Our Marxist Wizard of Oz

The Real Barry Obama JR-is quite clear now.

Almost four years into the Obama plan for America(fundamental change) Obama style is now a completed pciture of what Obama is and wants for American's.

Obama envisions a Marxist state, all sectors of the economy-- all aspects of everyday life, infact-- would fall under the control of a centrlized bureaucracy. This destruction of liberty is already coming to pass with the implementation of Obamacare.

Barry's wealth redistribution follows the strictures of Marx, Obama constantly and reflexivley frames his remark in terms of {CLASS WARFARE}.

Obama insults the America people with constant antagonistic terms, with the rich pitted against the poor, white against blacks, bankers against borrowers, producers against consumers, young against old, and woman against men.

For each of these conflicts, or purported conflicts, Obama's "solution" is Wealth-Redistribution.

Marxbama's Dream?/

To bleed American captialism with a thousand cuts until big government has in effect nationalized the private sector. That goal***the death of capitalism, Obama's guiding objective-the passion he has brought to Class Warfare throughout his presidency is clear evidence where his heart lies.

It does not lie with Islam or Christianity, But with Marx!!!

Time to infanticide Obama-send him back to his ROOTS-Marxist-ACORN-street thugs.

http://news.gather.com/viewArticle.a...81474981138109

US President Barack Obama Thursday mocked Republican foes who snub his alternative energy plans, comparing them to those who questioned the revolutionary rise of television and automobiles.

Obama, facing rising political heat over spiking gas prices as he fires up his bid for a second term ahead of November's election, hit back at those who accuse him of wasting taxpayer money on failed new generation energy projects.

In his most sarcastic and cutting campaign mode, Obama slammed his rivals as "naysayers" who were stuck in the past, doubling down on his energy policy despite claims from Republican candidates that it is a miserable failure.

"Lately, we've heard a lot of professional politicians, a lot of the folks who are running for a certain office, who shall go unnamed... they have been talking down new sources of energy," Obama said.

Obama strongly defended his plans to make America a leader in new energy sources like biofuels, and wind power and solar power, and rebuked Republicans for opposing his plans to cut subsidies to profit cranking oil producers.

"If some of these folks were around when Columbus set sail ... they would not have believed that the world was round," he said, at a Community College in the Maryland suburbs outside Washington DC.

"They probably would have agreed with one of the pioneers of the radio who said, "Television won't last. It's a flash in the pan," he said.

http://news.yahoo.com/obama-slams-re...164715493.html

Yeap. Divide and conquer.

Do you know any moderates or centrists that call President Obama, Marxobama?
Didnt think so. Loony tunes.

Your still unemployed or just slacking off? Freeloader maybe? lol
I completely agree that Repubicans are stuck in the past when it comes to energy policy.



http://voteview.com/blog/?p=317

Below we plot the estimated positions of presidents between 1945 and 2011 along the liberal-conservative scale, which produces a pattern we call the “presidential square wave”. Because we use first dimension (ideological) Common Space DW-NOMINATE scores, presidential locations are directly comparable across time. However, because presidential estimates are based on a limited number of “presidential support” votes– roll calls on which the president clearly indicates his support or opposition to a particular (often contentious) measure, presidential ideal points are somewhat biased towards the ideological extremes (however, this effect is roughly constant for all presidents, so it is unlikely than any particular estimate would be affected more than others).

Our findings here echo those discussed in a prior post that Republicans have moved further to the right than Democrats to the left in the contemporary period. Indeed, as seen below, President Obama is the most moderate Democratic president since the end of World War II, while President George W. Bush was the most conservative president in the post-war era.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Havakasha

Do you know any moderates or centrists that call President Obama, Marxobama?
Didnt think so. Loony tunes.

Your still unemployed or just slacking off? Freeloader maybe? lol
I completely agree that Repubicans are stuck in the past when it comes to energy policy.



http://voteview.com/blog/?p=317

Below we plot the estimated positions of presidents between 1945 and 2011 along the liberal-conservative scale, which produces a pattern we call the “presidential square wave”. Because we use first dimension (ideological) Common Space DW-NOMINATE scores, presidential locations are directly comparable across time. However, because presidential estimates are based on a limited number of “presidential support” votes– roll calls on which the president clearly indicates his support or opposition to a particular (often contentious) measure, presidential ideal points are somewhat biased towards the ideological extremes (however, this effect is roughly constant for all presidents, so it is unlikely than any particular estimate would be affected more than others).

