About Me

Name: thekeenobserver
Email: reallykeenobserver@yahoo.com Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

 

No teacher left behind

Posted by thekeenobserver on Friday, May 22, 2009 3:57:04 PM
 

One of the great "holes" in American revisionist history is the lack of recognition for the Know Nothing Party, and its significance before the Civil War.

 

Despite its comedic-sounding name, the party had a profound, lasting effect on American politics with its true agenda-- anti-immigration. 

 

Basically, the Know Nothings were similar to the Freemasons; a near-secret 'society' that thwarted political opponents' efforts to learn of its actual leaders, or any designs of the movement.

 

Thus, whenever queried, "supposed" members would respond..."I know nothing," although there was never a political organization bearing that actual moniker.

 

The Know Nothings actually bore the patriotic name, the "American Party." Its efforts concentrated on electing only native-born Americans to office, and the party "platform" was a 25-year residence qualification for citizenship.

 

The American (Know-Nothing) Party would be a liberal's worst nightmare. They were hell-bent to prevent immigrants from being elected to political office, and sought to deny them jobs, arguing that the nation's business owners were far better off  to employ "true" Americans.

 

Millliard Fillmore (a Whig) after serving in the Whitehouse from 1851 to 1853, later "defected" to the American Party in 1856-- their high point--when the party ran him as their candidate for President. While Fillmore finished last, he received almost 1,000,000 votes out of the approximately four million votes cast in the election.

 

But resulting from the party's neutral stance on slavery, the Know-Nothings had declined precipitously by 1860, when members joined the Republican Party, and most importantly, comprised a large, critical voting bloc that elected Abraham Lincoln.

 

And today, we are witnessing a defacto revival of the party - it can be found in our nations' public schools-- a "duh generation" of students who literally know nothing.

 

In a country that supposedly leads the world, America's educational system more resembles that of a third world nation, where students cannot read with comprehension, write with coherency, nor perform simple arithmetic calculations.

 

Perhaps the fault lies with Texas Instruments; after all, it was they who invented the handheld calculator.

 

The push for classroom calculators was the origin of America's "educational malignancy." Once teachers decided to permit them in class, it was the doorway for the demise of not only arithmetic, but phonics, spelling, reading skills, and in the present day- allowing the distraction of cellphones.

 

Remember the dedication of the "old time" teachers? They would drill-baby-drill each individual student, with endless sessions of flash cards, writing exercises, and phonics, teaching dipthongs, consonants, vowels, hominyms, synonyms, etc.-- hard work indeed.

 

But it was satisfying, knowing that these teachers were giving each of their students a future. 

 

But in the early 70's-- like the decline in morals brought on by "the pill"-- America experienced a similar decline in "teaching morals," as classroom instructors betrayed their students' futures, and took the easy way out-- no more flashcards; no more phonics; no more endless writing exercises on "how to make your loops," or even hold your pencil properly.

 

Instead, it was calculators for math answers, "word association" instead of phonics, and forgoing rote memorization in favor of  "discussion," which promoted a "deeper understanding" of subjects.

 

While it would be unfair to paint them all with the same brush, many teachers now are of the mind..."put in your time, collect your paycheck, and hold on for the "promised land"--that fat teacher's union pension.

 

Meanwhile, our pubilc schools continue to turn out generations of unprepared students, who -- after placing their faith in their instructors to teach them what is "true"-- once graduated, they face a future that is at best, uncertain.

 

What if our military trained their recruits like today's teachers? How long would soldiers last on the battlefield if they had not been drilled endlessly with marksmanship, discipline, and self defense?

 

But today's teachers are sending out legions of know-nothing students, who are destined to fail on life's battlefields, that entail fierce competition in order to have the ability to support oneself with gainful employment.

 

To put it bluntly, many of  of America's students-- having been "systematically" dumbed down -- are unprepared, unqualified, and destined for a life of mediocrity; or worse, the unemployment line, and perhaps, incarceration.

 

But things are unlikely to change anytime soon; the leftists comprising the NEA (National Education Assoc.) have their own agenda.

 

They'll continue to teach the "conventional way"...just dumb down the children, and they'll grow up to be know nothings, unable to question what's really going on around them, particularly in the place where it matters most to our nation's future--- being part of an intelligent electorate .

 

Hence, the results of our leftist classrooms have been predictable:

 

Many high school students now "favor" socialism, lacking the critical knowledge of it's threat to what actually enables them to come to school with their designer jeans, and their flashy I-pods and camera-phones-- free market capitalism

 

To the delight of the left, the NEA professes not science, but global warming; they teach not history, but revisionist thinking, as they instill not love of country, but to be vocally critical of our nation's storied past. 

 

American history is the engine of patriotism; but why bother teaching it when self esteem-- what kids are taught instead--will enable them to "progress" into uneducated, hard-core liberals, and continue dividing the U.S. along partisan age lines: those that went to school when you actually received an education, and those now at school who receive indoctrination. 

 

And worse, what's taking place is a chance for our foreign competitors to continue to make up economic "ground," as we decline in our abilities in math, science, research, innovation, invention-creation, and slowly descend into a third-world-like standard of living. 

 

How many foreigners skilled in chemistry, engineering, physics, math, etc., must we import to perform our nation's vital functions-- R&D, teaching in universities, and those scientific pursuits required in the  private sector-- before we reach the point of "no return"?

 

The Roman empire began its rapid decline when citizens refused to fight in the military, and instead, foreign mercenaries were hired. 

 

And is this any different than what's now taking place, as we hire more and more "mercenary" foreign professionals, to maintain our standard of living within our own American empire?

 

Invariably, one of two things will happen: either the entire system experiences total bottom-up reform, or we continue to import more and more foreigners to fill vital professional positions, jeopardizing our status and living standard as the world's leading nation.

 

Otherwise, we will inevitably decline and fall economic victim to the Chinese and India, as generation after generation of dumbed-down, "duh" students-- now out on their own in the real world-- come to realize..."I know nothing."
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Lest We Forget? Obama's "F" in American History

Posted by thekeenobserver on Wednesday, May 13, 2009 6:41:03 PM
 

After the signing of the Armistice ending the First World War, crowds feverishly welcomed decorated American troops in Paris. The "Doughboys" became playboys, as they were literally stunned by the lights of the "magic city,"and the lovely sight of French women.

 

It would change them forever:

 

In 1918,  a hugely popular song, "How 'Ya Gonna Keep 'Em Down on the Farm, After They've Seen Paree?" was published. The song's title reflected America's agricultural heritage; fully 67% of Americans lived on farms before World War 1.

Immediately after the war-- as the song would portend-- U.S. population began migrating to the cities. But the very essence of American culture--rugged individualism-- was born on the farm.

 

When America was a colonial nation, 96% of the population lived on farms. And they were prosperous...very prosperous. Colonial farmers not only raised cash crops and processed sugar molasses to sell as rum, but raised hogs as well. 

 

And pork, "being a good source of protein", the early colonial diet was tantamount in America's astonishing victory in the Revolutionary war: 

 

Yes boys and girls, meat protein makes one grow up healthy and strong, as evidenced back in the 1770's, when Americans were forced to quarter the hated Redcoats, and it became immediately evident: the "average" American male was fully 2 1/2 to 3 inches TALLER than his British counterpart.

 

Hence, the Americans were not at all afraid of the British, and enabled the Continental Army to develop a winning attitude --that despite overwhelming odds--"we'll beat these guys." 

 

And in the last significant event of the War of 1812, General Andrew Jackson—the six-foot 1 inch hero of the battle of New Orleans-- inherently knew he would defeat the British, no matter the odds.

 

Jackson, as a boy of thirteen, had received a saber slash across the head for refusing to shine the boots of a British officer. But the battle of New Orleans -perhaps America's greatest one-sided victory ever-- would became "Old Hickory's" adult revenge.

 

And who knows? Could it have been Jackson's towering height (for that time) that had given him that sterling aura of confidence? Undoubtedly! The intrepid General convinced both himself and his command of 4000 troops they could win, despite being greatly outnumbered by the British force of 10,000.

 

Throughout both wars, the English were constantly startled by American boldness.

The British would often forego the advantage of surprise attacks, and procrastinated until offshore fleets delivered reinforcements. The flawed strategy was reflected in the final results at New Orleans-- 2,000 British  killed, and several hundred captured. American losses?  Eight killed...13 wounded.

 

But in 1861 at the start  of the Civil War, that same "we can win" atitude proved tragic for America; and was reflected in the casualty count: 618,000 Americans died-- the most costly U.S. war ever.

 

From the first battle at Bull Run to the Battle of Gettysburg, both North and South never had any doubt that they could outfight each other, evidenced in the huge number of casualties, and the hard-fought nearly even battles.

 

In 1917, American soldiers worried that by the time they were trained and completed the voyage to Europe, there wouldn't be any Germans left to fight!  It was the "we can beat these guys" American bravado that turned the bloody trench war stalemate of 1917, into a 1918 Allied victory.

 

In World War 2 it was again that farm-bred rugged individualism that separated the Americans from all the other warring nations. U.S. troops (unlike their Axis counterparts) were trained to take the initiative on their own. 

 

But German and Japanese troops were trained to NEVER make individual decisions, and remain static in their positions, and obey officers only; and it played a large part in the eventual outcome of the war.

 

Battlefield promotions were unheard of among Axis troops, but not so with the Americans.

 

Recall the stark realism depicted in the war movie "Saving Private Ryan". Upon landing on Omaha beach, six out of seven American officers fell victim to the horrendous machine gun and mortar fire of the well-entrenched Germans.

 

Then American sergeants and corporals were quick to take over, creating an ad-hoc "on-site" strategy that --despite overwhelming odds-- eventually enabled the GI's to breach Omaha's cliffs, and saved the D-Day victory for the Allies.  

 

Americans are by nature winners; we are competitors; it's our mindset. Americans despise losing, and go to any length to win; a nation who's culture was founded on the belief that any odds can be overcome, using bravado and American ingenuity.

 

Even in America's so-called "loss" of the Vietnam war, our troops never lost a single individual battle; it was politics--not a military defeat-- that caused the only setback in U.S. military history.

 

And how about the two Iraq wars ? It was the overwhelming confidence of the American troops that took them-- respectively-- only four days in the first war, and then 3 months in the second, to achieve "mission accomplished."

 

From the very outset, America has been a land where people have been of a positive mindset. Whether it was a war, or the Civil Rights movement-- or even down to a struggling small businessman-- we've always thought..."I can win" .."we shall overcome"…"we can do it"...until now.

 

Barack Obama, seemingly in denial of his "yes we can" campaign, now tells America ..”no we can't," a virtual character assassination upon America 's winning attitude, and that we should become a nation espousing defeatism.

 

In Obama's first 100 days Americans have heard nothing but negatives; nothing but, "we can nots." It's the Obama betrayal of our proud heritage..."we can't go on with living the same way as we've done in the past!"

 

Obama tells us we can't use energy like before. Obama tells us that our economy (a success for 250 years) can't go on with its "boom and bust" cycles-- that our free markets have failed.

 

And then Obama tours Europe on bended-knee, apologizing for American supremacy, as if we would have been better off to lose all our previous wars.

 

And recently in his speech to the Fifth Summit of the Americas, Obama opined (quote)..."that while it was important to learn from history, we can’t be trapped by it."

 

Trapped by history?

 

Obama --America's first anti-president -- urges us to forget the prosperous past, waylaying Americans toward the great "we can't" economic myth:  we can't achieve wealth…throw aside initiative; strive for more handouts; let mother government provide all necessities. 

 

So now, rather than looking for work, Americans should look forward to their next appointment with their case worker, in eager pursuit of expanding their "entitlements;" more welfare & food stamps; more section-8 housing; more WIC; more SSI; more unemployment benefits; free health care- the very essence of a "we cannot" society!

 

Instead of reaching for the stars, Obama is encouraging that we strive for the subway-- take the low road to government dependence -- the Obama doctrine of socialism.

 

Yes Mr. Obama—let’s all just forget the past, and put aside our pride--why risk taking the initiative, when Big government is there to provide us our needs.

 

When America elected John F Kennedy in 1960,  the country literally overnight was dazzled by Kennedy's charismatic, infectious "we can attitude". It was JFK who urged us to reach for the moon; and achieve what was once thought impossible.

 

And now, instead of a strong inspirational leader like John F. Kennedy, we are faced with the chosen one, Barack Obama, who stokes class-warfare, rewards unachievers, and urges Americans to belie their past history of rugged individualism, and strive for mediocrity.

 

And one only need to look at the Venezuelas (or Cubas) of today to see where America may be headed after the coming (and going) of Barack Obama, whose 'big government for everything' may result in an Obama-inspired socialist revolution of our own foolish making.

 

Yes we can, or "no we can't"… American history may not be kind to Mr. Barack Hussein Obama.
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Obama's in Washington...Wall Street takes a "bow"

Posted by thekeenobserver on Thursday, April 30, 2009 3:29:47 PM

St. Patrick's day, March 17-- America's favorite traditional, non-official holiday.

And going back to March 17,1976, it was a St. Patrick's day to remember for all investors, when on that day the Dow Jones Industrial Average rose 13.78 to 1009.21, and actually closed ABOVE 1,000 for the first time.

Yes laddies, the green beer on Wall Street was flowing in abundance on that storied St. Patrick's day. It touched off a wild wave of optimism: Brokerage houses across America, whose staffs had been withered down unrelentingly in a grinding 3-year bear market, were now beginning to hire again.

Spring 1976 was indeed a time for optimism in America:

The Alaskan pipeline was well underway, and was creating a new frontier of jobs above the Arctic circle. In the lower 48, large industrial companies were gearing up for new production, as orders for capital goods came pouring in.

GM was only 3 months away from introducing its brand new, beautifully designed "B- Body" line of cars that auto pundits predicted would be a huge success . The classified ad pages were expanding. It seemed as though everyone at once was starting to hire.

