Tag Archives: democratic party

The Dual Agenda of Barack Obama

minute-man-2-lithoDuring November, December and into January following the election of Obama to the office of President, conventional wisdom among the conservative and moderate elite was that Obama would govern from the center.  During the first few weeks of his administration that began to change to a “hope” that he would move to the center from the far left position he began with, as he gained more experience and heeded the advice of those with a better understanding of how our system works.

Millions of American voters, ignoring Obama’s resume of socialist activities and his lack of a resume in governing, were caught up in the historic importance of electing our first black President.  Closing their eyes to reality, they projected their desires into Obama’s carefully crafted rhetoric, hearing what they wanted and rejecting or denying the clear evidence of his intentions.

The Obama agenda that is emerging before our eyes can in no way be called centrist.  Instead, it is following in the patterns established over the past century and a half by international socialism.  The continuing optimism concerning Obama’s ability to govern a free society demonstrates a lack of understanding of both Obama and socialism.  Even those who disagree with his policies insist they are not really socialist.  Socialism takes on many forms depending on the culture on which it is imposed.  The single characteristic that makes socialism, socialism is the redistribution of wealth and income.  That is the litmus test.

Obama is the face of the socialist movement in America.  He is not the socialist movement. The real socialist movement is composed of the environmentalists, academics, media elites, and the Democratic Party leadership.  With the passing of each news cycle Obama appears to be more a pawn of the movement rather than its leader.  His agenda and the movement’s agenda are identical and interchangeable.  That agenda is two-pronged.

First is the destruction of free-market capitalism to be replaced with a centrally planned, government run economy.  By hyping the current temporary downturn in the up and down cycles of capitalism and capitalizing on the propaganda war directed against President Bush for the past eight years an opportunity has been created for an expansion of regulatory control over the economy never before seen in American history.  As Rom Emmanuel says, “Never let a good crisis go to waste.

The second prong of the socialist agenda is the dismantling of the traditional American culture as a “melting pot” and replacing it with a fragmented society based on class envy and class warfare that is easier to control from Washington.  The cornerstone of this agenda is the destruction of the family unit by promoting unwed motherhood, welfare dependency, and redefining the meanings of marriage and family.  The further fragmenting of our culture is carried out through immigration policies, multiculturalism, bilingual education and the importation of millions of illegal immigrants.

If you want to understand better the future Obama has in store for you read the next article by Jeffery Folks printed in the March 15th, edition of American Thinker.  It contains the most vivid first hand account of the destructive nature of socialism I have read in a long time.

My Socialist Past
By Jeffrey Folks

Anyone who has lived inside the demoralized, unproductive, gray prison of a communist state, as I did in the mid-1980s, knows to what depths of impoverishment the egalitarian fantasies of socialism inevitably lead. They lead to decades of frustrated poverty and lifetimes of untreated illness culminating in early death. I remember the columns of death notices for men and women in their forties and fifties that appeared in the local newspaper. Gradually I learned to associate those death notices with the lack of fresh foodstuffs, the travesty of state health care, and the pervasive demoralization of an enslaved population drowning itself in cheap alcohol and cigarettes.
Read More…

Socialism a la Obama

minute-man-2-lithoIt is becoming increasingly obvious that the liberal/socialist wing of the Democratic Party for which President Obama is the spokesperson, is taking America into the European Democratic Socialist camp.  To make this fact more palatable to the American people, the emerging message of Democrats is (1) Obama’s policies are not socialist, and (2) European style socialism is not really all that bad anyway.

Saul Friedman, a Pulitzer Prize winning columnist, writing for the “Times Goes By” blog attempts to both defend socialism as desirable and downplay its reality in American politics.  He first attempts to deny that Obama’s policies are socialist by appealing to the classical definition of “socialism” as, “a broad set of economic theories of social organization advocating public or state ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods…”  He then goes on to point out the mixed nature of such programs as Social Security, Medicare, and The Tennessee Valley Authority, using the acceptance by the beneficiaries of these programs as proof that what we have in America is not socialism.

