Category Archives: Socialism

We no longer have a Government.

Posted by on November 7, 2012 No comments

I’ve been listening to people attempt to downplay the devastation Obama will bring to America over the next four years. They drone on about how our government’s checks and balances prevent any president from doing too much damage to our nation. Unfortunately this assumes that American government still functions as it was intended to function. People are apparently unaware that our government no longer follows its own laws.

It is absolutely true that the Founding Fathers gave us a system of government that should have protected our nation from the excesses of any single president. However, the checks and balances, balance of powers, and other limitations enshrined in the Constitution (which they now call gridlock), have all been ignored by our current government. Those checks and balances disappeared as soon as those in power realized that they could ignore the law and no one would do anything about it. This leaves America vulnerable to any tyrant capable of winning an election…  Take Obama for instance.

Now that the Constitution is completely ignored, elections determine what the bare majority can inflict upon the other 49% of the population. There are no restraints, no restrictions on governmental authority, no limitations on governmental power, no protection of inalienable rights. Four more years of Obama is scary ONLY because the government ignores the Constitution and BECAUSE there are no longer any separations of powers.

Earlier this year the U.S. Attorney General announced that the President had the legal authority to order the

killing of any person, including a U.S. citizen, without trial. He explained that under certain circumstances, the President can order anyone outside America to be killed. Of course the circumstances are to be determined by Obama and his staff. No due process. No oversight. No appeal. PLAINLY unconstitutional.  but he did it anyway.

A few days after this announcement the Director of the FBI was questioned by a Congressional committee as to whether it applied to U.S. citizens within the borders of the U.S. His answer was that he would have to check the law. He DIDN’T say, “no, that would clearly be unconstitutional.” He DIDN’T say, “That would clearly violate the citizen’s right to not be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process.” He DIDN’T immediately respond by saying, “Hell NO, that would be murder.” The highest ranking government official in the federal government’s domestic law enforcement department said he wasn’t sure if the president had authority to unilaterally order the murder of an American citizen on American soil.

A government that ignores its own laws is NOT A GOVERNMENT!!!

It’s just a bunch of bullies asserting the power through coercion and threats. Our government now ignores its own laws. America, as established by our Founding Fathers, was a GREAT country. We must do whatever it takes to get it back. Our daily lives will get worse, MUCH worse, if we don’t throw off this outlaw band of bullies.

One step forward, two steps back:

Last summer the Supreme Court agreed with LLF’s argument in the U.S. v. Arizona case. Liberty Legal Foundation filed an amicus brief that made only one point: That existing Federal Law prohibited the Obama administration from telling Arizona it couldn’t ask for immigration status information on individual arrestees. To the best of their knowledge, no one else made this point to the Court. This was one of the few areas that the Court found in favor of the State of Arizona.

Unfortunately, the Court also told Arizona, and every other state, that States can’t enforce Federal immigration law. This part of the decision was completely unique in American history. This was a huge defeat that leaves no check on the president’s total authority regarding enforcement of immigration law. In the words of dissenting Justice Scalia, the 50 States are no longer sovereign. In the end LLF did what they could, but the Court’s decision on a different part of the case caused much more damage than LLF fixed. They plug one hole, the Court makes a bigger one somewhere else.

The Court also agreed with LLF, to a certain degree, in the Obamacare case. Again, LLF filed an amicus brief. Again, LLF was practically alone in making the most important argument: the commerce clause was never intended to allow Congress to do anything it wants to do. The Court didn’t overturn Wickard v. Filburn, as they wanted, but it did agree that the individual mandate was beyond Congressional authority under the commerce clause. The Court said that even the Wickard standard doesn’t justify the individual mandate.

Unfortunately the Court then issued completely new and completely arbitrary and unexpected precedent granting Congress authority to enforce any regulation Congress can dream up; as long as enforcement is via a fine collected by the IRS. The Court’s Obamacare ruling blew all tax and spend clause precedent out of the water. It opened a completely new avenue for Congress to assert authority that was explicitly denied to Congress by the Founding Fathers. Again, the Court gave LLF what they asked for, but made matters much worse by changing the rules elsewhere.

It seems that federal courts are determined to kill whatever remains of the Constitution. We must find a way to re-establish the rule of law.

We must find a solution before the only solution is armed conflict.  because that is what an oppressed population eventually degrades to…  all out civil war.  Obama has us hurling in that direction.  At some point soon, the producers who are carrying the rest of the parasites on their backs will say no more and either leave the U.S., or join the battle.  either choice is horrible… and they are BOTH the fault of Barack Obama and his parasite followers.