College grads and Phd's--who were working as gas station attendants and waiters-- now were getting replies to their resumes, as jobs offers in their fields of study actually began appearing in their maiboxes.

For the U.S., it was good times ahead after a terrible, frightening 3-year recession, that had seemed like it would NEVER end.

But then in November, 1976 came the election of James Earl Carter; and like a plane with a unconscious pilot at the controls, America's economy began another downward spiral to yet another teeth-clenching, gut-wrenching recession.

On the day after New Years, January 2, 1980, the Dow Jones had closed at a pathetic 824.57. In early 1979, inflation had reached a startling 11.3%, and by March,1980, it had soared to 13.5%. And interest rates dealt the final coup de' gras to Carter's economy, rising from an abysmal 11% in 1979, to an agonizing, staggering 19% by Jan 1981.

It was the first time in history that all three indicators simultaneously had been in such distress, and a new term emerged to define the debacle --stagflation.

But although Carter's ineptness ruined the economy, let give him at least SOME credit-- he had done it passively (unintentionally). And he did possess SOME business management expertise, because our beloved 39th president actually had spent much of his life running the family peanut farm in Plains, Georgia.

But now, we are under the wonderful economic tutelage of Barack Obama, our know-it-all, supremely confident anti-president, who professes to have all the answers to revive our grievously wounded economy.

But unlike Jimmy Carter, Mr. Obama has never run anything in the private sector, not even a Koolaid stand as a child in Indonesia, or even so much as a paper route during his adolescence in Hawaii.

Attention Wall Street... look out below!

Yes, Mr. Barack H. Obama-- the Harvard-educated lawyer--he's got all the answers... all the spiffy retorts...and all the solutions. Got a foreign policy problem? Blame Bush. Got a problem with high deficits? It's not his fault-- that too started with the "Boosh" administration.

Yes, Barack's an expert at blaming everyone but himself. He's just so smart; so prestigious, and "too cool for school." Plus the leftist media will support the his infallibility "to the bitter end"-- and it may get here sooner (2012) rather than later (2016).

Just you wait there a-while, Mr. Obama.

Our radical leftist 44th president may be facing a little surprise ahead, and it's the one thing he hadn't figured into his Machiavellian plan for ensnaring our fragile economy within his mega-government web of Socialism.

Mr. Obama can seize the auto industry, ransack the banking industry, tax the energy industry to oblivion, control the health care industry, plus whatever else the congress is willing to cede to this insatiable fascist.

But the one thing that our anti-president didn't figure on, is something immune to his politics, immune to his personality, immune to the slanted liberal media--even immune to congressional legislation:

The one economic indicator that cannot be fudged, manipulated. spinned (spun), or misinterpreted, can be found on Wall Street -the NYSE--the "home" of the Dow Jones Industrial Average.

(music)"Oh give me a home... where Obama can't roam..."

Right now Wall Street "experts" (propagandists) claim the Dow is on a roll--recently closing above 8000-- up over a thousand points from just a few weeks ago.

But in the parlance of the insiders (who really influence market direction), it's nothing more than a "sucker rally"-- the result of tens of thousands of solicitations by individual brokers trying to earn a living, "jaw-boning" hapless small investors to..."Hurry up, now is the time to get in before the next big move up."

The next big move up? Somewhere out there Gordon Gekko must be smiling.

But is now the time for greed on Wall Street---or fear?

With all those stellar economic events lurking on the horizon, the real insiders (the "smart money") knows that the market has nowhere to go but down--way down--possibly to 4900 in the next 18 months.

And no wonder. Wall Street and the market ALWAYS looks out ahead 18-24 months; that's why the insiders make the money that small investors unwittingly yield to them, as they buy high in unrealistic optimism, and sell low in panic.

It's always been that way on Wall Street...except for now.

As we look out ahead for the next year or two, it may be a long time coming before ANYONE (either a smart-money insider, or average Joe investor) ever sees these levels in the market for another 20--30 years.

But why?

The American economy has never before experienced what's on the horizon-- the intentional destruction of our free markets-- courtesy of our know-it-all (except for Wall Street) anti-president, Barack Obama.

Let's take a quick economic inventory of what's in store for Wall Street (and Main Street) in the next 2 years:

-higher income taxes--less disposable income for consumer spending
-higher business taxes for both small and large companies
-more government regulations for both large and small companies
-higher energy costs
-dollar inflation from rampant deficit spending
-cap 'n trade carbon taxes on energy
-card check (forced unionism) which will drive up business costs for everyone
-high unemployment--the result of clean air regulations on heavy industry
-higher energy costs for electricity- i.e. clean air penalties for coal-generated power
--higher corporate taxes for American companies doing business overseas
--more IRS audits driving U.S. capital offshore-- less domestic business investment

The Obama administration (regime) has a 5-year plan--it's all been figured out. Tax all fossil fuel energy. De-industrialize the Midwest and the South, where they burn coal. Force the auto industry to make cars nobody will buy. Force the banks to accept unnecessary bail-out capital, and then decide to whom they may lend it.

So expect a rapid transformation for private business from the free market to a government-planned economy, where you'll still own it-- but Big Brother now runs it!

And how do you think Wall Street will react to this? The same way it did from 1933 to 1945-- the last time a socialist president assumed total control, where the government can introduce itself any time, anywhere, into the private decision-making apparati, and levy restrictions on what private enterprises will be able to do within their own boardrooms.

EXAMPLE: Recently King Obama "summoned" all the credit card companies to Washington to tell them..."you can no longer 'overcharge' your customers." So just where in the Constitution is the president allocated the power for that? And where was the outcry from the private sector against it?

Now an emboldened Obama will soon be telling banks what interest rate they can charge, what private companies can produce, what type of workers (union) they can hire, how much they can produce--and at what price.

Is this a free market...or economic fascism?

So the Dow-Jones to 4900? Why not, as Obama's economic fascism takes hold and begins to strangle everyone's bottom line.

What effect will it have on the heavy industrial companies and energy companies? And what will happen to the transportation industry, the small business community, and the individual taxpayers themselves?

It's all so very simple: As government controls and regulations go up, everyone's bottom line will go down-- way down-- and taking down the stock market, our economy, our 401K's, and dashing the hopes and dreams of everyone who had the outlandish notion that they could some day become financially independent.

And now, it's all about to be dashed upon the rocks of Obammunism.


www.keenobserver.blogtownhall.com


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

"Fiscal marxism"-- Obama's secret passage to socialism

Posted by thekeenobserver on Thursday, April 02, 2009 6:27:25 PM

Thomas Jefferson- third President of the United States, sage philosopher, and brilliant author of the Declaration of Independence. A strong believer in individual rights, free speech, freedom of religion, as well as a free press.

However, what was indeed most noteworthy about President Jefferson is that he did NOT believe that the federal government should carry a large national debt.

Jefferson had long witnessed the narrow thread upon which the Revolutionary War dangled for all those perilous months, until Ben Franklin was able to persuade King Louie XIV that the colonies were indeed credit-worthy following their "shocking upset" victory at Saratoga-- which convinced the French (and the world) that the Americans were not just a bunch of rebellious upstarts.

As a result, by the end of the Revolutionary war in 1783, America was already in hock for 72 million dollars, which in those days, was a sum that threatened to derail the very establishment of our republic-- a nation that has mostly flourished for its entire 235 years.

So during his term in office, President Jefferson made a concerted effort at reducing the national debt, and repealed many federal taxes that had been put in by his predecessors.

Jefferson was the original Ronald Reagan.

While he is credited with the Louisiana Purchase, it may never have happened had the French not been so cash-strapped because of their ongoing contemporary war with England. Hence Jefferson was able to barter down the French all the way to the astounding desperation price of 3 million dollars, in return for doubling the size of America.

Jefferson, like Hamilton and Franklin, was one of our many Founders that "had a way" with money.

Back in the mid-1700's, writing in "Poor Richard's Almanac," Benjamin Franklin always encouraged the virtues of industry, thrift, and above all, staying OUT of debt. Franklin's  well known motto was, "neither a borrower nor a lender be."

A skilled horseman, Franklin wrote..."Prosperity, well mounted, when she let go of the bridle, would soon come tumbling out of the saddle" (i.e. prosperity is easily lost unless safeguards exist to prevent excessive debt).

Even 260 years ago as a young printer, he was a supporter and firm believer in free enterprise, for without it, Franklin understood there would be nothing to motivate one to make life better.

Franklin's insight also reveals that he deeply understood that without rules and regulations, it would only take a few to spoil things for everyone, and cause economic anarchy, writing: "Whither it bespeaks of commerce or sport, without rules there is chaos."

The Dutch Pennsylvanians living in Philadelphia influenced Franklin. They lived by the credo..." always pay cash for everything."

Throughout all time, the greatest leaders and philosophers of the world understood the importance of fiscal prudence. Hammurabi, Plato, Charlemagne, Dante, and both Queen Mary and Queen Elizabeth of England-- all condemned the perils of being in debt.

Now contrast all the above to another infamous and well known "monetarist", Vladimir Lenin, who believed in a rather different approach to economics..."The best way to destroy the capitalist system is DEBAUCH the currency".

Lenin continues:
 
"By a continuing process of inflation, governments can confiscate, SECRETLY and UNOBSERVED, an important part of the wealth of their citizens. By this method, they not only confiscate, but they confiscate arbitrarily; and, while the process impoverishes many, it actually ENRICHES some."
 
This is a shocking revelation into the mind of a marxist-- a stealthy covert approach to not only wealth re-distribution, but ruination of a nation!

Inflation is theft cloaked in monetary terminology. By eroding the value of a currency, inflation punishes producers, undermines investors and savers, and connives creditors slowly into ruin -- but all the while, rewarding debtors.

And where the U.S. is concerned-- inflation, high unemployment, and stagflation-- all are soon to become re-incarnated from the ghosts of a presidency past (circa 1980--Jimmy Carter).

In just the last five months there has been an explosion in M1, (the basic money supply) which is cash, total demand and government deposits with commercial banks, and money in all the federal reserve banks.

And to end our recession, Bernard Bernanke is busily printing money in the ole fed basement; thus we may about to be running an even greater risk than what Carter put us through-- hyper-inflation.

Hyperinflation can destroy a nation literally overnight, such as 1920's Germany, who's currency had collapsed tenfold after the end of World War I.

And with Barack Obama it may take awhile, but never fear, he'll see to it that we get there. After all, with a monetary marxist in charge, why should we even be concerned?

And what's to worry about? A measly projected 16 trillion dollar national debt by 2012? That's no big deal to Obama and his congressional komrades. Da! The more the merrier! Just keep Bernacke cranking away on his trusty printing press.

Money may not grow on trees, but to Obama & company it's the next best thing.

At the beginning of the year, we were paying approximately $450 billion a year on the national debt. But that total will probably rise up to near 650 billion by the end of our anti-president's first term. This is just the interest.

So our creditors will act just as any good credit card company would do. The more you owe, the less credit-worthy you become, and the higher interest rate you'll pay.

Obama's projections (just with his budget plan) will spend 23 trillion dollars over the next 10 years. 23 TRILLION!  And that's without adding in the "stimulus", or the "throw us all under the Omnibus bill," nor adding in the1 trillion dollars secretly sent into the economy  by Bernacke from his latest monopoly-money batch of fresh greenbacks.

At these withering monetary heights, even Vlad Lenin himself might have gotten the willies. The U.S. government is printing money to loan to itself. So that means, we take a trillion from our left pocket, write an IOU in place of it, and put that money in our right pocket.

Earth to Bernacke...You can't climb out of a hole by digging deeper! You cannot spend down debts with more debt. Even Herbert Hoover would blanche at trying that.

Yes indeed, Mr. Obama sure took that scalpel to government spending like he promised in his campaign. But isn't it funny how Obama supporters attempt to justify his outrageous spending proposals by pointing out that President Bush ran up the deficit as well?

Now that's a sure way to solve the problem. And to what end will these Obammunists spend?

Recently, Obama said he was... "scouring every corner of the budget to produce two trillion dollars in deficit reductions over the next decade"...and arguing that... "My economic proposals offer a long-term solution to America’s structural problems, and are not “a wish list of priorities that I picked out of thin air."

Yes Mr. Obama, we believe in you. We sure do.

All the initiatives over the last 6 weeks that were meant to "stimulate our economy" are pure political paybacks to the unions, the environmental fruitcakes, the pro-illegal immigrants lobby, and the "let's apologize to all the other countries of the world so they'll start to like us again" crowd.

Obama obviously believes in transferring wealth Lenin's way-- invisibly--via inflation, and by the establishment of his "world economic initiative."

And what about those wealth-destroying taxes on the people who--in Obama's mind-- have "more than they need".

Maybe it's time to re-introduce the words of Vladimir Lenin, who summed it up best...."By a continuing process of inflation, governments can confiscate, SECRETLY and UNOBSERVED, an important part of the wealth of their citizens."

These have really been the root of Obama's goals and achievements. He and his socialist admirers in the Congress are either so utterly stupid, or they have a grand plot to bankrupt the country, marching all together to the tune of Lenin & Marx-- the two "beatles" who wrote the tenets of communism.

And Lenin was certainly right. There is no subtler, no surer means of overturning the existing basis of society than to debauch the currency. The process engages all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction, and does it in a manner in which... "not one man in a million is able to diagnose."

Obama's loathsome budget will bury the United States with his covert goal--a looming, pre-manufactured deliberate crisis-- where  the only way to NOT to have a total financial collapse will be for the government to seize control of every aspect of business.

Sound familiar?

This will result in having the United States turn from capitalism to complete socialism, which is the only thing that will come from Obama's budget-- a 21st century economy where our children are dependent on liberal government handouts forever.