Another favorite canard of the liberal/socialist is to point out the similarities of policies of former President Bush and the policies now being proposed and implemented by President Obama and Congress.  I have been a consistent supporter and defender of the presidency of George W. Bush.  At the same time, I have consistently criticized him when he strays from the Constitution, including giving him proper credit, or in this case, blame, for ushering in the era of socialism through his unconstitutional and ill advised TARP program at the end of his presidency as well as the earlier $160 billion stimulus package.  Socialism is socialism whether it is promoted by Democrats or Republicans.

“Socialism”, like “Democracy”, “Republic” and other political words have been misused so often that their meanings become blurred and difficult to define precisely.  Politicians trained in law are expert at nuances in language and the shading of words so that their meanings fit their own agenda.  In order to hide their real intentions from the American public as long as possible, the American socialists use more upbeat words like “liberal”, “progressive”, “democratic“, and “fair”, words that disguise the hard-core nature of their socialist doctrines.

To accurately define what is meant by conservatives and others who label left wing democratic policies as “socialist” it is only necessary to look at the 150 years of history surrounding the rise of socialism.  Among all socialist nations throughout the past century two characteristics stand out.  First of all is the confiscation of wealth from the rightful owners who earned it and redistributing it to those who did not.  In agrarian states where the primary source of wealth is in land, it is relatively easy to confiscate property from the land owners and redistribute to the peasants who work the land.  This change has frequently been brought about through armed revolution.

In modern industrialized nations the task is more difficult.  Both in America and Western Europe, socialism has taken hold through the democratic process.  It makes little difference who owns the means of production.  Who controls it, sets policies for its management and takes home the lion’s share of its profits is what is important.  As a percentage of revenue, the major part of profits in most businesses goes to the government through direct or indirect taxation.  The modern enlightened socialist seeks control of the economy through government regulations and confiscatory taxation.  Profits are then redistributed via social programs to the less productive members of society, keeping the larger share for itself to use in the expansion and strengthening of its power.

As the progress toward socialism moves forward, central planning is introduced into the mix, as it has been in the automotive industry and will be in the healthcare and energy industries.  The fact that centralized economic planning does not work and has never worked, is completely ignored.

Mr. Friedman then attempts to present European socialism as something to be desired not condemned.  “I do not understand why we should fear the social democracy of Europe. Many Americans, including members of Congress, enjoy traveling to Europe and taking advantage of their social democracies – cheap and fast transportation, universal health care and a healthy opposition to war. There is no such thing as an uninsured person in the European Union, and the Euro has become as strong as the dollar”, he writes.  What he does not mention is the cost in liberty and the lack of opportunity for upward mobility among the poor and working classes.

Obama and his liberal/socialist supporters are master politicians but as economic managers they are total incompetents.  That fact is becoming more obvious and undisputable every day, just as is the fact that his agenda is to turn America into an European style Democratic Socialist country.    It still remains to be seen, whether the American people will permit him to succeed or not.

Totalitarianism 101

minute-man-2-lithoThe patterns of totalitarianism are taking shape in the American government virtually unacknowledged.  Few Americans can fathom the possibility of elected officials deliberately carrying out policies detrimental to the country’s welfare.  In the minds of Washington socialist dominating our government, the policies they are advocating are really best for the country.  To them, American is a flawed government that must be remade for its own survival.  Totalitarian policies are intended for the good of the people, to protect them from themselves.

A look at the despotic governments of the twentieth century reveals at least four characteristics of totalitarian governments.  Three of these characteristics are evident in recent developments we read about on the front pages of our daily papers or hear about in prime time newscasts every day.  The fourth is a necessity that must be implemented in order for the first three to take root and flourish.

1. Centralized Power

One of the fundamental themes of our Constitution is protection from tyranny and the preservation of liberty.   The original plan consisted of thirteen independent and sovereign states united in a federal government believed to be necessary for the collective security and harmony of the several states.  One of the greatest fears of the founders and their critics was that any federal arrangement might develop into a consolidated government that would usurp the sovereignty of the states and trample on the liberty of the people.

To guard against this possibility the Framers listed in the Constitution the specific powers granted to the federal government (Article I, Section 8) and then emphasized the sovereignty of the individual states by adding the Tenth Amendment.  Over the years the Federal government has chipped away at this feature of the Constitution through targeted tax incentives and economic and social regulations designed to transfer power from the states and the people to an elite ruling class in Washington.