Obama Destroying our Constitution – But He’s a “Good Guy” ????

Posted by on September 4, 2012 6 comments
dictator-obama22-400x283

Some people insist Barack Obama is a good guy with a good heart. They say his only reason for seeking re-election is the good impulse to serve the best interests of the people and defend the defenseless. Do his words match his actions? Do his policies deliver the good outcomes he promised?

It cannot be denied Barack Obama cut Medicare to fund ObamaCare. It is clear his “reform” system deprives treatment for seniors deemed too old to justify the expense. He has done nothing to save Medicare or Social Security. It is clear his ideology makes second class citizens of seniors. If anybody is pushing Granny off a cliff, it’s Barack Obama.

This is a good guy? This is a good hearted man defending the defenseless?

His tax and spend and steal-from-one-to-give-to-another ideology is destroying the middle class and the hopes of college graduates. Half of them can’t find work. Obamanomics has successfully created crushing and rapidly growing debt that kills any chance of prosperity for our kids and grandkids. Instead of listening to his advisors and his party leaders and changing course to help people, he plays golf, campaigns, takes expensive trips, and sends his wife on even more expensive trips.

This is a good guy? This is a guy that cares?

Worse still, his horrendous economic policies coupled with drastic cuts in defense put us all at risk, especially our military volunteers.

Barack Obama encourages our enemies, insults and humiliates our allies, and then expects us to cheer him when he shows up to reassure us a vote for him is a vote for security.

His policy in Afghanistan—-disarming our soldiers when training Afghan personnel—resulted in at least 100 of our men being murdered by those very trainees. Many more have been wounded. Telegraphing our surrender by naming a pullout date encouraged Taliban and al Qaeda terrorists to escalate, resulting in even more American deaths. Afghanistan, where there was once the promise of freedom, has become little more than a killing ground spiraling downward into chaos.

This is a good commander making wise decisions in theater?

Barack Obama is actively engaged in prosecuting a Navy Seal for writing a book, actively engaged in trying to prevent our military from voting, actively engaged in trying to reduce military health benefits, and actively engaged in leaking classified intelligence to make himself look good during the campaign, even if it means putting our people in serious, unnecessary danger.

Barack Obama takes credit for killing Osama bin Laden every chance he gets, even though he had nothing to do with it, first refusing to give the order, then passing off responsibility to an admiral so that if it went badly, he’d have someone to blame.

Time and again he has said, in word and deed, America should be ashamed of our leadership position in the world, we have dictated to others, and we should therefore take a back seat to the U.N. Time and again he has thrown Israel under the bus, bowed to thugs and dictators, and claimed love of country, all in the same breath. It would appear his crowning achievement is lying through his teeth then convincing people he is Honest Abe.

It’s obvious that Barack Obama is anti-military. He neglects our security because he is against America remaining a super power in the world. This too is part of his ideology.

And this is a good guy? These are good outcomes? This is defending the defenseless?

He talks about religious liberty, then works to destroy it by forcing people to pay for abortion and birth control whether they like it or not.

He talks about protecting and defending the Constitution (the oath he took with his fingers crossed behind his back) then subverts it at every turn. Examples of his complete disregard for the rule of law and the Constitution:

  • Engages war in Libya by circumventing Congress altogether
  • Uses the most corrupt, underhanded and devious means possible, ramming ObamaCare against the will of the majority
  • ”Reforms” welfare law by reducing the work requirements WITHOUT consulting or involving Congress
  • Covert use of drones in other lands, including our own, with no authorization, engaging indiscriminate killing
  • Uses the EPA to install Cap ‘n Trade when Congress would not
  • Directs DOJ to ignore the penalty phase after the conviction of Black Panthers intimidating voters in 2008
  • Refuses to defend standing law, his sworn duty as Chief Executive according to the Constitution
  • Promotes indefinite detention without filing charges
  • Sues states that have every right to secure their borders and manage voter eligibility
  • Uses stimulus money to reward political allies and operatives, engaging in blatant and corrupt cronyism
  • Threatens and intimidates the Supreme Court whenever he senses they might rule against him
  • Demands an oil company put up $20 billion in reparations without a court ruling or legislative action, even before anyone had a chance to determine responsibility for the Gulf Oil spill
  • Funds and conspires with public employee unions to command electoral outcomes against the will of the majority
  • Destroys our ally in Egypt allowing the Muslim Brotherhood to set up shop, destabilizing the entire region

This is a good man with good intentions? This is a man whose words and deeds line up? This is an honest, law-abiding individual who only wants to serve the public interest and defend the defenseless?