There is no other reason for describing why Obama is doing what he is doing.

And either way, the free market republic our Founders fought so hard to establish, will not survive.


www.keenobserver.blogtownhall.com


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

Liberals invading New Hampshire "stick to the script"

Posted by thekeenobserver on Tuesday, March 24, 2009 6:20:50 PM

"My country 'tis of thee, sweet land of liberty...of thee I sing".

Remember that uplifting and most patriotic of all songs that you sang in kindergarten? Well apparently in New Hampshire, the words of "My Country" are making a comeback.

New Hampshire-- a state long been known for its rebellious self-sufficiency -- was the first colony to thumb their collective noses at Lord North and George III, and declare independence from Great Britain in 1776.

And 233 years later, a new tyranny, this time from Washington D.C, has roiled New Hampshire, and its native citizens have decided...."THAT"S ENOUGH--take this federalism (and liberalism) and shove it!"

Can you imagine any state in today's economic turmoil putting the federal government on notice, and saying no to stimulus funds, federal high way funds, etc? Well, that is exactly what New Hampshire is doing!

It's called H.R. 6.

Basically, HR 6 stands against the socialist neo-democracy that currently controls Washington that's reaching out "to touch" the entire country and turn it hard left.

And leading by example, the people of New Hampshire have "boldly put forth" the federal government on notice with House Committee Rule 6; a resolution affirming States' rights based on Jeffersonian principles. Currently in committee, the resolution was introduced for all to hear.

HRC 6 states that... "any Act by the Congress of the United States, or Executive Order of the President  which assumes a power not delegated by the Constitution be put into force, then all powers previously delegated by the Constitution for the United States shall revert to the several States individually".

Powerful words indeed, echoing the days of the 1830's when Vice President John C. Calhoun (from South Carolina) had argued that when a state’s rights were violated by the federal government... "the state had a right to nullify the offending federal law and prevent its enforcement".

But this is not to imply another impending Civil War, but it DOES beg the question-- why does New Hampshire appear to be the only state with enough political moxie to be standing up for its state's rights?

In a word, it's TRADITION, a state where people love their liberty and are actively willing to take a stand.

Blessed by geography and a colder climate, for 200 years New Hampshire was the "Alaska of the East"-- the conservative bastion of independence who fought off the 60's invasion of liberalism that seemed to overwhelm most of the other 49 states.
 
But the real roots of political change in New Hampshire came, surprisingly enough, from the1930s with the attempts by the conservative government of that time to promote travel there (after the first cement roads were built) and auto travel became feasible.

And so it had all worked too well; New Hampshire lost the conservative refuge of its geographic isolation, and the wealthy from Massachusetts and Connecticut had began their influx, looking upon the state as a new playground. But It was their offspring that tended to be left of center, and they were ones that began to settle there and 'make waves'.

The newfound residents sought to enjoy New Hampshire's conservative ways, which spawned a more affordable lifestyle, low taxes, and a friendly business climate. New Hampshire was the only Northeast state that experienced significant population growth since the 90's, and the University of New Hampshire projects that trend will continue into the next 10 years.
 
And the end result? After nearly a century, the Democrats-- having been boosted in the polls by a wave of liberal migration-- gained control of the legislature.

And predictably, its just what we'd expect from the left: the legislature has approved a number of "firsts"--civil (homosexual) unions, a first-ever boaters' speed limit on Lake Winnipesaukee, and a ban on smoking in bars and restaurants. There are even bills in the legislature calling for the once unthinkable--a state income tax--although the odds against are strong for now.

But why the sudden changes to tradition? The majority of the population is decidedly against all of it.

But no matter where, liberals always bear grudges against others who love freedom. They're socialists because they are elitists. They operate in a two-class state system, made up of the elite intelligentsia who govern as "guardians," and the "workers" who "need to be governed".

And so it goes in New Hampshire; the liberals are governing, and the "workers" are rebelling; it's the spirit of '76 all over again, and their current ire is pointing at the fact that New Hampshire is considering passing the ultimate infringement upon individualism--a seat-belt law.

And again the native New Hampshirians are stepping forward and saying: "That's it for you damn liberal do-gooders--we've had ENOUGH!"

A firefighter recently drove 90 minutes in a snowstorm to a statehouse hearing  to tell legislators that New Hampshire is no longer worthy of its motto, "Live Free or Die."  A computer technician, dressed in camouflage hunting gear, came to say that "the state is basically moving toward communism".

New Hampshire is the only state in the nation that doesn't have a law requiring adults to wear seat belts. It has fought efforts to pass one for 30 years, and has been the only "proud resistor" since 1995, when neighboring Maine became the 49th state to "click it or ticket".

And resistance to the seat belt law has been overwhelmingly fierce, with many calling it "a liberal mandate on individual behavior". But liberals in the legislature maintain that "traffic congestion is worse than it used to be"...and..."someone needs to set the ground rules."

Proponents say the seat-belt law would save lives. Anti-seat-belters say there is no evidence that fatalities in the state are higher because of the lack of a belt law.

Of course its the same old songs liberals have been singing for ages -- laws for heath, safety, saving lives, preventing accidents--and for the unspoken reasons: the more powers the cops have to harass citizens, the better. And of course, like all liberal Democrats, it’s another way to get money to waste on spending projects.

Liberals are contradictory. They are all for saving lives, but avid proponents of abortion and the cruel death of the unborn. They are the people who have all the compassion in the world for criminals (especially judges and the criminal justice system) but none when children are harmed or raped. Even when absolute EVIL can be going on, liberals close ranks and hide it--especially where the media is concerned

You have a better chance of finding Elvis alive than you have of ever getting a liberal to listen to both sides of any political issue. Liberals always believe they are right.

Since they are educated and wealthy, liberals believe they're entitled to power. And ironically they seek their power to deny others liberty, holding up fairness as their excuse for legislative tyranny.

In the case of New Hampshire the liberals claim that... "Driving is not a right; its a privilege--and therefore is to be regulated so that harm to others or oneself does not occur". But where in the U.S. Constitution is the state empowered to regulate or license or restrict travel by any means? Nowhere, not even the Interstate Commerce clause!

So the seat belt battle endures. One key factor is that the state is strapped for cash. The law would qualify New Hampshire for $3.7 million in federal money offered to states that pass or update seat-belt ordinances by July 30.

Data from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration show seat-belt usage in New Hampshire is close to 70%, on par with most other states. But many here oppose the law on principle, and cherish the liberty to drive unbuckled as a hallmark of individualism, calling the federal funds dangling over the state as "blackmail money."

But blackmail, subversion, lying, misleading, these are the hallmarks of liberals, who like all good socialists, believe in incrementalism to reach their goals, and doing it "by any means necessary"-- straight out of the words of Karl Marx, the infamous author of the Communist Manifesto.

A gaggle of protesters showed up last week at a meeting of the House Ways and Means Committee, which was debating the fiscal impact of the seat-belt law before sending it back to the full House. "It's a last-ditch effort to stop these people," said  a 28-year-old internet technician from upstate.

But "these people" are liberals, and stopping them "by any means necessary," short of civil war, may prove impossible.

www.keenoberver.blogtownhall.com
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Is Obama exploiting fear to facilitate his socialist power grab?

Posted by thekeenobserver on Tuesday, March 03, 2009 6:27:45 PM

Dateline: November 17, 2008-- it was hailed as a legendary market call from an investing legend. It was the mother of all buy signals. It was a bold call, albeit one grounded in well-established investment theory.

Warren Buffett, the billionaire investor who made his fortune buying stocks on downturns, had advised America to buy stocks; but this time it turned out to be a calamity.

And now Mr. Buffett, Barack Obama's formerly highly-touted economic guru, recently emerged from out of his hiding place and pronounced in his news letter..." the U.S. economy will remain in a shambles through 2009".
 
Oh, but not to worry; Mr. Buffet forecasts..."better days ahead for the country".
 
Sure-- better days ahead-- trillion dollar deficits as far as the eye can see. Bleak outlooks for all the nation's large banks; and Barack Obama's repeated claims that our nation is in the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression-- all are jawboning the stock market southward.

The result? The Dow hit a low this week not seen since the glory days of 1997, below the 7000 level. And the economic tea leaves and news coming out of financial companies is still so alarming that investors feel no other alternative than to head for the exits.

But how concerned is the White House about the impact of the recent $11 trillion in wealth that has vanished from the stock market?

Apparently, not much

"I think it is unwise to believe everything we do is designed to cause an immediate market reaction, or that the score should only be kept by that,'' said Robert (Mr. Smirk- rhymes with jerk) Gibbs.

The smirky-jerky White House press secretary, continued... "If you look at the news of the week, the market probably processes in a lot of information, whether its price increases, or a lot of news throughout the globe about a deteriorating economy". Gibbs then suggested, "it's more likely a reflection of the nation's challenges, not merely a reaction to what the White House is doing."

Translation: anti-president Obama is not responsible for this downturn--it's what "we inherited" from the failed policies of the Bush administration, and a greedy Wall Street taking advantage of Main Street.

But traders and investors alike beg to differ:
 
Stocks are a bet on future performance and earnings. And right now, people have low to no confidence in the fiscal and monetary gyrations the Obama administration is going through. The stock market has incrementally shed value since Mr Obama was nominated, then elected, and then inaugurated--- each event caused another prolonged dip in stock prices.

And now with every doom and gloom statement Mr. Obama  makes (to innoculate him against failure of his program), stocks churn again.  Stock values always decline during periods of uncertainties; and what could be more uncertain than Obama's recent "to-and- fro" pronouncements, which virtually guaranteed the disastrous drops.
 
Every other word out of Obama's mouth is "crisis" or "calamity" or "catastrophe"; and investors and traders alike respond accordingly. A huge psychological component to the underlying market always exists; yet Obama obsessively continues to play his calamitous game of boogie man vs. Wall Street.

But could there be some ulterior motive...a more cunning reason? Is Obama exploiting fear and insecurity to facilitate his socialist power grab?
 
Obama claimed he would be a transformational leader; but the only thing transformational about his anti-presidency is that it will transform the dollar into a worthless currency, and the country into a third-world socialist nanny state.
 
And just WHEN will the media stop their cover-up for their candidate, who became our selected (not elected) 44th president? When does Obama actually become accountable for his policies' impact on the economy?
 
Obama seems to reflect a compulsion to keep driving the Dow down.

Yes indeed, he'll show those "greedy fat-cats" (a.k.a. the American public) who dared to invest in the stock market!  And as he's talking down the Dow, he's dragging down capitalism and the free market economy. It’s all part of his government dependency plan.
 
And going back to ever since his socialist comrades in Congress-- Pelosi & Reid-- took over on March 3, 2007, when the DJ Index closed at 12474, it now trades below the crucial support level of 7000. Support levels are used by Wall Street technicians to predict emotional buy-sell trigger points in market indexes.

So look out below--there may be further downside --a lot further. Just in the first month that Mr. Obama has been in office, the DJI has lost 1000 points.

And the stock market could continue to get pounded with Obama's insane, inane, financial agenda: spending $787 billion (before interest) on the economic debt expansion package (disguised as a stimulus); and then another $400 billion in supplemental spending-- and introducing a $3.5 trillion budget that next year alone will result in the highest annual budget deficit in U.S. history, which will consume an unheard-of 12.3% of the nation's gross domestic product.
 
But that just for starters! Obama forecasts trillions in deficit spending in his first term; then the next week, he's gung-ho for a plan halving the upwardly-spiraling deficit.

So if you were a big money investor, what would you think?

Obama's insanity-calamity deficit-spending profligacy has Wall Streeters heading for the hills; And with Obama on his current socialist, wealth-transfer, tax-hike frenzy, it will only worsen to the point where 1930-32 could become the new market model for Obama's wealth-destroying policies.

Right now, the market climate on Wall Street resembles an old time Japanese horror flick: Wall Street investors fleeing in panic from the Barack Obama wealth destruction monster--breathing his fire of higher taxes and socialism at every American financial institution.

And Wall Street sees the writing on the wall-- their worst, post election fears are coming true--- sensing that Obama is going to keep on spending and spending, with his objective to make the USA into a complete welfare state.
 
But if only Obama would pay attention to history, and truly get behind a sound policy that would stop the bloodletting.

Obama obviously knows that he could stimulate investment by lowering taxes on the "job creators"...the small businesses. But that would mean surrendering---giving up wealth (power) to the private sector-- and undermining his aim to railroad power from Wall Street to Washington.

Currently, investors are longing for the Reagan years, when lower income taxes decreased the cost of capital, and thus lowered the "hurdle rates" for various investments and projects. And the Dow took off in October, 82 and rose magnificently until March of 2000, with the internet bubble bust.

Right now Obama could provide an overnight turnaround if he cut corporate taxes, which would to help bring jobs home from overseas, and also would reduce the cost of capital for more investment.

And if Obama reduced capital gains and dividend taxes from 15% to 7.5%, it also would lower the cost of capital and create more investment. Remember that the 2nd, 3rd, and 5th longest economic growth cycles have occurred after the top tax brackets had been lowered.
 
But Comrade-in chief Obama has other ideas; just look at what happens when he speaks:

On inauguration day you could follow the dive of the Dow as he delivered his address. Whenever Geithner and Bernanke spoke recently, the market dived. After the anti- stimulus bill was passed by Congress, the market dove.

Words are important to the markets; and so far Mr. Obama's words have given the market nothing but negative reassurances.
 
The market trades basically on solid expectations. But the one thing the Street cannot tolerate is uncertainty. And the market is spiraling down in a cyclone of economic bad omens. And worse, the specter of the Obama tax hikes has basically pulled the plug for any type of bounce for the Dow-Jones in the near future.

Wall Street is about creating wealth. But Obama is about destroying wealth. Oppressive tax policies on the wealthy destroy initiative; and destroy the most essential element of future economic expansion--CAPITAL. People seem to be thrown for a loop when that word 'capital' is tossed out there. That includes Barack Obama.

