On Saturday, November 21, 2009, the Senate of the United States voted to move health insurance reform (the Democrat version) to the floor for debate. This represents to the ‘T’ what Rahm Emanual meant when describing the political strategy he called ‘rule one.’ Which is “Never allow a crisis to go to waste, they are opportunities to do big things.”
So for now and the coming weeks, the American people will be able to see one side trying to get support to pass this takeover of one sixth of the private sector, clearly and obviously without any Constitutional authority to do so, and one side trying to stop it. That is our only choice since the GOP’s plan to reform health care within the private sector and without a government takeover is off the table.
What we can expect to see if this bill passes the Senate with zero chance that Obama will veto it, is this:
New taxes on everyone that consumes medical care from a health care provider that is not ‘government’ approved.
New taxes on those that buy health care insurance if your policy in not ‘government’ approved.
New taxes on those that choose not to buy health care insurance. And the IRS will see to it that you will pay. Or, go to jail. How’s that for Choice and Competition?
New taxes on everyone that provides medical care to Medicare patients. To the tune of $500 billion in cuts in payments to Medicare providers. And that is over and above the discount rates the government currently demands from them. An exodus of doctors in the profession and more people to cover means long waiting periods, lower quality health care, and rationed health care. All that good stuff.
New taxes on those that find cures, both therapeutically and otherwise, like pharmaceutical and medical technology companies.
New taxes on all who use certain medical devices. Like your father’s pacemaker and grandmother’s stint and your wife’s or girlfriend’s new breasts.
New taxes on businesses with over 50 employees that don’t offer health insurance. Now there’s a job creator. Not.
Expansion of Medicaid, the federal-state health program for the poor, to include tens of millions more dependents and including illegal aliens. Without increasing the debt and without decreasing the quality of health care?
Expansion of government subsidies for the poor and even middle-income people to help them ‘pay’ for it all. Subsidies for a plan that was supposed to decrease premium prices? Instead, we will have more people dependent on government. All without increasing the debt one dime?
The plan would give states the option not to participate. This does not include an option not to pay for it. Just not to participate in it. Make any sense to you?
Insurance companies would be barred from excepting pre-existing conditions. (Probably the one and only problem sick people have that the government needs to be involved with, and accounted for in the GOP alternative.) Barred from interstate competition. Barred from offering customer-based insurance policies. Raising insurance premiums for everyone. But this plan was suppose to decrease premiums.
You will be forced into the government health insurance plan (you can’t keep yours if you want to) whenever you make any change in your current plan, like adding a dependent or changing your deductible, or changing your coverage in any way.
A government-run insurance company, with artificially lower rates than private-sector carriers (see pre-requisites above) that will eventually cause that private sector industry to rot on the proverbial vine.
ultimately leading to the SINGLE PAYER HEALTH CARE SYSTEM that Obama wanted. Before he didn’t want it.
So, despite 60 years of history of the American people rejecting the notion of turning over their power and responsibility of health care to the federal government, most recently in 1993 with Hillary-care, we have come to this point. This is a hit right between your eyes. A hit on freedom and liberty, a hit on the Constitution, and a hit on your family’s health and finances for generations to come. The days of incrementalism are over. If this bill becomes law, there’s nothing except the next election that can restrain this power grab in Washington. And no industry will be safe from government control.
In the most unreported news story of the month, and prepping the field for amnesty of all who are in this country illegally . . .
Arrests of illegal immigrant workers have dropped precipitously under President Obama, according to figures released Wednesday.
Criminal arrests, administrative arrests, indictments and convictions of illegal immigrants at work sites all fell by more than 50 percent from fiscal 2008 to fiscal 2009.
The figures show that Mr. Obama has made good on his pledge to shift enforcement away from going after illegal immigrant workers themselves – but at the expense of Americans’ jobs, said Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas, the Republican who compiled the numbers from the Department of Homeland Security’s U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency (ICE).
Comprende?
In a speech last week to the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank headed by John Podesta and funded by George Soros, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano proclaims that border security is so good now that it’s now time to consider amnesty for the ’12 million’ illegal aliens already in the United States.
Right! It is so good now that there is still 400 miles of border fencing to be built.