It has taken years for people to start looking beyond the bright smile and the glittering words. It has taken years for them to start evaluating the man by watching his actual behavior and seeing the terrible results of his policies.

The majority now understands he cares more about his ideology than he does about them, that he will say and do anything to hold on to power, only to glorify himself.

And this is the essential reason he will lose in November.

Our Pending Decision: Socialism or Americanism

Posted by on August 31, 2012 2 comments

After listening to Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan at the Republican National Convention and reviewing the past three and half years of the Barack Obama and Joe Biden administration, the November election boils down to this: socialism or Americanism.

American was built upon the back of thousands of men and women who worked hard and long to build their own businesses. They all started small and the vast majority remained small. The backbone of the American economy is made up of the millions of small businesses across the nation that also supply jobs to millions of people.

Under the Obama administration, small businesses have been closing their doors at a record pace. Not only are the owners losing their livelihood, but so are millions of workers, other businesses and individuals that rely upon them. Like a human backbone, it cannot continue to support the body if it keeps weakening and losing pieces. When enough pieces of the backbone are removed, the body can no longer support itself and it collapses on the floor.

Socialism relies on the collapse of small businesses. The government assumes the role of provider in all areas and aspects of life. This is the path that the Obama administration is actively pursuing. This is socialism, not Americanism.

The Romney/Ryan ticket promises to help small businesses and entrepreneurship to help rebuild the economy, create jobs and strengthen America’s backbone. They’re not going to do it by borrowing hundreds of billions of dollars to use on another stimulus package, but by sound and reasonable business practices that have worked for years. This is Americanism, not socialism.

The hallmark of the Obama/Biden administration is Obamacare. Obamacare is nothing more than socialized healthcare. The government assumes the role of health provider and they will make the decisions on what medical care you do and don’t get. The cost of Obamacare is far greater than you know. Not only is it going to cost every American family, rich, middle class and poverty level, thousands of dollars in hidden taxes over the next decade starting this coming January, but it will also cost lives. Americans will die for lack of proper care. Others will die because the care dictated to them by the government will not be the right care as in the case of Jacob Stieler. Obamacare is socialism, not Americanism.

The Romney/Ryan ticket promises to repeal Obamacare and return ownership of your health to you. They do plan to try to work on a new health plan, but one that will not tax American’s into poverty. In the process, they will restore the money that Obama took from Medicare and strengthen the program to help make it last. This is Americanism, not socialism.

Under the Obama/Biden administration, they have reduced the middle class and increased the number of families living at or below the poverty level. A socialistic society does not have a middle class. It has the upper governmental elite and then everyone else. This is socialism, not Americanism.

The Romney/Ryan ticket promises to boost the economy, increase jobs and thus help bring more Americans out of poverty and back into the middle class. The middle class helped make America strong and will help to strengthen it once again. This is Americanism, not socialism.

Under the Obama/Biden administration, government entitlements and dependency has increased at an alarming rate. The administration has made it harder for religious and other non-profit organizations to operate and provide charity. Instead, the government has been assuming the role of charity and provider. This is socialism, not Americanism.

The Romney/Ryan ticket has promised to help get many Americans back on their feet so that they can provide for themselves and their families and get rid of the government handout lists. They will continue to provide care for those that really need it, while at the same time forcing many to take responsibility for their own wellbeing. This is Americanism, not socialism.

The real choice come November is whether you want a socialistic government and country or the free America of our past? If you want America to become like the old Soviet Union and Cuba, then cast your vote for Obama/Biden as this is socialism. If you want to save America and restore it to its former greatness and free enterprise system, then vote for Romney/Ryan for this is Americanism.

Leftists (Democrats) are only generous with OTHER people’s money.

Posted by on August 22, 2012 No comments

The last bastion of Communism is found on the campuses of American universities. Alan Wolfe is the poster child for soft-core Communism. He is currently on the faculty of Boston College and serves as director of the Boisi Center for Religion and American Public Life. He rejects the conclusion of a “new study produced by the Chronicle of Philanthropy  [that] shows that 14 out of the top 20 states in charitable giving are red, or Republican states, while 12 of the bottom 15 are blue, or Democrat states.

Dr. Wolfe “said it’s wrong to link a state’s religious makeup with its generosity. People in less religious states are giving in a different way by being more willing to pay higher taxes so the government can equitably distribute superior benefits, Wolfe said. . . .

Wolfe said people in less religious states ‘view the tax money they’re paying not as something that’s forced upon them, but as a recognition that they belong with everyone else, that they’re citizens in the common good. . . .  I think people here believe that when they pay their taxes, they’re being altruistic.’

