Obama Unfazed by Constitution – Reason #65

Only 90 Days Remaining!

Obama Unfazed by Constitution

In a 2008 article that otherwise appeared very defensive of the Obama campaign, ABC News at least provided the following glimpse into Presidential Candidate Obama’s thought process:

“The Missouri Truth Squad, an Obama campaign press release stated last week, would ‘respond quickly, forcefully, and aggressively when John McCain or his allies launch inaccurate claims or character attacks about Barack Obama, or when they distort Barack Obama’s record or plans.’”[i]

Members of this “Truth Squad,” included members with “law enforcement powers, such as St. Louis County Circuit Attorney Bob McCulloch, St. Louis City Circuit Attorney Jennifer Joyce, and Jefferson County Sheriff Glenn Boyer,” [ii] giving a very different tone to the campaign’s promise to respond to so called inaccuracies, “…quickly, forcefully, and aggressively.”

When the NRA-Political Victory Fund called into question, “Sen. Obama’s statements and support for restricting access to firearms,” Obama reportedly “sent ‘cease and desist letters’ to news outlets in the two states, ‘denouncing the ads,” “demanding their removal from the airwaves,’” and “…warning station managers that in order to stay in the Federal Communication commission’s good graces, they should not air the ads.”[iii]

Missouri Governor Matt Blunt weighed in, saying:

“This abuse of the law for intimidation insults the most sacred principles and ideals of Jefferson. I can think of nothing more offensive to Jefferson’s thinking than using the power of the state to deprive Americans of their civil rights…”[iv]


[i] Natalie Gewargis, (Sept. 29, 2008), ABC News web-site, Political Punch, Attacking Obama’s Missouri ‘Truth Squad,’ retrieved December 23, 2011, from http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2008/09/attacking-obama/

[ii] Natalie Gewargis, (Sept. 29, 2008), ABC News web-site, Political Punch, Attacking Obama’s Missouri ‘Truth Squad,’ retrieved December 23, 2011, from http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2008/09/attacking-obama/

[iii] World Net Daily staff, (Sept. 27, 2008) World Net Daily Web-Site, Backlash to Obama Officials Squelching Political Speech: Law Enforcement Threats, intimidation likened to ‘Police-State Tactics,’ by Missouri Governor, retrieved December 23, 2011, from http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=76438

[iv] World Net Daily staff, (Sept. 27, 2008) World Net Daily Web-Site, Backlash to Obama Officials Squelching Political Speech: Law Enforcement Threats, intimidation likened to ‘Police-State Tactics,’ by Missouri Governor, retrieved December 23, 2011, from http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=76438

Bulletin: White Houise Seeking Informants – Reason #64

Only 91 Days Remaining!

Bulletin: White House Seeking Informants

If you’re old enough to remember the early days of Fidel Castro, then you remember when neighbors were urged to inform on neighbors – particularly, against those expressing contrary political opinions.  But then, Castro wasn’t the first and he won’t be the last dictator to sponsor this type of nightmarish reality.  Most Americans feel an icy chill, just thinking about a government that divisive – that controlling – that paranoid – that dangerous.  Welcome to the Obama Administration.

In August, 2009, Linda Douglass, Communications Director for the White House’s Health Reform Office, appeared on national television, sitting at her computer screen, ostensibly tracking misinformation circulating about the new President’s Healthcare Reform plan.  Turning towards the TV cameras, Douglass explained:

“There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there, spanning from control of personal finances to end of life care. These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through casual conversation. Since we can’t keep track of all of them here at the White House, we’re asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov.” [i] (Emphasis Added)

Is this the type of request you anticipated from the office of the President of the United States?  It’s an easily explainable request and a case can certainly be made for the paranoia of those who see it as sinister.  Yet, it runs along the periphery of very ugly territory – informing on our neighbors’ exercise of free speech.  The loss of liberty in minute doses is hardly felt until it is suddenly gone.  Arguably, this type of request provides a clear indication of how quickly, how far, by what means and in what areas the American people can be pushed into compliance with new policies.


[i] Posted by Macon Phillips, (August 4, 2009), The White House Blog, Facts are Stubborn Things,” retrieved March 2, 2011 from http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2009/08/04/facts-are-stubborn-things

Maxine Waters: Wall Street is “Shaking in their Boots!” – Reason #63

Only 92 Days Remaining!

Maxine Waters: Wall Street “Shaking in their Boots”

If there were ever a need to explain the importance of maintaining a Republican majority in the House of Representatives, Rep. Maxine Waters, (D-CA) has given it to us.