”How can they claim that enforcement is ‘done’ when there are more than 400 open miles of border with Mexico, hundreds of thousands of criminal and fugitive aliens and millions of illegal immigrants taking American jobs?” said Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas, the top Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, which oversees immigration and border issues.
And it doesn’t stop there. The administration’s spin is that economic recovery would be enhanced by amnesty. And, that doing so would also enhance national security. What? With a 400 mile long welcome mat and a laundry list of free stuff? Dang, almost forgot about al-Qaeda. They like the welcome mat too!
Hearken back to the Sept 9 Joint Session of Congress where President Obama said, and was called a liar for it, that illegals were not covered in the bill, which at that time was H.R. 3200. That bill did not exclude illegals from participating in the health care plans. So yes, he lied.
Now there is a ‘better’ way. Make them all legal, problem solved. Now he’s no longer a liar. Feel better now?
After seeing this Air America Radio talk show host’s opinion of the so-called mainstream (CBS, NBS, and ABS) media bias, one would have to wonder just where his planet is? The notion that they are all biased in favor of Republicans is beyond laughable.
Since President Obama’s address before the joint session of Congress on Sept 9th, lets review what has been said by Obama and what has been done by the Obama administration, then ask yourself if you’ve seen the dichotomy reported in any of those media outlets.
He says all bills will be made publicly available no less than 10 days before it would be voted on. He wants bills voted on without being read or even completely written. He kills amendments submitted by Republicans that would require legislation be made publicly available 72 hours before being voted on. Why would they do that?
He says that illegal aliens will not be covered under whatever health care bill ends up being voted on. He kills amendments submitted by Republicans that would require proof of citizenship for participation. Why would they do that?
All that and not a peep out of the media that is supposed to be biased to the Right? The media silence demonstrates exactly the opposite.
As a follow-up to the post How The Left Tolerates Free Speech, we will examine how the Left and the President use the English language to deceive the American people when it comes to the President’s health insurance/health care initiative and illegal aliens. Since the mainstream media refuses to do their job with a minimal amount of investigation into who is really lying to the American people, let’s examine the argument right here, right now.
When the Left says that illegal aliens will not be covered in his plan, they are referring to a section of H.R. 3200 on page 143 that has to do with a form of welfare assistance called Individual Affordability Credits under Title II – Health Insurance Exchange, IE., the government-run health insurance program. Not the receiving of health care. Despite what they would want you to believe, these are two different and distinct issues. When the President says illegals will not be covered, he is either talking about what is not yet written or lying about what is written. In either case, the proof is in the actions of the Democrats in Washington.
Sec. 246 plainly states . . .
Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States.
That’s fine. Obviously, cutting checks or issuing credits for illegal aliens would be problematic for a whole host of reasons not the least of which would be no Social Security Number to attach a check or credit to. They are not US citizens. They are citizens of some other country.
As for illegal aliens receiving health care under H.R. 3200, it is not that they are explicitly included but rather that they are not explicitly excluded as described on page 50, Sec 152 pertaining to prohibiting discrimination in health care. Not payments or credit, but in the providing of health care.
SEC. 152. PROHIBITING DISCRIMINATION IN HEALTH CARE.
22 (a) IN GENERAL.—Except as otherwise explicitly permitted by this Act and by subsequent regulations consistent with this Act, all health care and related services (including insurance coverage and public health activities) covered by this Act shall be provided without regard to personal characteristics extraneous to the provision of high quality health care or related services.
The legalese in this section is what prompted the Heller Amendment, proposed by Rep. Dean Heller (R-Nev) in July 2009. The bill would require using the same database that is used to verify employment eligibility that verifies social security numbers on job applications, The Income and Eligibility Verification System (IEVS), and the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE). The Heller Amendment was defeated along party lines.
Why do you suppose the bill would have been defeated if it were not the intent of the Obama administration to include non-US citizens? And why do you suppose the Obamamedia doesn’t seem to be the least bit curious about it either? Oh that’s right. The media watchdog died last year.
Here are some of the highlights of some of the change the President has in mind for our health care. Complete bill here.
{UPDATE 11/10/09: This is the old version, as of July 2009. The latest version is H.R. 3962. We’ll call it Obamacare v2.0. You’ve come here due to a net search. The latest incarnation of this is the one the House approved last Saturday night and is HERE.}
But first, the lead sentence of the bill H.R. 3200 .