For over forty-five years—two generations—the Federal government has managed our education system.  The end result is that most Americans have lost sight of the federal, republican character of our government and think of it a monolithic central government designed to direct the affairs of all the states and their citizens.  The economic downturn that started at the end of 2007 and continues today provided an opening for the government to centralize economic planning and direction in Washington and they are taking full advantage of the opportunity.

The central planning and control of economic activity is a central part of all totalitarian governments. Through the trillions of dollars being pumped into the economy by “stimulus packages” implemented by both the Bush and Obama administrations we have been placed firmly on the path to the tyranny of centralized planning.

2. One Party Rule

All totalitarian governments have one political party that acts as a “rubber stamp” for the head of the party who functions, to a degree, as a dictator, much like the City Council and Mayor of Chicago, Illinois.  In America we have two major parties, the Democratic Party and the Republican Party.  Regardless of the label, all political parties in America fall within a continuum from Constitution Fundamentalism on the right to Marxist Socialism on the left.  The Democratic Party, with the election of Barack Obama, is on the threshold of becoming a true Marxist Party to the left of European Socialism.

The Republican Party is slightly to the left of center and would be further left if not for the restraining influence of its conservative base.  Too many Republicans share the aspirations of power with the Democratic Party and believe the way to get and keep that power is by supporting big government and raiding the public treasury on behalf of their supporters.  The touted ideal of “bipartisanship” is nothing more than a tool for moving the Republican Party further to the left until we eventually have one party with two labels.

During his first month in office, Obama has instituted a number of policies designed to entrench the power of the Democratic Party for generations to come.  As we have pointed out numerous times over the past year, Community Organizers are the “foot soldiers” of the socialist movement.  They work diligently at the local level to “plant” the principles of socialism at the grassroots of American Society.  Few have been more active or more successful in this task than the former affiliate of Barack Obama, ACORN.  In the stimulus package just signed into law millions of dollars have been allocated for “community organizing” and organizations similar to ACORN.

Another effective means of strengthening the Democratic Party is by Gerrymandering Congressional Districts and manipulating the counting of citizens.   By Executive Order, Obama intends to take over the 2010 census.  By changing the way in which citizens are counted and “estimating” rather than counting citizens difficult to find, the Democratic Party can substantially increase its representation in the House of Representatives and alter the number of Presidential Electors allocated to the various states.  Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution places the responsibility for conducting the census totally in the hand of the Legislature and not the Executive.

“The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they (Congress) shall by Law direct.” (Article 1, Section2, Clause 4)  The transfer of this duty to the White House by Executive Order is clearly an unconstitutional usurpation of power by the Executive Branch.

3. Dependency

Still another means of concentrating power in the hands of a single party is through the creation of dependency.  The third and most reliable tool of totalitarianism is to cultivate a dependency of the masses on the power of the state.  The three most effective means for creating dependency are in the areas of defense, crises, and economics.  Because of the natural dangers in the world of international relations, the “enemies” ploy is a “gimmie” for the would be dictator.  Every modern dictator has used the threat of real or manufactured enemies as a means of solidifying the support of the people behind the protection of the state.

Sometimes the enemy is real and easily identified, like Nazi Germany, Soviet Russia and Islamic Terrorism.  Sometimes they are manufactured like “The Great Satan” of Islamic despots or “global warming“.  Always they are used by aspiring tyrants as a means of creating fear and rationalizing an ever expanding role for government.  Unfortunately, we in America are not immune to this tactic.  Whatever the good intentions, and even the necessity of some policies, there is no denying that the war on terror, the war on drugs, the war on poverty and the war against climate change has seen a steady erosion of personal liberty and freedom in our own country.

Another means of creating dependency is crisis management.  Natural disasters like hurricane Katrina provide fertile ground for the expansion of government.  Although federal response to Katrina highlighted its shortcomings in dealing with local disasters, it has still been used to increase the dependency of citizens on the national government rather than state and local governments in responding to local crises.  At the same time it is utilized as the rationale for expanding the federal government into areas that should be the primary responsibility of the states and the people, weakening the power of local government and further consolidating the power of Washington bureaucrats.

On the economic front, a large majority of the American people are to some extent dependent on the federal government for part or all of their livelihood.  In addition to those we normally think of as being on the “public dole”, anyone who works in an industry dependent on government contracts, grants, tax incentives, or other government programs ad infinitum, is to some extent, a ward of the federal government.

