Obama To Stick With Class-Warfare Approach in 2012

President Obama is expected to set the major theme for his 2012 re-election campaign with a State of the Union address on January 24 that portrays him as the defender of the middle class and Republicans as the party of the rich and big corporations.

Democratic strategists say Obama's earlier campaign message--that his economic policies prevented a bad situation from getting worse--was weak and didn't connect with most voters. Now Obama has decided to shift gears in an attempt to take on the role of tribune of Middle America.

Among the policy initiatives that will be incorporated into his new message, Democratic strategists say, are support for federal assistance for various popular programs including college assistance and transportation projects, and helping to pay for them by raising taxes on the rich.

Democratic strategists add that this approach was bolstered by the fight with House Republicans in recent weeks over a proposal to extend the current payroll tax cut for 160 million Americans. House Republicans initially blocked a temporary fix, holding out for a year-long extension along with various conservative provisions. But in the end, the House GOP backed off, partly because the White House and the Democratic party succeeded in portraying the GOP as obstructionists who didn't want to give the middle class an immediate break.

The problem with the defender-of-the-middle-class strategy is that it might seem to be a diversion from the nation's Number One concern--creating jobs, according to Republican strategists.


http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/Ken...proach-in-2012

"Marxists argue that class conflict plays a pivotal role in the history of class-based hierarchical systems such as capitalism and feudalism.[1] Marxists refer to its overt manifestations as class war, a struggle whose resolution in favor of the working class is viewed by them as inevitable under capitalism."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Class_conflict

Obama stated, "Capitalism never worked" in his KS speech.

Obama is fueling class struggle.

Is Obama a Marxist?

What did Cheech and Chong once say? If it looks like dogshit, smells like dogshit.......

We can understand Obama PERFECTLY ... after reading Karl Marx

Every time I believe Barack Obama has reached the final level of unbridled hypocrisy, he amazes me by putting forward an idea or utterance that brings the words "unmitigated gall" to an entirely new level.


On Wednesday, January 11, Obama will make a plea to profitable multinational companies which have relocated their manufacturing and production facilities overseas to return to the United States.


This is being done ostensibly as part of his "middle class" doctrine that is championed (no surprise) by organized labor unions. The White House forum on "Insourcing American Jobs" will attempt to convince the nation that Obama's over-regulation, class warfare and Marxist Doctrine regarding the redistribution of wealth will benefit the hated capitalists in question.


Executives from more than a dozen companies will attend, including padlock maker Master Lock, furniture company Lincolnton Furniture, software application developer GalaxE Solutions, and chemicals company DuPont.

The emphasis on keeping U.S. jobs at home is in line with a populist economic message championed by Obama that could play well with union workers, whose support the Democratic president will need to win re-election in November.

This "Power to the Proletariat" doctrine is not exactly new; it is the brainchild of Karl Heinrich Marx (1818 – 1883), a German philosopher, economist and revolutionary socialist. His ideas played a significant role in the development of social science and the socialist political movement.

He published various books during his lifetime, with the most notable being The Communist Manifesto (1848) and Das Capital (1867); some of his works were co-written with his friend, the fellow German revolutionary socialist Friedrich Engels.

Marxist ideology was the primary influence for Lenin's Russian Revolution, and has served as the centerpiece for Communist and Socialist movements across the globe. Marx also apparently serves as the pervasive influence for our "Campaigner and Chief."


As a student of Soviet & Eastern European Studies in my undergraduate days, I was required to read all the collected works of Marx, Engels and Lenin. While distasteful, it gave me a glimpse into the mindset of the Socialist.

In 1989-1991, when the USSR dissolved, I never thought I would have a practical use for that knowledge again. Then we elected Barack Obama, and the memories came flooding back into my consciousness.

Just for comparison -- for those who have never been subjected to the socialist/communist ideology of Marx, Engels and Lenin -- I thought it would be enlightening to lay "notable quotes" side by side and search for any common threads.

As you will see, one doesn't need to search very far to recognize the influence Marxist ideology has on the President of the greatest free-market capitalist economy in the world.

I ask you to read the quotes from Marx, Engels and Lenin first. Then read the quotes from our esteemed leader for some current perspective.

http://aia2012.blogspot.com/2012/01/...tly-after.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1196232.html

"The Daily Show" kicked things off this week with a look at Saturday's umpteenth GOP presidential debate in New Hampshire (as well as the ensuing debate 12 hours later) and how the rest of the candidates have been treating frontrunner Mitt Romney ahead of today's primary.

While there has been much infighting among the six remaining candidates, Jon Stewart realized Monday night that there's one thing they pretty much can all agree on: "Class warfare" against the rich -- excuse me, job creators -- is wrong, unless we're talking about Mitt Romney.

Amidst talk of lower taxes, deregulation and unlimited corporate campaign funding, the candidates, especially Newt Gingrich, have gone against those views to criticize Romney's wealth. Gingrich himself said Romney should give back the sums he gained by laying people off, which sounds specifically like a liberal-minded redistribution of wealth to Stewart.

"WELCOME COMRADE " Stewart joked. :)

So what exactly instigated this hypocritical behavior? Gingrich's biggest complaint is that Romney's attack ads -- funded by his unlimited PAC money -- are not fair. But a quick reel showing the rest of the GOP candidates' economic views proves that not only is what Romney's doing "fair" by their standards, but that he's really the "pure distillation of Republican economic policy" and the very picture of Gingrich's platforms.