To provide affordable, quality health care for all Americans
and reduce the growth in health care spending, and
for other purposes.
‘Pan American’ would be a truthful description. That this bill is intended to cover only Americans is a deception that Democrats and their willing accomplices, the mainstream media, continue to perpetuate.
Below is some of the highlights from the first 500 pages.
Last Friday, Democrats in Washington were forced to show their hand when it comes to providing taxpayer-funded health care to millions of Mexican citizens, PG 50 Section 152 of H.R.3200. The House Ways and Means Committee nixed a Republican-backed amendment that would insure that whatever health care legislation comes out of Washington will not include health care for citizens of Mexico or any other country.
On Friday, Democrats moved one step closer to giving free health insurance to the nation’s estimated 12 million illegal aliens when they successfully defeated a Republican-backed amendment, offered by Rep. Dean Heller, R-Nev., that would have prevented illegal aliens from receiving government-subsidized health care under the proposed plan backed by House Democrats and President Barack Obama.
The House Ways and Means Committee nixed the Heller amendment by a 26-to-15 vote along straight party lines, and followed this action by passing the 1,018-page bill early Friday morning by a 23-to-18 margin, with three Democrats voting against the plan.
Additionally, the Democrats are exempting illegals from paying the same penalty that would be assessed on US citizens for not participating in the government-run health care system. Short of amnesty, I can’t think of a better illegal alien magnet. Instead of removing incentives to illegals, they are supplying them.
Thanks to Rep. Dean Heller (R-Nev) for introducing the legislation that forced Democrats to show their hand when it comes to illegal aliens.
As usual, the media gives this action little attention, paying more attention instead to what Obama and his administration is saying rather than to what it is actually doing.
The fact that Mexicans, if and when they are allowed to vote in the US, would be a solid Democrat voting block has not been overlooked by the Obama administration. Doing that is not an unintended consequence of ‘health care reform.’ It is, by design, politics by the numbers.
The European Union held parliamentary elections over the weekend and the results indicate a rejection of socialism as they see it and of left-leaning parties in most member nations.
Conservatives raced toward victory in some of Europe’s largest economies Sunday as initial results and exit polls showed voters punishing left-leaning parties in European parliament elections in France, Germany and elsewhere.
Right-leaning governments were ahead of the opposition in Germany, France, Italy and Belgium, while conservative opposition parties were leading in Britain and Spain.
First projections by the European Union showed center-right parties would have the most seats – between 263 and 273 – in the 736-member parliament. Center-left parties were expected to get between 155 to 165 seats.
The EU seems to get it. They’ve seen it all before. Even more reason for the Obama administration to keep his socialist plans on the fast track. Before most Americans figure him out and what he is doing. The US media are not talking.
You can kind of tell when a media outlet doesn’t like what they’re seeing. Look how the left-leaning Telegraph.co.uk describes the victories. They get very creative in adjectives for the winners. Extremists, far-right, fringe parties, anti-immigrant, anti-Islamic immigrant party, anti-gipsy extremist, ultra-nationalist. See any bias there?
Far-Right parties and extremists made gains across Europe this weekend as protest votes and low turnouts marked the European parliament elections.
Support for centre-Left parties and governments crashed across the EU as fringe parties, not the Socialists, picked up protest votes while the centre-Right weathered the storm.
Anti-immigrant and far-right groups made significant gains in the Netherlands, Austria, Hungary, Denmark, Slovakia and Finland.
In Slovakia a low turnout of just 19.4 per cent propelled an anti-gipsy extremist ultra-nationalist into the parliament and Hungary’s far-Right Jobbik took three seats for the first time.
In France, Nicolas Sarkozy’s centre-Right UMP group was the big winner, with 28 per cent of the vote, as the opposition Socialists suffered serious losses, plunging the already weak party into further disarray.
Can hardly wait to hear David Axelrod’s spin on the election results. It is the writing on his wall.
The northward flow is down 13 percent for the first quarter of 2009. That should be good news for Californians, who are broke due in no small part to the impact of illegal immigrants and sanctuary cities.
The economic crisis, combined with a more fortified border, has led to what may be the first drop in the U.S. illegal-immigrant population in years.