The best example of this is the health care industry.  In spite of the picayune payments made by agencies like Medicare and Medicaid on behalf of individual patients, the industry as a whole has become dependent on the federal government for its existence; from the phlebotomist to the hospital administrator they all rely on government for a substantial part of their paychecks.

Almost any problem can be turned by the government into an opportunity to increase dependency and expand the scope of government.  As Rom Emmanuel says “never let a crisis go to waste”.  In the hands of government anything can be and often is turned into a crisis.  The mild recession we entered in 2007 has been turned into an economic crisis by the Democratic Party and used to justify the largest expansion of government in our nation’s history.

4. Control of the Means of Communication

With proper information, people will always make decisions based on what is best for their own welfare.  Information is power, and for that reason totalitarian governments always fear the free flow of information.  An argument could be made that America today would not be on the verge of converting to socialism, if not for the national media functioning as propagandists for the socialist movement over the past decade.

The Democratic Party controls the flow of information through the mass media with only a few exceptions.  Those exceptions are talk radio, a segment of the internet, and FNC.  No one would voluntarily choose tyranny over liberty if they were aware of the choice they were making.  Eight years of misinformation, slanted reporting, half-truths and propaganda against the Bush administration by the MSM created the circumstances that led to the election of Obama as President.

Now that we are at the point of transition between capitalism and socialism, control of information is even more critical to the new President and his supporters.  In order for the transformation of our society planned by Obama to go somewhat smoothly, the tens of millions of listeners to talk radio must be neutralized.  For Obama and the Democratic Party that is not just something that would make their lives easier, it is an absolute necessity.  Democratic leaders like Schumer, Durbin, Pelosi, Reid and others are already sending out “feelers” as they cast about for a plan that can be sold or forced on the public.

Make no mistake about it.  An attempt will be made by the federal government to silence talk radio.  It’s only a matter of finding the correct vehicle for its implementation.  When that happens it will be the fourth and final step on our road to totalitarianism.

Letter From Thomas Jefferson, June 16, 1817

“Whereas, our tenet ever was, and, indeed, it is almost the only land-mark which now divides the federalists* from the republicans, that Congress had not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but were restrained to those specifically enumerated;”

NOTE:  The words, “Federalist and federalism” mentioned in Jefferson’s letter refers to the Political Party founded by Alexander Hamilton and John Adams.  Its ideological counterpart today is the Democrat Party.  Its central theme was that of unlimited power for the federal government based on the general phrase “provide for the general welfare” found in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution.

TO ALBERT GALLATIN.

Monticello, June 16, 1817.

Dear Sir,

The importance that the enclosed letters should safely reach their destination, impels me to avail myself of the protection of your cover.  This is an inconvenience to which your situation exposes you, while it adds to the opportunities of exercising yourself in works of charity.

According to the opinion I hazarded to you a little before your departure, we have had almost an entire change in the body of Congress.  The unpopularity of the compensation law was completed, by the manner of repealing it as to all the world except themselves. In some States, it is said, every member is changed; in all, many. What opposition there was to the original law, was chiefly from southern members. Yet many of those have been left out, because they received the advanced wages. I have never known so unanimous a sentiment of disapprobation; and what is remarkable, is, that it was spontaneous. The newspapers were almost entirely silent, and the people not only unled by their leaders, but in opposition to them. I confess I was highly pleased with this proof of the innate good sense, the vigilance, and the determination of the people to act for themselves.

Among the laws of the late Congress, some were of note: a navigation act, particularly, applicable to those nations only who have navigation acts; pinching one of them especially, not only in the general way, but in the intercourse with her foreign possessions. This part may re-act on us, and it remains for trial which may bear longest. A law respecting our conduct as a neutral between Spain and her contending colonies, was passed by a majority of one only, I believe, and against the very general sentiment of our country. It is thought to strain our complaisance to Spain beyond her right or merit, and almost against the right of the other party, and certainly against the claims they have to our good wishes and neighborly relations. That we should wish to see the people of other countries free, is as natural, and at least as justifiable, as that one King should wish to see the Kings of other countries maintained in their despotism. Right to both parties, innocent favor to the juster cause, is our proper sentiment.