But the maddening question is: Why doesn’t the Chosen One choose to calm the waters? If Obama would only make a simple announcement: "We do not plan on raising taxes for the foreseeable future, because in a downturn, this is a bad idea".

But instead, we get: "Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes; not any of your taxes.
 
Translation: if you make over $250K, your lifestyle is going to mimic the stock market--it's about to take a sudden plunge-- and it will take the economy down with it.
 
And all during the prolonged plunge, Obama stubbornly has taken a phlegmatic approach to the massive losses in the market; while all the while, panicked investors and big money speculators--fearing another 1929-- are driven to panic selling.

But Obama doesn't see the losses as suffering for people, but rather an opportunity, because he suffers himself from that incurable disease-- economic socialist liberalism-- a disease which is always terminal, and has no cure.

Economic liberalism's symptoms are many, but the cause is simple-- those who suffer from it have never worked a hard day in their lives. They have no idea of what it takes to earn a buck in the real world; they never have had a real job in the private sector.

Thus according to comrade Obama; anyone who has more money "than they deserve," must surrender the excess to those who have less. A philosophy which is an anathema to Wall Street.

After 1929, the market didn't recover for 25 years, until1954. And for all we know it could go down much more from here, reminiscent of the good ole days of 1930-36.
 
So after 200 years of presidents who have praised the economic strengths of Americans, Obama is celebrating our weakness. His negative words have done almost as much damage to the stock market as all the financial challenges combined.

And Obama knows well the one TRUE economic index to be concerned with: the power a fascist can seize is directly proportional to the severity of the crisis.

Obama has learned well his socio-marxist-fascist strategy: It is much easier to frighten people than to urge them to do the right thing.
 
Barack Obama, former South Chicago community organizer; he was not trained to give people hope and encourage them to strive to be better; his training was to convince people that they were truly downtrodden and oppressed, and that only the government could save them.
 
So Obama welcomes a terrible economy-- it enables him to call it a crisis, and enact desperation measures that steal individual freedom from Americans. Obama wants everyone to need government. And bigger government bestows more power to Washington.
 
Fear and intimidation is a standard policy, Just look at Cuba (or any socialist nation) and you can see that Obama is ruling in the same manner as any socialist dictator would. Thus our anti-president needs a declining economy. It makes it easier to install full-fledged fascistic socialism.
 
Barack Obama- the Marxist man with a populist, preacher-like Mussolini slant.

So what's the best advice to Wall Street and investors alike? Buy "puts" on the option markets; go "short"; brace for further declines.

Until Obama learns the difference between being a leader and being a manipulator, the markets will descend. Until Obama learns how to solve problems, not exploit them, the market will go down.

But if Barack's callous calculations somehow don't work out-- if it's only one term for our fearless, socialist leader-- he'll find out that all along, tax cuts and prosperity (not fear and uncertainty) should have been the way to go.

And "Yes we can", will quickly turn into a..."I wish we did."

www.keenobserver.blogtownhall.com


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

The new Amerika? Obama's neo-communist revenge.

Posted by thekeenobserver on Monday, March 02, 2009 5:59:00 PM

Okay boys 'n girls, let's get out our dictionaries and learn an important definition.
 
SEDITION: a term of law which refers to covert conduct, such as speech and organization, that is deemed by the legal authority as tending toward insurrection against the established order.
 
And right now, a treasonous, vicious, seditious, covert action is underway to dissolve what's left of self-government-- right underneath our unsuspecting noses!


Anti-president Barack Obama is punching the buttons as fast as he can to fire off his executive order torpedoes, and sinking our democracy beneath an ocean of government induced socialism--the Obama revenge.
 
As far as comrade Obama is concerned, he's voted "nyet" to our democratic tradition and "da" to his peculiar brand of American neo-communism
 
Is it treason? Sedition? Take your pick; it's Obammunism on its most dastardly obsessive mission; changing the face of America to a nation that won't even recognize itself by the time Obama is done serving his presumed second term.
 
And predictably, we should have known:
 
Mr. Obama has been publicly quoted as saying... "that generally, the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties..." a remark that revealed a shocking disregard of the intent of our Founders- to limit central government.
 
Of course this was a only a preview of the other troubling signs demonstrative that Obama was indeed a presidential candidate who despised America. Recall how Obama refused to wear a flagpin; or pictured where he brazenly declined to hold his hand over his heart during the pledge of allegiance
 
While these may seem trivial, they reveal the true nature within--Obama may be the first truly anti-American president in history; and sought the office to "get even" with America.
 
But "why" you say? Well, as the old saying goes, "the child is father to the man."
 
Obama may not even have been born in America. His father wasn't American.

In his early formative years, he spent time in Indonesia-- a Muslim nation. Then, after moving in with his grandparents in Hawaii, he spent his later formative years under the tutelage of Frank Marshall Davis, an avowed member of the communist party, and certified hatemonger against America.

Obama was mentored by a communist who claimed that "true patriotism" consists of trying to ensure that America loses wars. Thus, Obama, as an adolescent, adopted Davis as the father figure he never had.
 
By the time a young Obama applied to college, he was full blown anti-American in his attitude toward the country where he may have already been planning to "even up the score".
 
Could this be why Obama's entrance records at Occidental college have been barricaded; or maybe eradicated? What student groups did he associate with there? What were his elective subject choices? Where are his admission records? Why does he persist in hiding these?
 
And could this also be why Obama's transcripts at Columbia and Harvard are non-available to the public? Was it because of his Marxist associations...or the anti American theme of his thesis? Did Obama associate with radical student groups as rumors suggest?
 

Columbia and Harvard were schools steeped in leftist radicalism, exposing their students to an ideological liberal bent, and painting America as racist, rife with injustice, and in need of drastic, fundamental change-- a theme Obama took to heart
 
Yes, Obama is the most learned, well educated, well spoken president since John F. Kennedy; but one thing Mr Obama may have never learned in his entire lifetime is patriotism-- love of country-- an appreciation for all America stands for: the opportunity; the freedom: an individual's option to pursue any type of life he or she so desires
 
And Barack Obama’s lack of a parenting American father is coming to the fore in spades during the first months of his anti-presidency.
 
America is more than a country; it's a unique experiment in human history; an idea enthusiastically embraced by immigrants and native-born alike; and it gets passed along from generation to generation
 
But Mr Obama, fatherless during his youth, didn't get the memo; and like his wife, he grew up learning that America is “just downright mean", and must be dealt with in a way he feels is deserving of a people who get bitter, cling to guns and religion, and express antipathy to people who aren’t like them
 
It's Obama's typical liberal elitism-- viewing the average Joe as cattle to be managed--and a desire to defy traditional American government and ideals.
 
Obama is pro-abortion; anti-God; anti guns, and anti-Old Glory. But he’s pro-big government, pro-big spending, and pro-Marxist--punish the achievers and subsidize all the slothful government-dependent leaches. And his his pro-socialist revolution is but a glimpse into Obama’s plans for more Stalin-esque destruction yet to come.
 
Thus we now we face the full wrath of Obama's anti Americanism: trillion dollar deficits...massive tax increases; military cuts...socialized medicine...welfare explosion, and basically, overturning the Constitution's theme of a limited federal government to guard against the one thing the Founders greatly feared --tyranny
 
And tyranny comes in many disguised forms; and Obama is a master of disguise, who's hollow rhetoric belies the true devious objective that lies within: the bleeding of the middle class, and transferring its wealth to the underclass
 
As Lenin wrote, "The way to crush the bourgeoisie is to grind them between the millstones of taxation and inflation."
 
Now that Obama is in the Whitehouse, his antipathy for the Constitution, the country, the people, and our traditional way of life has found a wide open avenue of expression
 
Obama has his sights set on an accumulation of power that will continue to go unchallenged as long as the media remains an accomplice-- and they seem quite content to comply
 
And the Obama "push" to end democracy is unrelenting: he's literally peripatetic in his pursuit of a Marxist agenda to destroy, one by one, our Bill of Rights, and establish a new communist order within our country: "Da, Comrade.. .welcome to UNITED STATES of AMERIKA"
 
But predictably, our treasonous media has chosen to masquerade this travesty, going so far as likenening Obama to Abe Lincoln. Yes of course!  And Dick Cheney was the second coming of Thomas Jefferson
 
But the true presidential comparison of Obama will never be spoken by the media. His election is more aptly compared to another anti American president-- James Earl Carter
 
Yes; the Democratic liberal, Jimmy Carter — Mr. Human Rights--with his body of work that decimated the US economy, emasculated our once highly-effective CIA, and embarrassed the U.S. time and time again with his blundering pro-Islamic foreign policy

Almost single-handedly, Carter destabilized the Middle East by working to allow the overthrow of the pro-American Shah of Iran, in order to create a power vacuum that permitted radical Islamists to take over that country.
 
Carter was also instrumental in causing radical Islam to seize the U.S. Embassy and its staff in Iran, which resulted in the 14-month Hostage Crisis. This Carter-created hostage disaster ended only after Republican Ronald Reagan was elected President of the United States—replacing the reckless, naively-dangerous Carter.
 
Jimmy Carter, with all of his actions taken during his single-term presidency — and beyond — could also be considered as our first truly anti-American president.

And if so, then Barack Obama is well on the way to proving to be our second.

 

Obama's presidential "thesis" seems to be a take-off from Carter-- a theme of punishment-- getting even with America for all her past sins of racism, imperialism, and taking advantage of the poor; a radical leftist agenda that would have sent shivers up the spine of Thomas Jefferson. 
 
And it should do the same to all thinking Americans, who know that without the intent of our Constitution-- to protect our rights and liberties-- we would be at the mercy of a powerful and unrestrained federal government, ruled not by law, but by power-hungry men like Barack Obama.
 
So a big dose of patriotic reality is urgently needed; we need to start getting loud, REALLY LOUD, to warn of the creeping cancer of Obammunism.
 
Only a few years ago, people thought that this ultra-liberal socialist push was just a fear of the conservative right. Now it is not only on our doorstep, it has seated itself at our dining table.
 
Obama may or not be a Christian, but he never seems to be able to forgive America for her so-called past sins, and he’s out to condemn a death sentence upon the country we all know and love as patriotic Americans, who will fight Obama to the end.

 

www.keenobserver.blogtownhall.com



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

The Smirk vs.The Smile-- the political polarization of a nation

Posted by thekeenobserver on Tuesday, February 17, 2009 7:12:23 PM

Surveys anyone? Here's a tasty political tidbit:
 
In Pennsylvania, a recent  Muhlenberg College's Institute of Public Opinion looked at a sample of the hundreds of thousands of former Republicans in the state who've defected and voted Democrat the last two election cycles.

An astounding 67 percent of the ex-Republican respondents cited former President Bush as a "very important" catalyst for their decision to leave the party. Fifty-four percent cited the Iraq war.
 
The most worrisome factor for the GOP is that these were once long-term loyal voters. And most were suburban, like those around Bucks county in Philadelphia. They're the better educated, wealthier individuals who now will be voting "blue."
 
This is extraordinary--who would have ever thought that the bread-n-butter of the party, the wealthy well-educated suburbanites, would have ever given up their republican badges for any reason. But the last 8 years were indeed extraodinary-- the near-complete political polarization of America; a situation not seen in our country since the pre-Civil war era of the 1830's.
 
Recall the events leading up to that war. It was because of the economic polarization of the Union, precipitated by the actions of a Republican congress.

In 1828, The "slave" state of South Carolina was in turmoil over what it called the "Tariff of Abominations ." The Constitution did not permit the federal government to tax exports. But taxes on imports would be onerous for an agriculture-based economy like the South, which had to import many of its machines, and nearly all its luxuries.

As planters and slaveholders, the South expected President Andrew Jackson to side with them against the "Tariff of Abominations of 1828" that Congress had approved . Vice  President John Calhoun, a South Carolinian himself, argued that when a state’s rights were violated by the federal government, the state had a right to nullify the offending federal law and prevent its enforcement.

Calhoun's tacit implication was that a state had a right to leave the Union. Thus secession, the logical end result of nullification, began to seriously be argued throughout the country's political dens in1829 and early 1830.

On April 13, 1830, attention was focused on the Jefferson Day banquet in Washington D.C. Out of courtesy, President Andrew Jackson was asked to deliver a toast. Jackson looked directly at John C. Calhoun and vowed... "Our federal Union. It must be preserved!"

So what's the point? Simple- God help America! Our country  is sorely in need of another Andrew Jackson. We are a country in dire need of unity.

In all its 235 year history, has America ever seen two extraordinarily divisive presidents in a row as we're experiencing now?

Barack Obama won in 2008  by putting together an unprecedented grass roots organization that swelled his democratic advantage in Pennsylvania by an unprecedented swing of 1.2 million voters. But how many of them voted out of pure unbridled hatred of George Bush? How many of their votes for Obama were cast to just to "get even" with Bush?

The Muhlenberg findings suggest that this was exactly the case.

And what's worse for the Republicans, the survey recorded that only 22 percent of the former Republicans said they were likely to change their registration again in the next five years. This suggests that Bush Dubya has driven an enormous divisive wedge from which the party may never recover.

Again, It can be said with some certainty, that the election of 2008 was less about the success of Barack Obama, and more about the virulent political backlash against the reviled George Bush.
 
Maybe it was the way Dubya sliced and diced the English language into nonsensical "Bushisms", where he couldn't even conjugate his verbs properly. Or maybe it was his exaggerated sense of self-righteousness.
 
And of course, we had the Iraq war.

But the mega-disastrous end result is what we have now -a radical leftist-controlled Democratic Congress-- and the specter of a complete social transformation under the neo-Stalinist, Barack Obama.
 