At a California Democratic Convention, Waters told her audience:

“…and guess what.  Let me let you in on a secret.  I am the senior most person serving on the Financial Services Committee.  Barney Frank is about to retire and guess who’s shaking in their boots – the too big to fail banks and financial institutions and all of Wall Street, because Maxine Waters is going to be the next Chair of the Financial Services Committee.”[i]

For those who may have forgotten, this is the same Maxine Waters who told an oil company executive that she would be about “…taking over and the government running all of your companies.” [ii]

 


[i] Representative Maxine Waters (D-CA), Breitbart TV web-site, Maxine Waters: Don’t Let GOP ‘Demons’ In ‘Our Hall’, retrieved February 19, 2012 from http://www.breitbart.tv/maxine-waters-dont-let-gop-demons-in-our-hall/

[ii] Representative Maxine Waters (D-CA), (May, 2008), originally broadcast on The Fox Report, posted on YouTube.com on May 23, 2008, by “ElephantOwnersDotCom,” Maxine Waters wants to “Socialize” Oil Companies, retrieved January 28, 2011 from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=niJAkR_6tKQ

Community Organizing: Power and Redistribution – Reason #62

Only 105 Days Remaining!

Community Organizing: Power and Redistribution

In a 2001 interview on Chicago’s WBEZ radio, Obama unveiled his belief that economic justice in America can only be achieved through the redistribution of income – a concept not unlike that voiced by Karl Marx many years earlier.  He also appears to have suggested that the way to achieve redistribution was not through the courts, but in the streets – through agitation and community organizing.

“But, the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth – and more basic issues of political and economic justice in the society – and to that extent, as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren court, it wasn’t that radical.

“It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution – at least as it’s been interpreted – and the Warren Court interpreted it in the same way, that generally, the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties.

“It says what the states can’t do to you.  It says what the federal government can’t do to you.  But it doesn’t say what the federal government, or the state government must do on your behalf.

“And that hasn’t shifted – and one of the – I think – tragedies of the civil rights movement, I think, was because the civil rights movement became so court focused, I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributive change.  In some ways, we still suffer from that.”[i] (emphasis added)

In little more than a sound-bite, Obama provided us with a very important insight into his view of the Constitution and the role of the Supreme Court in interpreting it.  Here, he seems to be touching on the argument for bigger government (“what…government must do on your behalf”), while chastising the Warren Court for upholding the Constitutional constraints written by the Founding Fathers.  Then, as if echoing these words from Karl Marx – “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs”[ii] – he talks about both the redistribution of wealth and the ability of community organizers to put together coalitions capable of producing “redistributive changes.” [iii] 

That line produces instant images of ACORN pressuring banks and nonbank lenders to adopt a financial paradigm in which loans could be made to people regardless of their credit worthiness and ability to pay.[iv]  Indeed, history strongly suggests that Obama’s formula here, would result in coercive, disruptive, “in your face” practices.  Was this his intention as an expert Organizer?


[i] Odyssey, WBEZ 91.5FM , Chicago, (2001) audio contained in story by Steve Schippert,(October 27, 2008), Wizbang blog.com, Wealth Redistribution An Unattained Civil Right: Obama Interview, retrieved September 15, 2010 from http://wizbangblog.com/content/2008/10/27/obama-wealth-redistribution-an-unattained-civil-right.php

 

[ii] David Lane, Politics and Society in the USSR, (New York, 1978, New York University Press), 8

[iii] Odyssey, WBEZ 91.5FM , Chicago, (2001) audio contained in story by Steve Schippert,(October 27, 2008), Wizbang blog.com, Wealth Redistribution An Unattained Civil Right: Obama Interview, retrieved September 15, 2010 from http://wizbangblog.com/content/2008/10/27/obama-wealth-redistribution-an-unattained-civil-right.php

 

[iv] Steven Malanga, Shakedown: The Continuing Conspiracy Against the American Taxpayer, (Chicago, 2010, Ivan R. Dee), 133-151

Blame on Display/Marxism v. “Income Inequality” – Reasons 59/60

Only 108 Days Remaining!

Obama – Blame on Display

Just five days before leaving office, then President Bush – unifying the nation around a new President – proudly noted in his press conference:

“Five days from now, the world will witness the vitality of American democracy. In a tradition dating back to our founding, the presidency will pass to a successor chosen by you, the American people. Standing on the steps of the Capitol will be a man whose story reflects the enduring promise of our land. This is a moment of hope and pride for our whole nation. And I join all Americans in offering best wishes to President-elect Obama, his wife Michelle, and their two beautiful girls.”[i]

Eight days into the new Administration, President Obama’s new Interior Secretary, Ken Salazar, told the American people:

“President Obama immediately made clear that the type of ethical transgressions, the blatant conflicts of interest, waste and abuses that we have seen over the last eight years will no longer be tolerated.”[ii]

This would be only an early and small example of President Obama’s seemingly infinite ability to divide America, direct blame, avoid personal responsibility and promote discord.