There is nothing much to be optimistic about with a 13% decrease except for the direction it is going. Which is down. That’s a good thing. But it also means that there were 137,497 illegals that did enter the country in the first quarter. Down from 159,024 in 2008. I wonder how many of those were terrorists?
There is a plethora of information ‘out there’ about Democratic Presidential Candidate, Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) that, for whatever reason, you may not have heard or seen. Most of it is negative and has to do not only with the kind of people who Obama deals with and has dealt with over his entire political career and before, but also with what Barack Obama has in mind when he speaks of the kind of change he has in mind for our country, his ‘core beliefs’ if you will.
This is a recap of what has been discovered about Barack Obama that the mainstream media has chosen to ignore, for obvious reasons, but, because he is vying for the presidency of the United States, you have a right and a need to know. Please take the time to check it out before you go to the polls November 4th.
I don’t know where this tape was during the primaries, maybe it was ‘the tape’ that was referenced by Clinton campaign staffers but was never released. There is also a video tape of Rashid Khalidi that you will learn about which could also be what was called ‘the tape.’ I don’t know, but either one would have ended his run if it had been released before the Democratic National Convention.
The job of the President of the United States consists of only two tasks. To protect and defend its people, and to protect and defend the U.S. Constitution. After you listen to this radio interview that Obama gave in 2001 to an NPR interviewer, you’ll have to ask yourself how this man could even put his and on the bible and take the oath. It is obvious that he feels the founding fathers erred in the creation of this country and its Constitution. And in this interview, he explores ways to fundamentally change it. Not protect it.
Beyond the archived web page from the Socialist New Party is the recognition by the “Progressive Populist” magazine in November 1996 that Obama was indeed an acknowledged member of the Socialist Party.
New Party members and supported candidates won 16 of 23 races, including an at-large race for the Little Rock, Ark., City Council, a seat on the county board for Little Rock and the school board for Prince George’s County, Md. Chicago is sending the first New Party member to Congress, as Danny Davis, who ran as a Democrat, won an overwhelming 85% victory. New Party member Barack Obama was uncontested for a State Senate seat from Chicago.
The Democratic Socialist Party of America published in their July/August Edition of New Ground 47 Newsletter.
The Chicago New Party is increasingly becoming a viable political organization that can make a different in Chicago politics. It is crucial for a political organization to have a solid infrastructure and visible results in its political program. The New Party has continued to solidify this base…[T]he NP’s ’96 Political Program has been enormously successful with 3 of 4 endorsed candidates winning electoral primaries. All four candidates attended the NP membership meeting on April 11th to express their gratitude. Danny Davis, winner in the 7th Congressional District, invited NPers to join his Campaign Steering Committee. Patricia Martin, who won the race for Judge in 7th Subcircuit Court, explained that due to the NP she was able to network and get experienced advice from progressives like Davis. Barack Obama, victor in the 13th State Senate District, encouraged NPers to join in his task forces on Voter Education and Voter Registration.
Years later, Obama still believes that ‘spreading the wealth’ is where it’s at. Which is the anathema to the ‘American Dream.’ Here is where Barack Obama mounts his assault against Joe and middle class Americans.
Isn’t it amazing how the media is all over ‘Joe the plumber?’ Within 24 hours, we know all about this man’s personal and professional business. And for over two years now, the media is still not motivated to tell us about Barack Obama’s alliances with people who hate America, and his proclivity for supporting directions in education that promote socialism. But I will. Then there’s his working for and with ACORN, and so much more.
Looking at Obama’s foreign policy expertise. Beyond telegraphing that he would raid Pakistan’s tribal region, making an already shaky political situation even more fragile with a nuclear power, he is already trumped by Iran with his ‘no preconditions’ talk.
Well isn’t this just too rich? Iran has two preconditions of its own before it will engage in any talks with the United States.
Get all our troops out of the Middle East
End our support of Israel.
Well, I’d say that presents quite a challenge to the Democratic presidential candidate, who has already capitulated to Iran by saying that he would meet with Iran without preconditions.
Are we still believing that Obama is ready to lead?
Are we feeling any safer now? This also, btw, has not been reported by the mainstream media.
It’s not about Obama’s associations, it’s about Obama’s alliances.