Yes, it was good ole George W. bush-- agent provocateur of the political polarization of this once-united country.  And instead of a smile, Bush was the total opposite of political de riguere; he had that smirk...that hated smirk.

Whenever questioned about the legitimacy of the Iraq war, Mr. Bush would reply with "THE SMIRK". Whenever questioned about the wisdom of spiking the national debt with his socialist senior prescription drug plan, Bush replied with "the smirk".

Yes; just as the old axiom goes; it's not what you say as president, but HOW you say it.
 
And Bush never seemed to be able to say anything with the political decorum of a president; and the public hated him for it.  Hence, his recent political ranking as one of the 10 worst presidents ever.
 
Now contrast "the smirk" vs. "the GRIN." It's how Barack Obama gets away with saying anything; it's his perfect smile.

And as a wise old timer once said..." you can tell a person to go to hell right to his face, but as long as you do it with a big smile, the other person might just go along with it".

This theory was evident last fall during Obama's primary campaign:
 
scene: St Louis;  Obama  addressing the crowd at one of his rock-star campaign rallies...

OBAMA: "Hello St Louis! (flashes his big Cheshire cat-grin)...Today, John McCain said he wants to give more tax cuts to Exxon and big oil"...(BOO!) ..."This is just more of the same failed policies of George Bush!  (BOOO!). But Its time we stop favoring Wall Street, and think about Main Street!" (YAY!)

Translation: I will be the most anti-capitalist, anti-business president in history.

Obama continued..."It's time we give the rest of America a break! (YAY!!)... I'm going to give tax cut to the other 95 percent of America! (HOO-RAY!!)...America doesn't need another George Bush in the White house (YAY!)... That's how we will move America forward (YAY!)... And that’s why I'm running for president of the United States!"

Translation; get ready for socialism and wealth re-distribution.

Obama smiles whenever he presents something that goes against what America has always stood for--the freedoms put forth in our Bill of Rights-- freedom from the tyranny of a big government.

Obama has that grin...that devastating smile.
 
Recall when Obama was campaigning in the environmentally conscious state of Oregon; where the President called on the United States to "lead by example" on global warming:

OBAMA: "We can't drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want, and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times ... and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK,"

Obama had said all this with his trademark big smile. So how else could he have gotten away with such an egregious statement? Basically Obama was telling America..."elect me and you'll suffer a decline in your standard of living".

Well, America elected him, and we are suffering a decline into a soviet-style socialism that may forever change the character of our nation. But despite those outrageous campaign statements, the media never once called him on anything. But again, Obama got away with it because he'd said it with a smile.

Yes; from his early days in politics, Obama had "the smile", similar to the beloved John F Kennedy. Even back as a community organizer in south Chicago, Obama had that winning smile that could charm and disarm almost any opponent.
 
Could it be that the "smile factor" was why Obama's obvious political charm appealed to the radical leftists, such as William Ayers, and his wife, Bernadine Dohrn? Was it why they chose to set the stage for his political debut in their own living room?

Could it be that they saw in Obama a man richly gifted in the skills of articulation, public oration, manipulation, and equanimity? Skills that would pretext someone who could change people's minds against their own best interests?  A man so disarming in appearance and candor, that no one would ever suspect the devious nature within-- a man who could turn America against itself!

And a man who could transform the country seemingly overnight in a non-violent socialist revolution.
 
Obama comes across as almost being too intelligent, a know-it-all in the truest sense of the word . But how could he possibly NOT know the almost certain devastation his radical leftist stance will do to our country?

Obama claimed he would reach across the aisle; but since he took the oath of office, all evidence of his actions have been to the contrary:

EXAMPLE: President Obama warned Republicans on Capitol Hill …"You can't just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done," he told top GOP leaders, whom he had invited to the White House to discuss his nearly $1 trillion stimulus package.

This was extremely divisive, and set the tone for the first term of his presidency-- that Obama would play dictator with a big grin.

In an exchange with Rep. Eric Cantor (R-Va.) about the proposal, the president shot back: "I won," according to aides briefed on the meeting. Obama was obviously noting his unrivaled one-party control of both congressional chambers

Obama was gloating to the point where he might as well have stuck out his tongue, saying "nyah-nah--you lose". But our sacred media have set Obama on a pedestal made of excuses. No matter what Obama does, someone will have an excuse ready for him.

So now America will be faced with the possibility of another bitter polarization for possibly another 8 years, which leads us back to another history lesson from Colonial times:

At the close of the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia on September 18, 1787, a certain lady, a Mrs. Powell, anxiously awaited the results. And as Benjamin Franklin emerged from the long task now finished, asked him directly: "Well Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?"

"A republic --if you can keep it," responded Franklin.

So what kind of republic do we have today? One where the social fabric has literally been torn asunder-- the disaster of successive presidents who, in their own unique way, have both managed to split America in two.

With Bush it was the shouting --people divided over the Iraq war-- squaring off against each other face to face.

And with Obama, we have the lowered voices --a sure sign that our nation's social fabric and patriotic unity is under attack.

Americans now whisper... afraid to speak their true opinion in normal public discourse; suffering from the fear that the people are already on the inevitable path to losing their constitutional right to free speech.

So are we headed for a new type of Cuba, where government repression takes away our freedoms, one by one?

Apparently Ben Franklin was right: we have a Republic, if we can keep it. And we may be on the verge of losing it.

And all the while, Mr. Obama will be doing it with a big smile.

www.keenobserver.blogtownhall.com

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

Going nowhere? A nation without motivation.

Posted by thekeenobserver on Friday, February 13, 2009 4:30:01 PM

Here's a pertinent observation one might find interesting: Comparing government employees with workers in the private sector.
 
When the St. Anthony Bridge (I-35 West) collapsed in Minneapolis, killing 13 people, it had severed a major artery into Minneapolis. At the time, it was feared it would take three years to rebuild it at an astronomical cost.  When Governor Tim Pawlenty announced that he wanted it rebuilt within 17 months, everyone scoffed at such an improbability.
 
Pawlenty guessed incorrectly. It took less than 14 months to rebuild the bridge. And it came in under budget. Why? The job was turned over to the private sector.The team of FIGG Engineering, Flatiron Constructors, and Manson Construction, won the bid for the project and delivered a new bridge in what turned out to be an unprecedented time frame.

But how? It was pure motivation.
 
Construction began well before the final design was completed. Teams of contractors worked 12-hour shifts in brutal subzero temperatures. By shaving off more than 12 weeks from the 17 month deadline, FIGG, Flatiron and Mason earned themselves hefty bonuses, which no doubt played a part in the bridge's early completion.
 
Now let's shift our story to Boston- home to the infamous "Big Dig."
 
When excavation began in 1991, it was heralded as a jewel of engineering and vision. Then after many years of cost overruns, delays, and myriad construction-related problems, the most expensive highway project in U.S. history was finally completed, save for an array of nettlesome side projects.
 
One big source of its delay-- faulty bolts throughout. Tests showed more than 1,100 bolt assemblies that used epoxy, and more than 300 other areas in the connector tunnel complex were unreliable. All had to be retrofitted-- flaws typical in every government project.

Throughout its lengthy construction, the Big Dig stood up to nationwide ridicule for its delays, faulty design, cost overruns, and overall general incompetence.

Of course when it comes to anything involving the government, competence is a foreign word.
 
The $14.6 billion Big Dig took 14 years to construct-- the most expensive highway project in U.S. history. And the Dig's overall cost exceeded double the Panama Canal's price in today's dollars.
 
And can you guess why? Of course; 60 percent of the project's tab was federal-- meaning the "drone factor" was involved--and nearly every American taxpayer has felt the impact of the Big-Dig's price tag.
 
So what is this mysterious government drone factor? Simple; it all boils down to one thing--motivation-- the essence of all human behavior.

One fact of our human nature is that if were not challenged to take things to a higher level, a person may get a little lazy, and slack off into drone-ish mediocrity. And government programs often inspire most workers into achieving new heights of mediocrity.

Why do successful football coaches make the big bucks? They are the ones capable of pushing their players to a higher level. Coaches are motivators.

And motivators are worth it. They boost productivity. It's basic to our human nature. If people are not challenged to take their lives to a higher level, they tend to remain in a sea of mediocrity-- only the motivated are the ones who standout. Motivation is the one essential of all human achievement.

If there's a behavioral-political lesson to be gleaned from all this, it can be summed up in a nutshell- the basic reason why government programs never work-- there is nothing to truly motivate anyone to do anything properly.

Example: let’s use the dreaded state auto bureau registrar as your typical government drone agency. Let's say your job is to mail out license plates, and let's say it’s Friday at 2 p.m. and you're not interested in working any longer. What would happen if you just dawdled around, and then left at 3:15, citing the excuse, "I'm not feeling too chipper". What would be the consequences?

Example #2: let's say you work at a privately-owned UPS franchise store, and your job is to wrap and ship customer packages promptly. What if you decided to walk out at 3:15 on a Friday, citing the same "I don't feel good" excuse? Would you...

a) be questioned by the mgr.
b) be told by the mgr. "to tough it out" till closing
c) be told by mgr. he's calling owner to say, "you went home early"
d) be fired

Answer=All the above

Here's the salient point: without consequences there can be no rule; no order of any kind. And without order there can be no discipline. And without discipline, there can be no accomplishment.

So analyze just about any government position. You just show up. You can be mediocre; you can slack off... watch the clock... do a crossword...surf the net. Who cares? There's really no urgency to get anything done promptly because there are no consequences, other than maybe some type of minor murmur from your supervisor.

But the supervisor isn't the owner; the supervisor isn't the one PAYING you. It's the government, which is a faceless, paper-shuffling bureaucracy running on the taxpayer's time and money.

Thus, nothing tangible ever gets accomplished on time, because there are no consequences. Once again --who cares! It's the government stupid! What did you expect-- something done on time? Something done right the first time? Something finished ahead of schedule? Work harder for the government? Hah! For what?

This is why big government has never been (and will never be) the answer to our nation's problems. Can anything positive ever be accomplished if mediocrity is the norm, incompetence is tolerated, and excellence is non-existent?

There have only been two greatly successful government programs in our modern history:

First-- the 1942 national transformation from peacetime to wartime economy. This was because Americans had the most powerful motivator of all--survival-- the country was united under president Roosevelt. Factories ran 24/7. Inspired people worked 12-hour shifts. We out-produced our enemies and won the war.

In the 1960's, we achieved what seemed impossible at that time ...we landed on the moon, and safely returned our men. Once again our nation was united under President Kennedy who had set one goal--win the space race over the Soviet Union.

Recall the great legacy of Ronald Reagan, an inspirational, patriotic motivator. He was instrumental in guiding 1980's America to a wildly successful peacetime decade of prosperity.

But now, we ignore American history at our own peril. We've seen roller coaster times ever since. There have been no great motivators. The White house has been sorely lacking for its next great inspirational leader.

Presently America has arrived at a fork in the road; we can retain our free market heritage-- or we can progress down the pathway to Barack Obama's socialist neo-democracy-- a change we all have been deceived in.

It all harkens back to the Marx-Engels concept -- The State vs. The Individual. The individual exists for the State. Everyone in effect, becomes "government employees"...drones subservient to the State.

And socialism is the same old Marxist theory. Tax the rich; give to the poor. Class distinction. Class envy. That's Obama's neo-communist America. Remove all incentive; crush the entrepreneurs; set income limits with the ceiling of taxation. The more you earn, the more severely you will be penalized.

Examine all the socialist countries in Europe. Except for Ireland (a low tax-high growth economy), the other nations could be best described as mediocre performers. If wealth is equalized by redistribution, and the government takes charge of everything else, who amongst the masses has the desire to perform at a higher level ?

Barack Obama...are you listening?

www.keenobserver.blogtownhall.com


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

The "DUH" generation...will it destroy the Republican party?

Posted by thekeenobserver on Tuesday, February 10, 2009 6:57:07 PM

School days...school days.

Ah yes; most everyone remembers them fondly.
 
But inside our hallowed halls of education, what's taking place could be more aptly be described as a school daze-- a leftist-slanted, decidedly liberal way of not instructing our children in the "three R's", but rather feeding them a constant stream of "San Francisco" style mainstream liberal teachings.
 
Today's students aren't being educated-- they're being indoctrinated!
 
The children of today can't read, write, add, subtract, multiply, divide, or spell, or even speak English correctly. They, like, uh, like, can't communicate too well-- unless it's by text messages.
 
But these youthful, ecological tyrants can talk all day about how plastic bags are destroying ocean life, or argue vehemently about why the United States should never have gone into Iraq. They learn all about social injustice, and the necessity of trying to be "fair" to everyone at all times.

Many elementary school children are profoundly troubled by the thought that global warming will eventualy burn up their earth. And in almost every school (and college), students are led to believe that CO2 is a poison gas, and its release into the atmosphere must be placed under some type of government authority.
 
Today's children aren't being taught science; but they can tell you why we should use the new light bulbs. And they can talk extemporaneously for hours about coastal cities being swamped because we refuse to give up oil-- the commodity which is basic to our economic strength.

Today's students don't have a clue about why it's critical to construct new power plants and refineries (to enable the U.S. economy to expand along with its population). But instead they're taught to hate the big oil corporations. Thus, they retain a basic anti-capitalist, pro-socialist, anti-American liberal inbreeding.

So what is going on in the classrooms of today? Apparently not education.
 
In 2007, only 36 percent of American eighth graders were rated ''proficient'' in reading on the National Assessment of Education Progress. The math results were similar. This means hundreds of thousands of students, having reached the threshold of high school, have yet to master the ability to read critically or do basic computations, let alone grasp the essentials of science, history and civics.

Today's high school graduates can't make change, or compute percentages; many couldn't qualify for a part time retail job even if it were available
 
But this isn't even the worst problem. Yes, it's bad enough that we'll have 75 million functional illiterates interacting throughout our society for the foreseeable future.