"You're mad at Mitt Romney? For God sakes, it's like Mitt Romney answered the Republicans' eHarmony ad and now you're saying it's unfair, that it's not what you meant," Stewart said.
To finish his point, Stewart whipped out his spot-on Woody Allen impression (which is a must-see)

Watch the full segment above.


Funny stuff on typical Republican hypocritsy. Check out the videos

GOP "Class Warfare" Argument a Dud
http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...-rhetoric.html
It seems the GOP “class warfare” argument has been a dud. True, most Americans don’t begrudge rich people their largesse, nor should they, if it is lawfully earned. What is unseemly is the GOP’s insistence in treating the well off as though they matter more than the middle class. Most Americans just want a fair shake, and there is nothing fair about insisting that tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires are necessary and don’t need to be paid for, and then turn around and try to block a middle-class tax cut and complain that it’s not paid for.

Furthermore, it doesn’t take a genius to see that the Bush tax cuts have been in effect for 10 years and the middle class is still waiting to be “trickled down” upon by the wealthy.

Even millionaire Republican presidential candidates like Rick Perry and Newt Gingrich seem to sense something is amiss in the American economic structure, as evidenced by their recent Kinsley gaffes, which acknowledged that the super rich aren’t always the magnificent benefactors or “job creators” the GOP tries to pawn them off as. Yeah, I’m talking about you, Mitt Romney.

Too bad for them that embracing reality counts as being “off message” in the Republican Party.

Fairness for all!!!

Which means he'll pay you student loan and refinance your house at tax payer expense IN EXCHANGE FOR YOUR VOTE, and your freedom.

This is the "economist" who SiriuslyWrong gets his knowledge from on economics. Very embarassing wouldnt you say?


01-10-2012 04:52 PM

How will Peter Schiff and the Austrian school of economics predictions do this year?
Last year they did pretty badly. Wonder if SiriuslyWrong and Ron Paul will still praise and
defend him?

http://coolspot7.wordpress.com/2011/...ce-in-a-while/



Well, let’s go back in time and see how good his prediction was for 2011:

US dollar demise: Schiff does not see much safety in the US dollar. Schiff says it is not just a dollar collapse, it is a bond collapse too; "avoid any kind of long term bonds, avoid treasuries, and avoid municipal bonds."
The year is not over yet, there is still one more trading day so this can change, but in 2011 the US dollar is up 1.85%, basically flat. No collapse in the dollar like what Schiff predicted.

The 3-year Treasury bond fund (SHY) is up 0.56% (basically flat), 10-year Treasury bond fund (IEF) is up 12%, and the 20-year Treasury bond fund (TLT) is up 28%. No collapse in treasuries like what Schiff predicted.

I looked up three municipal bond ETFs (PZA, MUNI, MUB) and they are up 8%, 5%, and 10%. No collapse in municipal bonds like what Schiff predicted.

I looked up one long term bond ETFs (BLV) and it is up 16%. No collapse in long term bonds like what Schiff predicted.

Indeed, every bond fund I checked was up big this year (and everyone one I wasn’t invested in was up more than mine). Quite simply, what Schiff predicted would occur this year did not occur.

Buy emerging markets and foreign currencies. Schiff is focusing on Asia where people work hard, are producing and have savings.
The emerging market funds (VWO, EEM) were down 20% this year.

For currencies:

Japanese Yen: +4%
Australian Dollar: –0.9%
Swiss Franc: –1%
Canadian Dollar: –2%
Swedish Krona: –3.06%
Euro: –3%
Chinese Yuan: –1%
Mexican Peso: –11%
New Zealand Dollar: –10%
Russian Ruble: –4%
US Dollar: +1.85%

How did the US dollar do against some other currencies directly?
vs Singapore Dollar: +1.48%
vs Hong Kong Dollar: –0.03%
vs South African Rand: +25%

Looks like the US dollar did very well this year and held its own against almost everyone, contrary to what Schiff said. Emerging markets also did poorly, contrary to what Schiff said.

Buy precious metals and commodities. Stay with gold, stay with silver.
Gold is up +9% this year, so he got this one right. However, silver is down –10% this year. Copper is down 42%, Aluminum is down 45% and platinum is down 25%. If you were lucky enough to buy a precious metal ETF, you could have made some money but not very much, maybe 3%.

What about other commodities? The general commodities ETFs (GSG, MOO, DBA) are down 3%, 20% and 11%.

The fact is that commodities did not do very well this year, contrary to Schiff’s advice.

If you would have listened to Peter Schiff this year, you wouldn’t have done very well in the market. You would have underperformed it. Everything he recommended was either flat (currencies), down big (emerging markets) or straight up wrong (collapse in dollar, treasuries and bonds). He was right on gold but wrong on silver – and every other metal. That’s 1 out of 7.

Now, you can argue (as Schiff does) that gold is a long term investment and long term, everything he is saying will turn out to be correct. Maybe. But for now, his prognostications are no more correct than anyone else’s.

He did say, after all, that this was his outlook for 2011.

When in doubt.... LMFAO.

Union vs. non union
Rich vs. poor
Public vs. private
Corporation vs Government

Divide, divide, divide.... Obama the divider.