By the time a person rises to the level of the leader of his party and becomes their nominee for the office of President of the United States, people already know a lot about what kind of person he is. Like John McCain, they know his history, his legislative background, his core beliefs, and his character. That is, until now. So when you have a candidate for the top spot that has limited legislative experience, no executive experience, and no public presence beyond a well delivered speech at the 2004 Democratic National Convention, knowing more about who our candidate is rises to a level that it would not otherwise be.
Critics of Obama, and I’ll include myself in this, are wrong when they bring up Obama’s ‘associations’ with unsavory people. Until I read Thomas Sowell’s article regarding who ‘the real’ Barack Obama is, I’ve come to the realization that it is not Obama’s associations that matter as much as his ‘alliances.’
Critics of Senator Barack Obama make a strategic mistake when they talk about his “past associations.” That just gives his many defenders in the media an opportunity to counter-attack against “guilt by association.”
We all have associations, whether at the office, in our neighborhood or in various recreational activities. Most of us neither know nor care what our associates believe or say about politics.
Associations are very different from alliances. Allies are not just people who happen to be where you are or who happen to be doing the same things you do. You choose allies deliberately for a reason. The kind of allies you choose says something about you.
About the names that are part of Obama’s past and present, Sowell writes . . .
Jeremiah Wright, Father Michael Pfleger, William Ayers and Antoin Rezko are not just people who happened to be at the same place at the same time as Barack Obama. They are people with whom he chose to ally himself for years, and with some of whom some serious money changed hands.
Some gave political support, and some gave financial support, to Obama’s election campaigns, and Obama in turn contributed either his own money or the taxpayers’ money to some of them. That is a familiar political alliance- but an alliance is not just an “association” from being at the same place at the same time.
Obama could have allied himself with all sorts of other people. But, time and again, he allied himself with people who openly expressed their hatred of America. No amount of flags on his campaign platforms this election year can change that.
What we do know about the kind of politician Obama is, is not well-known. A testament to the effectiveness of his enablers in the mainstream media in reshaping and repackaging their chosen candidate. Ask yourself if this is the first time you’ve seen or heard this about Barack Obama.
The story of Obama’s political career is not a pretty story. He won his first political victory by being the only candidate on the ballot- after hiring someone skilled at disqualifying the signers of opposing candidates’ petitions, on whatever technicality he could come up with.
Despite his words today about “change” and “cleaning up the mess in Washington,” Obama was not on the side of reformers who were trying to change the status quo of corrupt, machine politics in Chicago and clean up the mess there. Obama came out in favor of the Daley machine and against reform candidates.
Senator Obama is running on an image that is directly the opposite of what he has been doing for two decades. His escapes from his past have been as remarkable as the great escapes of Houdini.
Barack Obama is also in tune with educator William Ayers, the unrepentant terrorist that also taught at the University of Chicago. They both co-chaired the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, which calls itself “a public-private partnership improving education for 1.5 million urban and rural public school students,” it gave to some of the same groups — partnering with ACORN to manage funding for schools and giving over $1 million to the Small Schools Network.
Stanley Kurtz, a Senior Fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center, found the collaborative’s original application when going through Annenberg’s archives.
Asked to comment, Yvonne Williams-Kinnison, executive director of the collaborative’s parent group, the Coalition for Improved Education in South Shore said, “I don’t want to put more fuel on the fire. You can call us back after the election…. I don’t want to compromise the position.”
Wouldn’t you be surprised to find that the curriculum is more about turning the current educational system, and our culture upside down. It goes along these lines as written by Afrocentrist scholar Jacob Carruthers . . .
‘The submission to Western civilization and its most outstanding offspring, American civilization, is, in reality, surrender to white supremacy,” Carruthers wrote in his 1999 book, ‘Intellectual Warfare.’ ‘Some of us have chosen to reject the culture of our oppressors and recover our disrupted ancestral culture.’
“One of Ayers’ descriptions for a course called ‘Improving Learning Environments’ says a prospective K-12 teacher needs to ‘be aware of the social and moral universe we inhabit and…be a teacher capable of hope and struggle, outrage and action, teaching for social justice and liberation.”
So does Obama agree with Ayers’ view of education?
Presumably as keeper of the CAC’s purse strings, Obama paid attention to where the money went. His seal of approval would have been needed to fund Ayers or anyone else asking for a grant. So does Obama agree with Ayers’ ideas for reforming education? Because they are radical and extreme, to say the least.