Forced altruism is a contradiction. A person is not being altruistic if he votes for people who take money from property owners in the form of taxes to pay for programs that a voting majority wants. Spending other people’s money is not being charitable.

A number of religious leaders follow Dr. Wolfe’s soft Communism worldview by an appeal to the Bible. The Good Samaritan (Luke 10:25–37) uses his own money to care for the robbery victim left for dead. This story cannot be used as a directive for social spending by governments. Jesus never calls on the State to act in an altruistic way. The State can’t be altruistic since it has nothing of its own to give. The eighth commandment applies to civil governors in the same way that it applies to self-governors. Neither is permitted to steal to help others.

Religious liberals take verses from the Bible that are directed at and turn them on their head by giving them a political twist. To base government programs like welfare, food stamps, and social security on Matthew 25:31–46 is without foundation. The division in Matthew 25 is between sheep and goats, that is, individuals. Nations don’t visit people in prison. Private citizens do. Governments put people in prison. Private citizens do not.

Civil governments are the biggest hindrance in helping the poor, and it’s not because they don’t tax enough and redistribute wealth. High taxes and manipulation of the money supply (inflation/deflation) enable civil governments to control people and their property. A ten percent tax is a sign of tyranny (1 Sam. 8:15), and yet these so-called social justice Christians believe in higher taxes on the rich to help the poor.

Dr. Wolfe’s comment that people in less religious states ‘view the tax money they’re paying not as something that’s forced upon them, but as a recognition that they belong with everyone else, that they’re citizens in the common good.” This is nonsense. If 100% voted for the tax, then he might have a point. But if everybody votes for the tax, then why bother with the taxing power of the State? Why not set up a charitable foundation to distribute the money? The answer to these questions is easy to come by: Not everybody agrees that their property should be taken from them to pay for programs that are best left to charities.

Walter Williams writes:

In 1796, Rep. William Giles of Virginia condemned a relief measure for fire victims, saying that Congress didn’t have a right to ‘attend to what generosity and humanity require, but to what the Constitution and their duty require.’ A couple of years earlier, James Madison, the father of our constitution, irate over a $15,000 congressional appropriation to assist some French refugees, said, ‘I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents.’

By the way, Dr. Wolfe’s PH.D. is in political science. It’s time that Dr. Wolfe dust off a copy of the Constitution and read some original source documents by our founders.

Is Obamunism Socialism, Communism or Fascism… or Socio-Communistic Fascism

Posted by on August 4, 2012 1 comment

Like so many others over the past three years, I’ve written about President Obama and made claims about his socialistic ideas and way of government. But after reading Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul’s statement that Obama is more fascist than socialist, I began to wonder just who is right and what best describe the man that wants to overthrow the American government.

Since I’ve been using the term socialism quite extensively, I went to the dictionary to get a precise definition. According to one dictionary it gave the following two definitions for the word ‘socialism.’

Socialism

1. Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy.

2. The stage in Marxist-Leninist theory intermediate between capitalism and communism, in which collective ownership of the economy under the dictatorship of the proletariat has not yet been successfully achieved.

Next, let’s take a look at the definitions of communism and fascism and then we will compare them to Obamanism (sounds eerily similar to abomination).

Communism

A system of government in which the state plans and controls the economy and a single, often authoritarian party holds power, claiming to make progress toward a higher social order in which all goods are equally shared by the people.

Fascism

A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.

When I examine these three definitions and compare them to Obamanism, I would have to say that at this moment, it is a transition between socialism and communism headed toward fascism.

Since taking office, Obama has managed to have the government take control of healthcare, student loans and has exerted control over the financial and housing markets. At one time the government took partial control over the auto industry and is currently trying to take control of the Internet. His stimulus packages have placed the nation in a financial crisis that is primed for a complete government takeover.

Thus, the transition from socialism to communism seems well on its way. However, the manner in which Obama conducts himself fits more into the definition of fascism as stated by Ron Paul. Obama clearly sees himself in a dictatorial role. He is already suppressing opposition by taking action against nearly 800 websites that have posted negative articles about him. He also starting to exhibit the belligerent nationalism and racism as he shows favoritism to blacks, Muslims and illegal Hispanics while at the same time taking action against law abiding American citizens such as Border Patrol agent Diaz.

So when you weigh in on just where Obamanism falls, I would have to say that it is socio-communistic fascism. It wouldn’t surprise me to see the term Obamanism show up in political dictionaries in the near future.