You will have learned that an act for internal improvement, after passing both houses, was negatived by the President. The act was founded, avowedly, on the principle that the phrase in the constitution, which authorizes Congress ‘to lay taxes, to pay the debts and provide for the general welfare,’ was an extension of the powers specifically enumerated to whatever would promote the general welfare; and this, you know, was the federal doctrine. Whereas, our tenet ever was, and, indeed, it is almost the only land-mark which now divides the federalists* from the republicans, that Congress had not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but were restrained to those specifically enumerated; and that, as it was never meant they should provide for that welfare but by the exercise of the enumerated powers, so it could not have been meant they should raise money for purposes which the enumeration did not place under their action: consequently, that the specification of powers is a limitation of the purposes for which they may raise money.

I think the passage and rejection of this bill a fortunate incident. Every State will certainly concede the power; and this will be a national confirmation of the grounds of appeal to them, and will settle for ever the meaning of this phrase, which, by a mere grammatical quibble, has countenanced the General Government in a claim of universal power. For in the phrase, ‘to lay taxes, to pay the debts and provide for the general welfare,’ it is a mere question of syntax, whether the two last infinitives are governed by the first, or are distinct and co-ordinate powers; a question unequivocally decided by the exact definition of powers immediately following. It is fortunate for another reason, as the States, in conceding the power, will modify it, either by requiring the federal ratio of expense in each State, or otherwise, so as to secure us against its partial exercise. (Emphasis Added)

Without this caution, intrigue, negotiation, and the barter of votes might become as habitual in Congress, as they are in those legislatures which have the appointment of officers, and which, with us, is called ‘logging,’ the term of the farmers for their exchanges of aid in rolling together the logs of their newly cleared grounds.

Three of our papers have presented us the copy of an act of the legislature of New York, which, if it has really passed, will carry us back to the times of the darkest bigotry and barbarism to find a parallel. Its purport is, that all those who shall hereafter join in communion with the religious sect of Shaking Quakers, shall be deemed civilly dead, their marriages dissolved, and all their children and property taken out of their hands.

This act being published nakedly in the papers, without the usual signatures, or any history of the circumstances of its passage, I am not without a hope it may have been a mere abortive attempt. It contrasts singularly with a cotemporary vote of the Pennsylvania legislature, who, on a proposition to make the belief in a God a necessary qualification for office, rejected it by a great majority, although assuredly there was not a single atheist in their body. And you remember to have heard, that, when the act for religious freedom was before the Virginia Assembly, a motion to insert the name of Jesus Christ before the phrase, ‘the author of our holy religion,’ which stood in the bill, was rejected, although that was the creed of a great majority of them.

I have been charmed to see that a Presidential election now produces scarcely any agitation. On Mr. Madison’s election there was little, on Monroe’s all but none. In Mr. Adams’s time and mine, parties were so nearly balanced as to make the struggle fearful for our peace. But since the decided ascendancy of the republican body, federalism has looked on with silent but unresisting anguish. In the middle, southern, and western States, it is as low as it ever can be; for nature has made some men monarchists and tories by their constitution, and some, of course, there always will be. (emphasis added)

*****

We have had a remarkably cold winter. At Hallowell, in Maine, the mercury was at thirty-four degrees below zero, of Fahrenheit, which is sixteen degrees lower than it was in Paris in 1788-9. Here it was at six degrees above zero, which is our greatest degree of cold.

Present me respectfully to Mrs. Gallatin, and be assured of my constant
and affectionate friendship.

Th: Jefferson.

A Party of Deception: Part 2 – Tactics and Strategies

During the twentieth century, the Democratic Party became the premier vehicle of the socialist movement in America for promoting its socialist agenda. While maintaining an “arms length” association with established socialist political parties democrats have worked diligently to further the socialist agenda through legislative actions. To avoid the connection between Democratic Party policies and those of organized socialism in the public’s perception, left wing democrats choose to hide behind the labels of “liberal” and “progressive”.