Let's call them the "duh" generation.

And functional illiteracy is only the beginning; the worst problem is political demographics-- the effect this dumbed-down generation will have on future elections.

Just in the last election, Barack Obama won by a 52.7% vs. 46% margin over John McCain; but Obama didn't exceed 50% in any voting groups, except for the under 25 (69%) and the black vote (94%).

Could this portend future doom for the Republican party? Definitely!

Political conservatism is slowly going the way of the incandescent light bulb. The National Education Association (teacher's union) is seeing to that. Anecdotal stories of liberal-slanted teacher-classroom incidents abound:

Last summer, in the Clark County School District in Las Vegas, a ten year old boy had written a letter to president Bush, and got a reply. But when the excited 4th grader brought his letter from the President to school, his teacher told him to put the letter away, citing, "no politics in class". Then the same classroom teacher instructed all her students to write a letter to President-elect Obama several months later.

In the classrooms of today, republicans merit zero tolerance:

In Carmel, California, a 16 year old high school girl, the only Republican on her debate team, was told to... "sit down and shut up until you have something intelligent to say''.

American Enterprise Institute's magazine published a survey of voter registrations. More than nine out of 10 teachers belonged to the Democratic party.

Disturbing stories have surfaced over the past months, further highlighting just how far many segments of American education have now elevated Barack Obama.

A concerned parent reveals that his 1st grader son complained of having to pledge allegiance every day at school to a huge projected image of Mr. Obama.The 6-year old told his father that the teacher put up a large image of the new president next to the flag. What is worse is that he said all of the kids in class each faced Obama, instead of the flag that hangs in the corner.

What the heck is going on...is this supposed to be what we call citizenship in the community?

Or what about citizenship in the nation? The liberally-slanted history that today's students are being taught is so polarizing, it's almost as if we're splitting into 2 nations --the old vs young, depending on WHEN one went to school

Modern American history textbooks speak little of the American  Revolution, or Civil War; or the 2 world wars; or all the United States stands for-- freedom won through hardfought victory over tyranny through all its years.

Today, revisionist history texts focus on the U.S. as an imperialistic, racist country, with groups being pushed in & out of slavery; groups have been denied rights, and America's bullying of nations.

The story of the Klan is given more weight as an influence in the country than all the great inventors, all the great Presidents, and all the great statesmen of our American past.

On campuses, conservative opinion doesn't qualify as respectable inquiry. You won't often find conservative principles discussed, or patriotism argued on the American campuses of today

Imagine the America of the future:

A country where all the doctors, engineers, and architects are foreign, due to today's  inability of teaching science or math properly.

An America sliding to its inevitable third world migration, where enviro-radicalism abounds:  Recycling bins everywhere. People riding bicycles, and driving little insect-like "green energy" cars to work. People living in small houses, with green "living" roofs, sleeping in 55 degree bedrooms-- to both conserve energy and the save environment.

And imagine the politics-- our Constitution, hanging by a thread...traditional marriage, individuals right to property, freedom of speech-- all under assault, becoming subservient in the name of moral equivalency.

And a constitutional amendment forbidding animosity towards homosexuals-- that preventing two people from marrying one another is discrimination. Such an amendment would be a likely offshoot of the inevitable march toward a one-party form of liberalism, that would guarantee a communal life, with no liberty, and the pursuit of social injustice.

www.keenobserver.blogtownhall.com

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

Duh, socialism? That's no worry to me!

Posted by thekeenobserver on Wednesday, January 28, 2009 6:47:49 PM

Don't laugh. Do not deride the stark reality at hand. National socialism (in its most subtle form) is on our collective doorsteps. That's right boys 'n girls...the Washington Nazis are clicking their heels, all in lockstep (goosesteps) with our new almighty fuehrer, Barack Obama.
 
Of course this foolish notion-- that Obama is like Hitler, and the leftists in Congress are his Nazi henchmen-- is blatantly silly, and smacks of right wing exagerration. But does it really?
 
Example: Barack Obama recently has said, "Americans shouldn't listen to Rush Limbaugh". Now analyze that. When is the last time a president attempted to use the bully pulpit to verbally censor freedom of speech, with the objective of eliminating an opposing political view? And according to Obama, the conservative talkers on the radio are seen by our 44th president as public enemy #1!
 
How un-American is this? Since when did politicians in this country not allow an opponent a fair shot at them? Well, since Barack Obama got elected
 
Example #2: our good buddy, Rahm Emanuel, Obama's chief of staff, has all but officially banned Ann Coulter's conservative, anti-leftist new book. Said Emanuel, "Not a single Republican elected official has stepped forward to reject her "hate", so I have to conclude they are comfortable with her as their spokesperson".
 
You heard correctly-- holy prime minister Rahm Emanuel, has somehow come to an obtuse, Marxist conclusion that all conservatives in Congress are now to be held up as officially being "in opposition the State"-- heil!
 
Think...since when did the government assume the role of censor? Or that we "not read this," or "do not listen to THAT person"? Is this not eerily reminiscent of that frightful night in Germany known as Chrystalnacht (1938), where the Nazis burned all the "forbidden" books?
 
But they say, "Oh, this is America...or...''Doh, this couldn't happen here". Well hello there Homer-- take a look... it's happening.
 
Coming up for a vote soon is the so-called "Fairness Doctrine", which will ban conservative talk radio from the airways, classifying it as unfair, divisive, hate speech. Yes- it will OUTLAW free speech over the air. Scratch the First Amendment; score another one for the Washington Nazis (the national Obammunist party). 
 
But this is RULE #1-- the standard modus operandi for any socialist (communist) leader who wants to assume absolute power:  "First...you Create A Common Enemy."
 
Recall back in his '08 campaign; Barack Obama cleverly "incited the masses" against both George Bush, and Wall Street, blaming them for every American ill, from unemployment to whooping cough. So he succeeded very well at RULE #1.
 
And now as president, Obama is taking aim at popular media conservatives, such as Limbaugh and Hannity, and attempting to paint them as divisive, hateful enemies of the "common good" (i.e., enemies of the State)-- heil again! 
 
Yup-- it's right out the manual-- text book Marxism being brandished by our freshly inaugurated, and overtly confident new leader.
 
And how about that word, "socialist''? Do the majority of Americans even realize what the term stands for? Of course they don't!
 
Most of our dumbed-down population undoubtedly associates it with the Orwellian fictional book "1984", where the 'thought police' storm into a room and arrest someone. Or that socialism conjures up the Gestapo, bashing the door down, with submachine guns at the ready. But they're missing the point by a country mile.
 
No boys and girls, socialism has nothing to do with soldiers. It has nothing to do with violence-prone policemen. And it has nothing to do with rebellion. But it does have everything to do with eliminating people's status as individuals, and elevating the government to the point of controlling our lives. That's the real danger-- that we are destined to become numbers, rather than individual private citizens. And since the individiual is now totally subservient to the state, privacy is destined to become extinct.
 
Oh, and that "social" security card we all MUST have? That was the brainchild of Franklin D. Roosevelt...our first socialist president! 
 
So now its time for our history lesson:
 
Question #1)What does Nazi stand for? Answer -the national SOCIALIST party (of Germany)
Question #2) What does USSR stand for? Answer- the union of soviet SOCIALIST republics.
 
But most Americans (residing within their cocoons of  individual comfort) don't see it that way .They don't percieve Barack Obama's socialist big government as any threat. They don't hold the Fairness Doctrine up as someting to be feared. "Duh, like...I just don't see how any of this affects me...uh."
 
Just you wait.
 
How about socialized medicine? Sounds pretty neat, doesn't it? "Da comrade! We vill be socialized in our health care!" Yes, wonderful socialized medicine is coming to a hospital near you. "Oh goody, we will meet a lot of really cool people while were bring treated for free".
 
That seems to be the image most Americans propably have about socialized medicine... or else they would not have voted for it when they pulled the lever for Obama
 
But what socialist medicine actually means is the next time you get really sick, your individual illness no longer becomes important; and the doctor (or whomever treats you) could care less.
 
So in reality, you must first report to a bureaucreat, and present evidence that you're sick. Then, get in line... another  bureaucreat dertermines your level of care (not a nurse or doctor). Next, you report to some unfamiliar doctor's office; wait for who knows how long (because nobody cares), and get treated by a doctor with a not-so-gentle bedside manner .
 
Note: the doctor's livelihood (paid by the government) now has nothing to do with his reputation as a good practitioner, because instead of his own private practice, the socialized doctor is merely practicing on you ( whatever the outcome); and making way for the next number-- er, patient.
 
And don't ever think of sueing for malpractice in an iatrogenic (faulty) medicine lawsuit, or for an operation not so well done. Not with socialized medicine. No way. You have to live with their mistake and suffer accordingly. Yes America; ignorance is not bliss.
 
And how about "Card Check? This is yet another socialist-communist law  to reduce our individual  freedom on the job. Card check will soon come up for a vote in Congress this year. And once it passes, the entire character of our country's work force (and workplace) will change overnight.
 
Under Card Check, outside union bosses come into a company and all but force each individual worker to sign a card, obligating them to a join a union-- against their will. The purpose? Simple . Eliminate all opposition by eliminating the current method done by secret ballot, which will open up anyone who resists to union intimidation until they join....("We know where you live").  It's a Gestapo-like measure that will eliminate individualism on the job forever. Yes--forever.
 
So just how Gestapo-like is card check? Try this-- once you sign the card, the union takes hold in your company PERMANENTLY. Yes! Those are the provisions of the bill; you're forever unionized...no going back.
 
That's right, passing card check means no time limit-- your company's unionized PERMANENTLY. And you the worker, have no say in your salary, or your hourly, or your benefits, or your work conditions, or your days off. Nothing. You're  just one of the group now Buddy-- like it or lump it.
 
So now, you, as an individual, mean nothing to the union...just your weekly dues, which go to the union bosses, and are applied toward the perpetual re-election campaigns of the democrats in power . Nice work Obama & company.
 
And the provisions of card check allow for an outside union arbitrator, who comes in every other year, to re-negotiate your contract with the company. 
 
Once again, you have no voice- but  that's what happens by merely signing the card. If you plan on making a career of your job, you have just literally signed your life away.
 
Well, the unions contributed  $50 million to the Obama campaign, so this is their payback.
 
So are we gettin' any warmer about what socialism really means? It means, one by one, we lose our freedom  to conduct our lives as individuals.
 
It means that you are no longer in America, but in some foreign country resting upon the land mass between the Atlantic &  the Pacific, somewhere below Canada and above Mexico. The same geography, but an all but totalitarian different way of life altogether.
 
But Americans will lamely stand by and watch this all unfold in Congress before their very eyes. They absolutely won't care until it affects them individually --and then, it's too late.
 
But its not too late . Congressional midterms elections are coming up in two years.
 
However, an apathetic and selfish America, misled by our socialist liberal press, will continue to return the same old Congressional power-lusting Nazis back to incumbency, so they can finish the job under the fearless leadership of Barack Obama.
 

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

The Yawn of a New Era...Barack Obama's economic stimulus

Posted by thekeenobserver on Wednesday, January 21, 2009 8:01:26 PM

It was hyped everywhere in the news. It was hailed by pundits and economists alike. So what's the big deal all about? It was President Barack Obama's announcement last month that he would revive the economy, with the largest public works program since the 1960's build-out of the Interstate System of highways.

Advocates for the nation’s long-neglected infrastructure were euphoric. Some hoped that the time had finally come to bring high-speed rail to the United States. But as details of the plan were released, transformative building projects like intercity bullet train corridors, now seem highly unlikely.

The largest beneficiary of the 30 billion in "shovel-ready" road and bridge construction projects would be the labor unions. And surprisingly, there are fewer of the green-collar jobs and renewable energy measures to be found at all. Looks like Obama's five million new green energy job creation plans are on hold, all in lieu of the 600,000 new government bureaucrat jobs that'll be created just to administer  all the hundreds of new measures called for in the plan

Civil engineers everywhere (who were expecting to be deluged with new bridge and road proposals) are wondering, "wheres the beef"?

 Answer; it's been transposed into pork!

The 850 billion promise that the engineers had expected to bring the nation’s aging infrastructure up to snuff, has been shortchanged by a mere 820 billion, which has been set aside for "other purposes".  And now, its only 30 billion to be actually allocated to road, bridge, and mass transit construction.

Er... what happened to the other 820 billion?

Roughly $200 billion would go toward middle-class tax cuts, tax credits for tuition and small businesses; while another $200 billion is under consideration to help mitigate the soaring costs of Medicaid and education. Up to $350 billion or more could go toward  tax credits for renewable energy, increased funding for food stamps, and the creation of an extensive technological health database-- welfare on steroids!

Is this not to be the largest wealth transfer of all time? A vote buying bonanza in disguise? It's something for almost everybody; and money for nothing (welfare) payments to every last drone in the population. Even the homeless have had places set for them at the feeding table.
 
Ironically, last December, Vice President  Biden VOWED that the proposal would not become a "Christmas tree" for lawmakers' policy earmarks. He staunchly defended it against the criticism that its focus would be on old-fashioned projects.

But low-n-behold... Santa Claus Obama is coming to every state in the union, with a gift bag of goodies that will spread out Christmas over the next 2-3 years of our new president's first term.
 
And Barack has plans to spend it well. Ho-ho-ho-- the more votes he can "buy" for his second term, the merrier- basically an infrastructure plan to get re-elected . Can you say anti-transparency?

The array of spending allocations are mind-numbing:

-$11 billion for smart grid research and development
 -$8 billion in loans for renewable energy power generation 
-$6.9 billion to help local governments become more energy efficient ;
 -$6 billion for broadband and wireless services ;
-$430 million for small business loans
-$650 million to convert to digital TV transmission
 -$1 billion in grants for new commuter rail or light rail projects
 -$20 billion to computerize health records
 -$4 billion for job training

Obama's harshest critics have often accused him of being "inexperienced"..."never held an executive position"..."not qualified to be president"..."indecisive"..."too far to the left", etc. True.