Two years ago, Bill Ayers spoke at the World Education Forum in Caracas, Venezuela. The event was hosted by none other than that great friend of the U.S., Hugo Chavez. Here’s more from IBD: “With Chavez at his side, Ayers voiced his support for ‘the political educational reforms under way here in Venezuela under the leadership of President Chavez. We share the belief that education is the motor-force of revolution…I look forward to seeing how all of you continue to overcome the failures of capitalist education as you seek to create something truly new and deeply humane.”
So I guess Ayers believes the problem with education is that it’s “capitalist,” and that education’s purpose is “revolution.”
Since Obama helped provide the funds for many of Bill Ayers’ education reform projects back in Chicago, I have to assume he agreed with the principles behind them. I hate to think how Obama as President would “reform” education, and where he’d distribute our precious education dollars.
There are two more educators that the Obamas are familiar with. That would be Rashid and Mona Khalidi, co-founders of the The Arab-American Action Network, a virulently anti-Israel organization that strongly supports the Palestinian Arab terrorist movement. From 1976 to 1982, Mr. Khalidi was a director in Beirut of the official Palestinian press agency, WAFA. Later he served on the PLO “guidance committee” at the Madrid peace conference.
Rashid and Mona Khalidi became close friends of Barack and Michelle Obama during the time when both Barack and Rashid taught at the University of Chicago (1992-2003). At a lavish farewell party for Khalidi in Chicago in 2003, when Khalidi left his prestigious position at the University of Chicago for an even more prestigious one at Columbia University in New York, Obama gave Khalidi a glowing eulogy. He said that he and his wife Michelle had been frequent dinner guests of the Khalidis, and that the Khalidis had frequently babysat for the Obama children.
Here is more on Khalidi once he got to Columbia University by two writers who attended a conference on the Middle East conflict titled “One State or Two? Alternative Proposals for Middle East Peace.”
The “one state” solution is a euphemism for the destruction of the Jewish state – a trope of the most extreme rejectionist elements within the Palestinian movement and their allies in Syria and Iran.
In bringing professor Khalidi to Morningside Heights from the University of Chicago, Columbia also got itself a twofer of Palestinian activism and advocacy. Mr. Khalidi’s wife, Mona, who also served in Beirut as chief editor of the English section of the WAFA press agency, was hired as dean of foreign students at Columbia’s SIPA, working under Dean Anderson. In Chicago, the Khalidis founded the Arab American Action Network, and Mona Khalidi served as its president. A big farewell dinner was held in their honor by AAAN with a commemorative book filled with testimonials from their friends and political allies. These included the left wing anti-war group Not In My Name, the Electronic Intifada, and the ex-Weatherman domestic terrorists Bernadine Dohrn and Bill Ayers. (There were also testimonials from then-state Senator Barack Obama and the mayor of Chicago.)
Obama’s relationship with ACORN goes way back. And as a community activist and attorney representing ACORN in Chicago in 1995, he participated in worsening the sub-prime mortgage scheme that eventually brought down not only our economy, but the global economy. ‘Giving’ mortgages to people who could not pay them.
It is his relationship with ACORN and his political ambitions in Chicago that surrounded him with America haters like William Ayers and Rev. Jeramiah Wright, all driven by the socialist agenda of something known as the Cloward-Piven strategy.
The Strategy was first elucidated in the May 2, 1966 issue of The Nation magazine by a pair of radical socialist Columbia University professors, Richard Andrew Cloward and Frances Fox Piven. David Horowitz summarizes it as:
The strategy of forcing political change through orchestrated crisis. The “Cloward-Piven Strategy” seeks to hasten the fall of capitalism by overloading the government bureaucracy with a flood of impossible demands, thus pushing society into crisis and economic collapse.
Cloward and Piven were inspired by radical organizer [and Hillary Clinton mentor] Saul Alinsky:
“Make the enemy live up to their (sic) own book of rules,” Alinsky wrote in his 1989 book Rules for Radicals. When pressed to honor every word of every law and statute, every Judeo-Christian moral tenet, and every implicit promise of the liberal social contract, human agencies inevitably fall short. The system’s failure to “live up” to its rule book can then be used to discredit it altogether, and to replace the capitalist “rule book” with a socialist one. (Courtesy Discover the Networks.org)
No matter where the strategy is implemented, it shares the following features:
The offensive organizes previously unorganized groups eligible for government benefits but not currently receiving all they can.