 

 * * * *

 Marxism v. “Income Inequality”

Our Founding Fathers believed that we were all “created equal” and endowed by our “Creator with certain unalienable Rights…”  Obama and his cohorts seem to view those words, not as a commitment to equal opportunity, but as a promise of equal outcome.  It is only in that context that we can understand the words of such Obama stalwarts as Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV), who promised:

“Nothing is more important to Congress, than reducing income inequality.”[iii]

The political system to which “income equality” belongs is not one that has ever been found in America.  It is far closer to the one advocated by Karl Marx.  It is nothing less than scary that these words should come from a U.S. Senator.  In America we are guaranteed equal opportunity – not equal outcomes.


[i] (Administration)Bush Administration, (January15, 2009), CBS News, Transcript of Bush Farewell Address, retrieved May 25, 2010 from http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/01/15/politics/bush_legacy/main4726092.shtml

[ii] Ken Salazar, (January 28, 2009), White House.gov, Press Briefing by Press Secretary Robert Gibbs and Secretary of Interior Ken Salazar, retrieved September 15, 2010 from http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/press-briefing-12809

[iii] Senator Harry Reid (D-NV), MSNBC web-site, Politics Nation with Al Sharpton, retrieved January 26, 2012 from http://video.msnbc.msn.com/politicsnation/46139213#46139213

 

Homeland Security Fears Veterans & Constitutionalists – Reason #58

Only 111 Days Remaining!

Homeland Security Fears Veterans & Constitutionalists

On April 7, 2009, less than four months after Obama took office, the Department of Homeland Security published an unclassified intelligence assessment entitled: Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment.  The Administration, citing similarities in the conditions of the 1990s and today, speculated:

“The possible passage of new restrictions on firearms and the return of military veterans facing significant challenges reintegrating into their communities could lead to the potential emergence of terrorist groups or lone wolf extremists capable of carrying out violent attacks.

“Returning veterans possess combat skills and experience that are attractive to rightwing extremists. DHS/I&A is concerned that right- wing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize returning veterans in order to boost their violent capabilities.”[i]

They also cautioned against Americans “…rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority…” and against “…groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration.” [ii]

In other words – according to the Obama Administration – we should be very concerned about returning veterans who have risked their lives for our country.  We should also be suspicious of all those who believe in the 10th Amendment to the Constitution, as well as those who stay informed and take a position on abortion, immigration, or any other major issue affecting America.


[i] Extremism and Radicalization Branch, Homeland Environment Threat AnalysisDivision, (April 7, 2010), Department of Homeland Security, Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment, pp2-3, retrieved October 23, 2010 from http://www.fas.org/irp/eprint/rightwing.pdf

[ii] Ibid, 2

Enhanced by Zemanta

Obama and “The Same Rules?” – Reason #57

Only 114 Days Remaining!

“When Everyone Plays by the Same Rules”

How many times have we heard President Obama say:

“I believe that this country succeeds when everyone gets a fair shot, when everyone does their fair share, when everyone plays by the same rules. These aren’t Democratic values or Republican values. These aren’t 1 percent values or 99 percent values. They’re American values. And we have to reclaim them.”[i]

It is a fitting illustration of this Administration’s hypocrisy to note that as of September, 2010, Obama and his Administration were “reclaiming” these American values as follows:

41 White House Aides owed $831,000 in back taxes

1,971 members of Holder’s Dept. of Justice, owed $14,350,152 in overdue taxes

4,856 members of the Dept. of Homeland Security, owed $37,012,174 to the IRS

In all, federal employees throughout the U.S. owed one billion dollars in back taxes[ii]

Obama rails against so-called “millionaires and billionaires” (he really means everybody making over $250,000 per year) not paying their fair share.  Obama preaches the need for redistributing America’s wealth, in order to give everyone a fair shot.  But, at the end of the day, it appears that Obama and members of his Administration mean to promote American values only with our money – not theirs.


[i] President Barack Obama, (Dec. 6, 2011), White House web-site, Speeches & Remarks, Remarks by the President on the Economy in Osawatomie, Kansas, retrieved February 6, 2012 from http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/12/06/remarks-president-economy-osawatomie-kansas

[ii] Andrew Malcolm (Sep. 10, 2010), LA Times Web-site, Political Commentary, Top of the Ticket, 41 Obama White House aides owe the IRS $831,000 in back taxes — and they’re not alone, retrieved February 6, 2012 from http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2010/09/congress-taxes-irs.html

Enhanced by Zemanta

Say “Hi” To 800 New Friends at IRS – Reason #56

Only 115 Days Remaining!