But one thing ol' Barack-o knows best is how to win elections; the man is easily the most brilliant, foresighted "see over the horizon" type of politician America's ever known.

Although Obama was president of the Harvard Law Review, he is highly skilled at math. He knows if he can get enough government checks into the hands of enough different people (say about 45%  of the voting public), his re-election in 2012 is a fait accompli (sure thing).

And under the pretext of stimulating the economy, he's most cleverly disguising a subtle but irrepressibly powerful way to consolidate his political influence.

Once again; its that ability to see over the horizon thing. He began to lay the groundwork shortly after he won the election last November when he began to talk of: "Only the government can solve this economic crisis"..."deficits don't matter"..."we face the prospect of trillion dollar deficits for years to come..."things will get worse, before they get better."
 
In effect, Obama was laying the groundwork for his cover song, " I'm your savior...do what I say-- or risk being unpatriotic!

And the savior has "prioritized" well his bag of gifts. His stimulus (socialist) plan will include a use-it-or-lose-it provision to force states to spend the money they get quickly, or risk forfeiting all of it

The mere size of Obama's enormous stimulus package would be scary enough without learning the details.

But from a purely fiscal standpoint, would it not have made more sense if the money was LOANED to the states? This would have assured more efficient use of the funds, cut down on bureaucracy and fraud, and would have allowed the government to recoup the money and reduce the deficit on behalf of the taxpayers, who pay interest on our national debt.

But for Obama, this would make way too much sense economically, and completely implode his vote-buying strategy for the next election.

Cleverly, Mr. Obama never says where the money is coming from to pay for it all, as if he can magically create prosperity simply by printing and distributing it -- as if it were "Monopoly" money.

Recently on ABC's "This Week", Obama said: "Here are a few things we're going to do. We are going to double alternative energy production. We are going to weatherize 2 million homes. We are going to create a much more efficient energy system."

But with all of Obama's profligacy, there's no proof his 850 billion stimulus will jump-start our economy. This borders on sheer fiscal madness! But when you hear some of the uses he has for this money, it is way beyond madness.

-87 billion for saving public sector jobs and vital services
-$32 billion to transform the nation’s energy transmission, distribution, and production
  systems by allowing for  better grid and focusing investment in renewable technology.
 -$16 billion to repair public housing and make key energy efficiency retrofits. 
 -$6 billion to weatherize modest-income homes.
-$31 billion to modernize federal and other public infrastructure 
 $19 billion for clean water, flood control, and environmental restoration investments 
 $10 billion for transit and rail to reduce traffic congestion and gas consumption
 
-41 billion to local school districts through Title I, a new School  Modernization and Repair Program
-$79 billion in state fiscal relief to prevent cutbacks to key services,
-$20 billion for health information technology to prevent medical mistakes, provide better     care to patients and introduce cost-saving efficiencies.
-$4.1 billion to provide for preventative care and to evaluate the most effective healthcare
  treatments.

Other vital  necessities include:

-2 billion for "youth building" programs
-1 billion for reducing wildfire threats
-500 mi for the bureau of Indian affairs
-13 billion for disadvantaged children funding
-300 million for improving teacher quality
 -300million for job training for "at risk" youth
-13 billion for disadvantaged children in local school districts
 -30 billion for attacking the housing crisis
-2 billion for child care while parents work
-4 billion for neighborhood stabilization
-1.5billion for homeless assistance relocation
-20 billion for alleviating hunger assistance
-726 million for after school meals
-4 billion for helping workers find jobs
-27 billion for extended unemployment benefits
- 30 billion for Cobra; for continuation of health care insurance for the newly unemployed

And then we have the really hardcore pork-belly projects:

-100 million for "compassion funding"
-750 million for periodic census and communication support
-1.5 billion for green rehabilitation of public housing
-500 million for Native American housing
-100 million for lead paint removal of public housing
 -1 billion for reducing wildfire threats
-1 billion for low income energy assist
-300 million for the national fish hatchery program
-650 million for the national forest service

Yup, Obama even included Smokey the Bear. Maybe ACORN can register him to vote in the 2012 election.

So did Barack forget anything? Did he leave any body out? Sure; all the hardworking people who hold the traditional private sector jobs, who are going to end up paying for it all!

Hidden within all this idolatry and worship of Obama is the beginning of a new Soviet era of pax Americana. Perhaps someone can provide Mr. Obama and his socialist advisers with some history textbooks, detailing the miserable failure of the Soviets' various five-year plans throughout the many decades of the last century.

Yes, it's the same old wealth transfer-vote buying strategy, cleverly disguised by Obama's "transparency in new government" promises.

And with the public blinded in sheer awe of our newly ordained savior, this boondoggle will fly through with warp speed, and leave any Republican opposition hiding in the corners of Congress, like mice cowering beneath a tomcat.

Recall during his campaign about how Obama (and his socialist minions) were always decrying the republican failure of "trickledown economics." So we'll see just how well "trickle-up" is about to work
 
And this is not the war on poverty, it's the opening salvo in the new era of American class warfare-- the haves vs. the have nots.

It's war on the wealth-producing sector of society-- the people who pay almost all of the taxes. And many of these same Americans (especially the ones who voted for Obama) are about to get a real change --a tax hike they can truly believe in.

www.keenobserver.blogtownhall.com

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

The new "in your face" democracy of Barack Obama

Posted by thekeenobserver on Monday, January 19, 2009 7:46:52 PM
 

QUESTION: Does it seem to you as though our newly elected savior-president, is obsessed with using the bully pulpit to help us change ourselves?

 

Not long ago, on election night of November 4, Barack Obama said in his acceptance speech..."We are NOT a country of individuals". And during his campaign, Obama often proclaimed in stump speeches that he wants, "No more Americans infighting among one another...Universal citizen service will bring Americans of every background together and make America safer and more united in common purpose".

 

Yes indeed; the great call for unity by our savior, Barack Obama. And one of the primary ways he seeks to "unify" is by making service a central cause of his presidency.

 

"We will create new opportunities for Americans to serve. And we will direct that service toward our most pressing challenges, by the formation of a new group, known as "Organizing for America." This will be an organization that will continue the grassroots advocacy of change that Obama began promoting during his presidential campaign.

 

This new group, "Organizing for America", will work within the Democratic National Committee -- led by Virginia Governor Tim Kaine-- to advance the Obama agenda.

 

"President-elect Obama has laid the foundation to meet the great challenges facing our nation, but we can succeed only if we build grassroots support for the administration's agenda," said Kaine, in a release announcing the formation of the new activist youth group.

 

Organizing for America will be run in conjunction with the Democratic National Committee's agenda for change. "As the DNC works to elect candidates who will support the change agenda, we will also invest in a bottom-up effort that ensures the priorities of everyday Americans are heard in Washington,” Governor Kaine said in a recent statement.

 

Translation: We are going to brainwash millions of young people to get Obama's socio-marxist agenda railroaded through Congress, and label all Republican opposition as being "unpatriotic".

 

And for all you disbelievers, consider his recent radio message, where Obama revealed..."As President, I will need the help of all Americans to meet the challenges that lie ahead; that's why I'm asking people like you who fought for change during the campaign, to continue fighting for change in your communities."

 

Translation: If anyone nearby you opposes my agenda, including your family, just get in their face.

 

The new group, "Organizing for America" (mobilizing for socialism) will be the flagship of "Obama 2.0,” as many people have taken to calling the transformation of Obama's political organization created during the 2008 campaign.

 

So for all you loyal Obammunist supporters, is this not code for the "National Civilian Security Force", the one to be "as well funded as the military", that Obama spoke about during the campaign?

 

Heil Barack!

 

And does anyone care to recall that wonderful children's nursery tale, the one about that laid back group, called the "Hitler Youth Corps"?

The reason why Hitler caught on so big was because of the youth movement. Hitler had a tremendous following from all the young people who idolized him. He convinced all of the people in early 1930's Germany that he was some sort of savior during difficult economic times.

 

Sound familiar?

 

In the 1930's, young people were more than willing to join Hitler's youth group, and were required to attend summer camps of paramilitary training, and to perform community service for the year round.

 

Is Obama plagarizing?

 

During the 1920's, Benito Mussolini created the "Giovenezza"; these were youthful "volunteers" who wore black shirts. Il Duce (Mussolini) had high hopes for Italy's youth, and deep faith in their abilities and destiny-- with the "right guidance."

 

But the original fascist may have been Woodrow Wilson, who was a role model for Mussolini-- who was a role model for Hitler.

 

During his second term, Woodrow Wilson deployed a nationwide Gestapo-like police force that jailed opponents of his administration, and gagged the media if anyone dared oppose his agenda.

 

And now Obama is acting like Woodrow Wilson. And it’s just as frightening, if not worse.

 

"As President, I will need the help of all Americans to meet the challenges that lie ahead," Obama said in a recent video message e-mailed to supporters. "Volunteers, grass roots leaders, and ordinary citizens will continue to drive our organization, helping us bring about the changes we proposed during the campaign...that's why I'm asking people like you, who fought for change during the campaign, to continue fighting for change in your communities".

 

Hmmm…sounds a lot like the Soviet era commissaries-- 1 or 2 youthful kommissars in each neighborhood, reporting on persons with the incorrect political leaning.

 

And how about, "No more Americans infighting among one another?” Is that to say that political discourse is no longer to be allowed at all? 

 

So is it high time that we axe Obama just why he feels the need to create this organization, and inquire if it will be  taxpayer funded? Is this what Obama meant when he spoke about the "fierce urgency of now"?

 

Basically, all Obama's talk about national service, youth volunteerism, community service, etc. are nothing more than code phrases for "My secret agenda for getting re-elected" 

 

Obama's intentions are right out of the ACORN handbook--building coalitions for "educating" people about reform legislation", and mobilizing them to put "pressure" on legislators to support needed reforms.

 

Basically, its just more ACORN-style "get in their face" intimidation; but now it's to be directed at those who enact our laws!

 

So is this democracy-- having a paramiltary force of Obammunist young people, aggressively waiting outside the offices of any legislator in opposition to the great savior's proposals, like re-instating the Freedom Doctrine? (this would abolish conservative talk radio).

 

Obama’s establishment of a Gestapo-like youthful security force is little more than a veiled attempt to impose a fascist-style dictatorship .

 

So after Obama gets his para-military "well funded" youth militia established, and then eliminates conservative talk radio opposition-- who would stand in his way of consolidating his power in a second term? Is this not Obama’s insidious way of ensuring a leftist minority rule for the rest of the foreseeable future?

 

And In the 2012 election, would these community service Obama youth "volunteers" also be assigned to performing valuable poll-watching services?

 

Presently, Obama is using his internet website to urge youth to, "Volunteer, donate time, donate funds, make things happen in your own neighborhood, town, city, or state". But social networks, e-mail lists, and text messaging are giving Obama the tools for continuing his campaigning -- and now, perhaps, for affecting new legislation as well.

 

Networking technology could also help younger voters get involved in lobbying, and influencing issues when legislation is moving through various committees on Capitol Hill.

 

Compare all this so called "call to volunteerism" to this remark from another astute politician, who once described the young as..."Useful idiots, who perform in blind obedience to my every decree"…Josef Stalin (circa 1931).

 

And right now, we have a newly elected president (with a 78% approval rating), who isn’t afraid of anyone. And with the media firmly in support, he can beat any opposition over the head with his silver tongue, and they’ll just fall right at his feet.

 

But what's even more troubling--- many people are now ready to believe that one man (and a one-party government) is able to cure all their ailments. This all opens the door to a soft tyranny of power, unprecedented by any one who's ever previously resided in the Whitehouse. 

 

Last November, A Republican congressman from Georgia, Rep. Paul Broun, spoke of his fears that Obama would establish a Gestapo-like security force to impose a Marxist or fascist dictatorship..."It may sound a bit crazy, but this thing Obama is proposing, this national security force, poses a problem with the radical philosophy of socialism or Marxism.”

 

Recall how often Obama has been planting these same seeds of black shirt- fascism on his campaign trail. His oft-proposed 100 hrs of community service for free tuition has been kicked around for awhile, and the specter of what it could now become is just coming to the fore.

 

Here's the intent: federally-funded tuition for 100 hrs of community service will become a mandatory part of funding a degree. This would undoubtedly grow into a rapidly expanding youthful segment of the population, an ever more dependent voting bloc, and it's evolution into a Hitler type of Obamian Youth corps.

 

So, for all you nice students out there; what if you don't want to join Obama's "Organized for America"? Would you even have a right to refuse?  Will Obama's two daughters someday be required to serve?

 

Yes boys and girls, you best plan on getting with the "Organized for America" program. And think of those cool uniforms, with a "YES WE CAN" armband. And it'll be a group likely to be directed at turning an entire generation of kids into hating all conservatives, and labeling them all as divisive "right wingers".

 

Inducing young people to take government money, and serving in some civilian corps (so they can afford to get an education) is not volunteering; it's manipulation. And compulsory labor with indirect compensation is servitude, no matter how you disguise it.

 

 

What Obama proposes - civilian national service - is actually a negation of service and volunteerism. Lured by college grants, and subjected to peer pressure, the kids who will be sucked into such a program will be easy pawns for whomever commands the organization - and we can just imagine how this might be used to intimidate any opponents of leftwing opinion.

 

Just the sight of a paramilitary force cruising through a neighborhood could intimidate anyone who doesn’t agree with the Obamunnism philosophy of "change".

.

"Where an excess of power prevails, no man is safe in his opinions, his person, his faculties, or his possessions." James Madison (circa 1789)

 

Let’s see now....America is the most powerful and richest country on the planet, but somehow, we need change. So, what is the change that we need? A change to socialism, where everyone is equally poor?