The offensive seeks to identify new beneficiaries and/or create new benefits.
The overarching aim is always to impose new stresses on target systems, with the ultimate goal of forcing their collapse.
ACORN’s voter rights tactics follow the Cloward-Piven Strategy:
1. Register as many Democrat voters as possible, legal or otherwise and help them vote, multiple times if possible.
2. Overwhelm the system with fraudulent registrations using multiple entries of the same name, names of deceased, random names from the phone book, even contrived names.
3. Make the system difficult to police by lobbying for minimal identification standards.
By advocating massive, no-holds-barred voter registration campaigns, they [Cloward & Piven] sought a Democratic administration in Washington, D.C. that would re-distribute the nation’s wealth and lead to a totalitarian socialist state.
Look around at the state of affairs today in the economy and in voting registration and related activities and what do you see? Do you see Barack Obama or a Democrat administration trying to shore-up the voting process by something as secure as a photo ID? I don’t think so. Why?
Obama aided ACORN as their lead attorney in a successful suit he brought against the Illinois state government to implement the Motor Voter law there. The law had been resisted by Republican Governor Jim Edgars, who feared the law was an opening to widespread vote fraud.
And what caused the mortgage crises? The roots of it go back to a law called the Community Reinvestment Act, passed by President Jimmy Carter in 1977, under pressure from a community activist movement that started in Chicago.
In the 1980s, groups such as the activists at ACORN began pushing charges of “redlining”-claims that banks discriminated against minorities in mortgage lending. In 1989, sympathetic members of Congress got the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act amended to force banks to collect racial data on mortgage applicants; this allowed various studies to be ginned up that seemed to validate the original accusation.
And ACORN’s involvement in the mortgage crises is compounded, thanks to help from, guess who, Chicago lawyer Barack Obama.
ACORN showed its colors again in 1991, by taking over the House Banking Committee room for two days to protest efforts to scale back the CRA. Obama represented ACORN in the Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank, 1994 suit against redlining.Most significant of all, ACORN was the driving force behind a 1995 regulatory revision pushed through by the Clinton Administration that greatly expanded the CRA and laid the groundwork for the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac borne financial crisis we now confront. Barack Obama was the attorney representing ACORN in this effort. With this new authority, ACORN used its subsidiary, ACORN Housing, to promote subprime loans more aggressively.
I don’t know how Barack Obama can say with a straight face how he has no ties to ACORN, how he so easily dismisses them as a community group that merely helps low-income people. He is clearly and deliberately deceiving you, and the media lets him get away with it. When he says that, he is telling just as big a lie as ‘I did not have sex with that woman, Miss Lewinsky.’ Barack Obama is not being honest with the American people about who he is and where he wants to take this country. Examining his character and his past is not a distraction from the ‘real issues’ as his campaign will have you believe. First, we need to know who he is.
Oil revenues is Mexico’s largest single foreign revenue source for the Mexican government. The second largest foreign revenue source for Mexico is money mailed or wired back to Mexico from the United States by Mexicans living in the United States. They have a nice clinical name for it. They call it remittances. And by the looks of this video , the major part of it seems to be coming from illegal alien Mexicans living in the United States.
Mexicans living in the U.S. sent home 12 percent less money in August, the largest drop on record since the Bank of Mexico began tracking remittances 12 years ago. Many towns depend on these dollars for survival.
According to the report, ‘remittances’ have dropped from $2.2 billion last year to $1.9 billion this year. It is not clear whether that was for August only or if that was a year-to-date figure ending in August. Whichever, they ‘blame’ increased border security and increased deportations, in addition to a slowing economy in the United States for ‘their’ loss. They are saying there is no work available here anymore. Can you say ‘guest worker’ program?
Looks like Mexico is going to have to learn how to take care of its own people and from within its own borders for a change. The bad guy here is Mexico’s government, not the United States government.
Since there is no compulsion in Washington or in Mexico, for Mexico to reimburse the United States for subsidizing them via remittances, and for letting the illegals here suck on the American teet, the question is whether the current financial crisis is enough for legal taxpayers to stand up and say ‘No Mas.’