One of the ironies of Democrat’s use of the label “progressive” is the fact that one of the best-known American progressives is the former Republican President and political Icon of John McCain, Theodore Roosevelt. After declining to run for a second term as President, Roosevelt became so disillusioned by his successor, William Howard Taft and his conservative policies that he challenged Taft for the Republican nomination in 1912. When Roosevelt lost the nomination, he pulled his delegates out of the convention and ran an independent campaign as a progressive in the general election. In doing so, he split the Republican ticket resulting in the election of the Democratic progressive candidate, Woodrow Wilson.

Fearing the socialists would undermine the war effort during World War 1, Wilson had a number of them arrested and prosecuted under the newly enacted Espionage Act. One of those jailed was Eugene Debs, five times candidate for President, four times as the candidate of the Socialist Party of America. After Deb’s death in 1926 many of his supporters drifted into the Democratic Party along with a remnant of Roosevelt’s progressive party, popularly known as the “Bull Moose Party”.

Socialist influence in the Democratic Party grew steadily during the Administration of Franklin D. Roosevelt. By the sixties, the Democratic Party had taken on many of the features of the Democratic Socialists of Western Europe. The three principles that unite the socialists of Europe and the socialists of America are, opposition to capitalism, opposition to the military, and social justice.

Opposition to Capitalism

The orthodox economic position of socialism is that the means of production should be democratically (state) owned. Capitalism is viewed as the repository of greed, oppressor of workers, instigator of war, and corrupter of government. A long-term objective of socialism is the nationalization of major segments of the American economy. Particularly targeted for government takeover are energy, health care, finance, durable goods manufacturing, agriculture, and transportation.

In order for government to take over these industries the American public must first be convinced that only government has the ability to manage effectively their operations for the good of all. This requires undermining the economy to the point enough citizens are willing to overlook violations of the Constitution in exchange for a promise of economic relief by the government. The legislative foundation has already been laid for the undermining of our economy in fairness in lending laws, environmental laws, restrictions on energy production, various labor laws, and a variety of bureaucratic actions in the fields of public health, education, land development and so on.

Tools and Tactics

Any number of single-issue activist groups has been working more or less in concert with socialist political action groups for years to set up the conditions for the dismantlement of capitalism with the blessings of the American public. They use legislative actions by congress and bureaucratic rules by the many departments of government to undermine legitimate economic activity in the areas most critical to the socialist objectives.

The instruments of tyranny in the socialist toolbox include children, women and minorities, wildlife, and the environment. The most destructive implement in the toolbox is perhaps the Endangered Species Act. The ESA has been used to stop energy production, commercial development, and restrict such normal economic activities as logging, fishing, building, and even agricultural projects.

Closely related to the Endangered Species Act are the regulations ostensibly meant to protect the air and water quality and to prevent or reverse “climate change“. These have been used to hobble energy production and drive up the price of gasoline, diesel fuel, electricity, food and almost every other item purchased by businesses and consumers, while at the same time expanding government control over the automotive industry, heavy manufacturing and many other vital elements of the economy.

Another primary target of the socialist movement is healthcare. Health care affects more than our physical wellbeing. It also makes up a major part of our economy and is scheduled to be among the first to be nationalized. Like all goods and services used by the public, it is sensitive to the market pressures of supply and demand. Using a concern for the physical wellbeing of children, women, the elderly and the poor as justification, the government has become the largest purchaser of healthcare in America. The added demand for healthcare caused by these purchases has been instrumental in driving up its price to the point where it is no longer affordable by the average citizen, making it a prime candidate for a takeover by government.

We have just witnessed a major incursion into the financial markets by the federal government in response to the increasing number of home mortgage foreclosures. There are many reasons for the increase in foreclosures, among them are the “fairness in lending” laws designed to make home ownership available to more of the working poor and minorities. Under pressure by government regulators to take on more “subprime loans”, lenders offered no-money-down and adjustable rate mortgages to otherwise unqualified borrowers with the predictable results.

The economic hardships brought about by government activity serve the purpose, whether intentional or not, of making the public more susceptible to allowing the government to take over an ever increasing part of their lifestyle. By using the propaganda power of the national media, socialist/democrats have been able to lay blame for our economic problems on the administration of George Bush and the Republican Party, making a democratic and hence a socialist victory in November more likely.

Tomorrow: A Party of Deception, Part 3: The Democratic Agenda and Energy Prices

Copy and e-mail this link to a friend: illinoisconservative.wordpress.com