 

Young people helped elect our country's first African-American president. Record numbers of volunteers chose to work for their ideals over high-paying jobs.

 

But their work isn't over. Not by a long shot.

 

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

The next bailout? It may be the biggee of all time!

Posted by thekeenobserver on Friday, January 02, 2009 4:23:33 PM
 

Ah, for the good old days of the 50's on the island paradise of Cuba. Everyone is familiar with the segment  from the movie in "Godfather II", when violent Castro rebels in 1958, suddenly thwarted the grand casino takeover plans of Michael Corleone, and literally kicked all the capitalist pigs out of the country, including Cuban president Fulgencio Battista.

 

It was the triumph of a young rebel, exactly 50 years ago, when fiery Fidel Castro emerged from the jungles around Santiago, and declared victory in the island nation's civil war. And when George Bush leaves office, the revolution will have outlasted 10 American presidents, who all unsuccessfully maintained tough sanctions aimed at overthrowing Castro's Communist leadership.

 

But tempus fugit--time files when you're having a good time. So after 50 glorious years of  Castro's firing squads, political imprisonments, economic shortages, and a once-prosperous nation turned tropical socialist ghetto, people thought the communist party would become obsolete with the resignation of Fidel, in Feb 2008, 

 

At that time, president George Bush expressed hope that with new leadership, the island "paradise" of Cuba would move towards democracy; but cold water was quickly cast upon the notion when Fidel's younger brother, Raul was announced as his successor.

 

Recently, as Cuba marks the 50th anniversary of its socialist revolution, Castro's sibling-successor proudly hailed, "It is time to reflect on the next 50 years, when we shall continue to struggle incessantly," said Raul, speaking beneath the same Santiago balcony where his older brother Fidel declared victory half a century ago.

 

Meanwhile, the Venezuelan president, Hugo Chávez, announced that, "In honor of the 50th revoliution's anniversary, the Cuban flag would fly permanently outside the tomb of our South American independence leader, Simón Bolívar". Yes, our good buddy Hugo is obviously pumped, and is going all out to commemorate the celebration.

 

And just like brother Fidel, Raúl Castro has continued Cuba's bellicose rhetoric against the United States, and suggested Cuba holds little hope for a change in relations in the next four years under the incoming president, Barack Obama. In his recent speech in Santiago, Raul warned Cubans that, "The enemy (America) will never cease to be aggressive, treacherous and dominant".

 

The 50th anniversary celebrations come amidst grim economic forecasts, after three recent hurricanes caused $10 billion in damages, and pushed up food prices. But will it be Obama to the rescue? Our new president-elect has announced his "new deal" for Cuba, promising to reopen negotiations, and lift severe restrictions on family travel and remittances to the island.

 

Presently the Cuban government is planning to celebrate its 50th anniversary "Prince-style"-- like it's 1999. Cuban's are encouraged to rejoinder in the great 'social achievements' of the last half-century, like public health care and the public education systems. But island officials admit that these services, although free, are badly frayed, and suffer from under-investment.

 

Other things for the population to "celebrate" include low production of nearly all consumer goods, and a looming demographic crisis-- low birthrates, a shrinking, unmotivated workforce, and growing elderly population. Big fun is on the horizon for Cuba after 50 years of lack and shortages, with no relief in sight.
 
But let's give the Cuban Commies a break; maybe they haven't been on the job long enough; and maybe a only a little more economic fine-tuning is needed. Like all good socialists, the Cuban power-elite will never admit they were wrong, and maintain only that more government programs and more time are necessary to correct the situation.

 

Today, many Cubans, with no other alternative, can only hope things improve. Despite all the free social services, the aging population wonders why these "freebies" have come at such a high price--the lack of basic civic, political and economic freedoms. And our dearly-beloved, departing president, George W. Bush, thought he could topple Cuba's socialist government with tightened sanctions, tough talk, and support for dissidents--but it hasn't worked.

 

But a hero may be on the horizon. Barack Obama will be the 11th president to deal with the socialist government in Havana, and he promises to slog along a different pathway--allow unlimited travel back and forth for Cuban exile families, and pursue direct diplomacy with the socialist government in power.

 

But why just play around with diplomacy and freed-up travel restrictions? Think big Mr. Obama-- think Cuban Communist bailout! After all, while everyone is talking trillions for this, and billions for that, do you think a cash-famished Raul Castro & company would turn down a $5-10 billion bargain basement bribe to literally take a hike to Venezuela, abdicate from rule, and hook up with their bosom-buddy Hugo? It would undoubtedly be an offer they couldn't refuse.

 

And such a deal! Not since William Seward paid $7.2 million for Alaska in 1867, if we bought (bribed) our way into Cuba, we'd be getting an equally sweet bargain; sugar cane plantations estimated in the millions of acres. And the falling price of bananas would make Barack the next great American consumer hero. And oh what fun it would be to see again all the incredible, chrome-laden American cars of the 1950s riding around the island. Maybe GM and the big 3 could get some ideas that the old cars were the stars, and go retro again.

 

And think of the boom to the U.S. tourist industry. Old junkets to Vegas would be out--and Cuban cruises around the island would be in. Americans would have a first-hand glance at  what 50 years of socialism have done to this once-prosperous island nation from its previous 400 year history.

 

Americans would experience all the accoutrements of  traveling Communist first class; people lacking electricity, food; and living in hovels. And if wasn't for the island's tropical climate, the Cubans would probably be freezing due to the lack of energy production. (In exchange for sugar, Cuba imports most of its fuel from Trinidad and Tobago). Yes, theCubans have much to celebrate indeed!

Cuba has a population in excess of 11 million, and although it is a soviet-style, centrally planned economy, with the exception of sugar, the island  imports practically everything else it needs. The tourism sector requires a regular supply of many consumer products, like ice cream and margarine, which are often in short supply. One can only wonder how a Baskin-Robbins, or Coldstone Creamery would do in downtown Santiago.

 Ah yes--the joys of Cuban socialism--or is it communism? But what's the difference? Either way, if you rebel against the government (ie. don't pay your taxes; or become a dissident voice), armed men in uniforms will forcefully accompany you to the nearest detention facility. 

 

Here is a slice-of-life, excerpt of a Cuban exile (who wrote to his cousin in Spain) of how he felt about his wondrous life growing up in Cuba:..."Born in the late 1950s, and raised in Cuba, I was fortunate to be able to leave in the early 1970s.  Ever since I departed from the Castro-Stalinist-Communist hell-hole, every single day of my life in exile from my patria (motherland,) has been permeated by my unflinching dedication to the cause of a free Cuba. May God Almighty grant all of those still captive within the island-prison, the blessings of a free, democratic and civil republic! We have suffered for far too long. Grant us Lord, our freedom from bondage, tyranny and oppression".

 

Today, the planned 50th celebration of the revolution is going full steam ahead. But with the Cuban economy in shambles, residents are preparing to mark the anniversary with low spirits; "There is no emotion" exclaimed a 40-year old female dance teacher. "We are lacking in everything". No question, despite the glossy attempts, the Cuban people know that even when Castro finally passes on, the communist party will remain, and life as usual will go on, with food lacking, a scarcity of jobs, and a nervous Cuban police force stopping anyone who acts suspiciously.

 

From a historical perspective, this all can be summed up in a nutshell: the basic reason why government programs (i.e. central planning) never work is the built in flaws of socialism; there is no motivation for anybody to accomplish anything. There is nothing wrong with government entitlements for those who truly need them, but they should be the exception; not the rule.

 

So what could possibly motivate someone to work harder for their government, when there are no personal rewards at stake? If our intellectually-absent President-elect Obama could only visualize that this is what institutionalized socialism always causes--class envy, shared misery, instead of the intended shared prosperity--would he feel any different politically?

 

Despite his good intentions, Obama has convinced Americans that the free market has failed them; and now, much of America could be headed down the socialistic path of a Cuba; "Yes, we need entitlements! We need government handouts"...that's the change Obama will bring to Washington.

 

Sadly, many class-envious Americans have been waylayed into thinking that they can't achieve wealth, they deserve more benefits, and confuse rights with government handouts, for providing their necessities: i.e. "Gimme more food stamps... gimme section 8 housing...gimmee free health care... gimmee extended unemployment compensation...gimmee free child care...gimme free college tution... gimmee-gimmee free everything! And I deserve it because thats my right!"

 

And now, instead of a strong leader like John F. Kennedy, who inspired people with the "we can" attitude, we are faced with the Chosen One, Obama, who stokes class-warfare, "We can't provide for ourselves because the wealthy have hogged everything!" And one only need to look at the Cuba of today to see where America may be headed after the completion of the second term of Barack Obama, whose presidency of 'big government for everything' may result in a Castro style socialist revolution of our own making.

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

One Nation, Under God?

Posted by thekeenobserver on Friday, December 12, 2008 4:50:38 PM
 

ATTENTION ALL KOMMISARS: For the good of the State, Central Planning has just issued its first 2 year program: Spending a trillion dollars for aid to the jobless, direct assistance to the cities and workers; job-creating construction of roads, schools and other public works, and investing in technologies creating 5 million green energy jobs of the future.

 

Prime minister Obama has decreed that the deficits matter not...."We will be going deeper into debt for at least two years by spending hundreds of billions of dollars or more to stimulate the economy." (end of pronouncement) 

 

Today, if we go back in history, just about every truly catastrophic economic event that has occurred in the last century -- from the depression to the savings and loan crisis to the current housing crisis -- all have at their root in government intervention in the private market.

 

But despite all the evidence to the contrary, Obama wants to get soviet and put the federal government in charge of the economy. Obama's critics lampoon him as a socialist, a liberal, a communist, a leftist, etc. But no matter what label one would hang on the Chosen One, it all goes back to this one basic tenet- the federal government is inevitably slower, dumber, and less competent than private industry. And Obama knows the more he can expand it, and the more bureaucracies he creates to run it all, it's just that many more bureaucrats and dependents who will be there in four years to vote for his second term.

 

Yes America, call it whatever you want, but this whole big mega-billion, multi-trilllion quadrillion-zillion stimulus spending spree, is little more than your basic democratic formula for vote-buying. After all, if you boil away all the fat and pork, America will be left with little more than some repaved roads, retro-fitted bridges, and better insulated schools and federal buildings, all courtesy of prime minister Barack Obama, whose name will be everywhere inscripted on all these public edifices. The only thing missing will be his portraits hanging everywhere, like they have in Romania and North Korea.

 

And what of all the workers? (i.e. the proletariat).  What's to become of them after all the roads have been resurfaced, the bridges reconstructed, and the school buildings refurbished? These are unskilled, make-work jobs, and will have little value in the private sector. So by the process of deductive logic, we must conclude that yes, they'll be transformed into government drones, and drawing extension after extension of long-term government unemployment compensation.

 

Basically, Chairman Barack can't miss. He'll spend whatever mega-billions on creating all the new government bureaucracies to run all the different stimuli programs, then he'll add more new federal departments, and new czars to run all of them. And then there are the workers...theyll be so many new government workers, it'll be like the draft of '42, only you'll be trained under the flag of Obammunism, and will join a virtually army of newly-minted government dependents, who'll all be there to vote for the second term of prime minister (and paymaster) Obama.

 

And while all this stimulus-deficit-spending is occurring, what about the flip side...the private sector, and the frightening numbers of a ballooning national debt? Obama's disregard for deficits is almost child-like; as if money DID grow on trees.

 

In it's most simple analysis, let's say we've been building a debt pyramid over the last decade, and now we'll be adding huge new amounts to the base at the bottom , while all the while, the interest will be coalescing at the top. And given time and the continuation of reckless deficit spending, the debt pyramid may become top heavy and will begin to tip over...but prime minister Obama will be long gone out of office when and if that occurs.

And and even more disturbing, is that a country under the rule of Obammunism, (or any communist country), is the fact that morality will be trivialized, and belief in God may become politically incorrect under the Obama regime. Look for new legislation and legal challenges to get God out of our sociey as much as possible.

Look at how the liberal leftists have already gone out of their way to marginalize Christmas as "just some holiday", which is to be held in the same esteem as kwanzaa, or even the atheist way of expressing it...'being good for goodness sake'. Public nativity scenes are the equivalent of obscenity, and receive court challenges from people who're "offended". If these people are so offended by God, one wonders what will happen to them when they are about to reach their final destination, and discover, to their ultimate dismay, that their atheism had played an eternally malevolent trick upon them.

And worse, under Obammunism, well see a litany of "San Francisco" behavior freely exposed around the rest of the country. There will be gay parades in every major city; and hundreds of same-sex court challenges for everything from gay rights for marriage, down to gay protection from harassment, or offensive, anti-gay language in any public venue. There will be gay wedding specialists, gay escort services, and every other type of "underground" behavior now openly visible in the public discourse.

And aside from all this, we haven’t even considered all the planned parenthood clinics that will expand around the country faster than the dollar stores, and the resulting abortion on demand mentality--all abortions all the time-- will further diminish our country's long-standing tradition as a God-fearing Christian nation, as life itself becomes cheap. Look for euthanasia to become legal, and Dr.Kevorkian office expansions in all the major population centers. All this could become  stark reality during a second 4-year term of obammunism.

Who knows...Obama would probably attempt to even remove the inscription "in God we trust" from our coinage and currency if the political climate so permits. And the pledge of allegiance doesn’t stand a chance...one nation, under God? And a child heard saying..."my right hand up to God" during recess could be grounds for expulsion.

 

Yes, look for the expansion of parallel societies, and political correctness taken to previously unimaginable extremes, during the regime of Barack Obama. And if America wants to see a vision of itself after two terms of President Barack Obama, they only need to look today toward the left coast at San Francisco, and judge for themselves.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous12Next »