Takes One to Catch One?

Despite repeated warnings from the International Monetary Fund (IMF), from whom Tim Geithner received income from 2001 to 2004, Geithner reportedly failed to pay $34,000 in payroll taxes.  In response to a 2006 IRS audit, Geithner corrected his payroll tax errors for 2003 and 2004, but continued his withholding of proper payment for 2001 and 2002, until after he was vetted as Obama’s nominee for Treasury Secretary.[i]

What would happen to the average middle-class American  failing to pay payroll taxes for four years and then continuing to stiff the IRS for an additional four years?

No need to worry about that.  In Obama’s world, that behavior could put you in charge of the entire Treasury Department, including the IRS.  And, who better to hold other Americans accountable?  Incidentally, Geithner – a poster child for tax issues – plans to increase tax evasion prosecutions in 2012 and to aggressively pursue the collection of back taxes.  According to Geithner:

“A total of $332 million would be devoted to new Internal Revenue Service (IRS) enforcement efforts, including $128.1 million to add nearly 800 new IRS employees to combat… tax evasion and improve compliance with tax laws by businesses and high-income individuals.”

Really!  No hypocrisy here.


[i] Jackie Calmes, (Jan. 13, 2009) New York Times web-site, Politics, Geithner Questioned on Tax Returns, retrieved March 6, 2012 from http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/14/us/politics/14geithner.html?pagewanted=all

Enhanced by Zemanta

Talk and Actions Matching? – Reason #55

Only 116 Days Remaining!

Obama – A New Washington Culture?

In a speech in Green Bay on Sept. 22, 2008, then candidate Obama was quoted as saying:

“We must change Washington.  We must reform our regulations, our politics and our government, but we will not be able to make these changes with the same policies, the same lobbyists or the same Washington culture that allows politicians and special interests to set their own agenda.”[i]

Nice sentiments indeed, for a politician who only a few months later, nominated a Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary, who had allegedly made “hundreds of thousands of dollars in consulting and speaking fees from health and pharmaceutical interests, some of which would be at the heart of any effort to overhaul the nation’s health care system” [ii] – an HHS Secretary also found to be owing $128,000 in back taxes.

No hypocrisy here.


[i] Barack Obama, quoted in Linton Weeks, (Feb. 3, 2009), NPR web-site, Obama Nominees: Who’s in and Who’s out, retrieved February 5, 2012 from http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=100249850

[ii] Linton Weeks, (Feb. 3, 2009), NPR web-site, Obama Nominees: Who’s in and Who’s out, retrieved February 5, 2012 from http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=100249850

Enhanced by Zemanta

Ready to Gift Your Job?” – Reason #53

Only 118 Days Remaining!

Freedom of Speech a Distraction

Mark Lloyd, often dubbed the “Diversity Czar,” is actually Obama’s Chief Diversity Officer, Associate General Counsel, Federal Communications Commission.  In his book, Prologue to a Farce, Lloyd makes a comment that may not place him so far from Obama’s Regulatory Czar, Cass Sunstein.

“At the very least, blind references to freedom of speech or the press serve as a DISTRACTION from the critical examination of other communications policies.”[i]

He also has some disturbing views of interracial relationships and affirmative action in America, that make his appointment as “Diversity Czar” somewhat troubling.  In one statement, the “Diversity Czar” tells us that – at least in his eyes:

“There are few things I think, more frightening in the American mind than dark skin black men.  Here I am.” [ii]

As to Affirmative Action, Lloyd tells us that:

“…we have really, truly, good  white people in important positions – and the fact of the matter is, that there is a limited number of those positions – and unless we are conscious of the need to have more people of color – gays, other people in those positions – we will not change the problem.  We’re in a position where you have to say ‘Who is going to step down, so someone else can have power?’”[iii]

Is this the Obama administration’s interpretation of equal opportunity, or is this simply a sugar coated approach to class warfare?


[i] Mark Lloyd, Prologue to a Farce: Communication and Democracy in America, (Chicago, 2006, University of Illinois Press), 20

[ii] Mark Lloyd, (May, 2005), Conference on Media Reform: Racial Justice, audio sound bites posted by Breitbart TV web-site, FCC ‘Diversity Czar’: Few Things Frighten Americans More Than ‘Dark Skin Black Men’, retrieved March 2, 2011 from http://www.breitbart.tv/fcc-%E2%80%98diversity-czar%E2%80%99-few-things-frighten-americans-more-than-%E2%80%98dark-skin-black-men%E2%80%99/

[iii] Ibid

 

Enhanced by Zemanta