Our findings here echo those discussed in a prior post that Republicans have moved further to the right than Democrats to the left in the contemporary period. Indeed, as seen below, President Obama is the most moderate Democratic president since the end of World War II, while President George W. Bush was the most conservative president in the post-war era.

---

Just rolled out of bed I see.............. Must be nice.........

Obama a failure, in every way possible

One does not have to be a Tea Party specialist or have attended one of their rallies to be a proud American, as I am, a distinguished twice-wounded combat veteran Marine of the Vietnam War.

Having read the letters of Barbara Skokan, Anthony Szymanski, I suggest you reread her letter concerning the 1900s. You should read it in the proper context and not with the rose-colored glasses of a rabid liberal.

In regard to the school lunch box inspection, people will choose the foods they eat as personal choice, e.g. diverse ethnic and regional backgrounds which play a big part in what individuals prefer to consume. Obama does want control of every facet of American life just as Castro, Chavez, Mao Tse Tung, his big idol, and even Joseph Stalin. If this isn’t a major branch of the Socialist tree that has its roots in Marxism, then what is?

As far as his infringement on the Catholic Church in an attempt to force them to provide birth control paid by offerings of parishioners, it is an absolute violation of their religious beliefs. By the way, I am a Baptist, not a Catholic. Anthony, have you not read the papers, watched TV, or listened to the radio news? All this talk is nothing but a smoke screen or truly veiled façade to hide his failing economic practice.

Yes, he did succeed in everything that he attempted much to the detriment of the American people. Stimulus packages were not to stimulate the economy but were to siphon off money for the bonuses of executives in failing businesses. Since when does failure deserve a bonus? What else did he do? His ObamaCare will bankrupt America and was passed with bribes, threats, arm twisting and backroom deals. Nancy Pelosi: “Let’s pass it so we can see what’s in it.” If that isn’t buying a pig in a poke, what is?
He inserted government control over the auto industry as a true diehard Socialist leader would. Again, all this to the detriment of the American people.

How can Barbara Skokan be in the one percent when Obama’s approval ratings are below 50 percent? Any Republican candidate has higher and ethical standards than Obama, who has had only a very brief term in the Senate. Before that he was a ward healer and community activist, which means why work when you can get over on the system?

It took his wife, Michelle Obama, decades before she would proclaim she was proud to be an American — only after Barack got into office. Was she the best and brightest or was she one of those who met an affirmative action quota?

The tools he has given us are food stamps, welfare, government handouts and dependency on big government. Is this something we can hold onto, to make our children secure for the future? Whatever happened to independent self-sufficiency when one strives to be better doing it themselves?

Finish it: http://www.mycentraljersey.com/artic...y-way-possible

1100 + views. NICE.

Why Do Liberals Hate Capitalism?

Is anyone but me sick of the hypocrisy yet? I checked out an article on CNN that had Jeb Bush saying:

“I think President Obama has used the bully pulpit as a way to attack capitalism.”
Of course immediately the Marxist, Communist and Liberal responders bashed Bush and his brother George W. Which in actuality they are partially correct. President Bush was no friend to the economy or our government. But while they have such fascinating vitriol to spew against GW, they can’t spare the same passion against President Obama. And why is that?

President Obama is socializing great swaths of America. Apparently it was egregious when Bush was doing it but now that YOUR guy is socializing the country, why that is fine and dandy.

Nothing about American politics is civil anymore. The views expressed on blogs is mean-spirited, un-American and mostly pathetic.

One guy, code named “Rob”,commented on CNN that:

“I’ll take Socialism under Obama over corporate GREED under a Bush ANY DAY!”
Really? Funny how so many people are hopping in tiny boats to make their way ashore illegally to this country for their freedom yet you never hear of Socialists and Marxists like “Rob” hopping a life raft over to Cuba or down to Venezuela. Have you ever studied Socialism? Lots and lots of people have been killed, tortured and imprisoned under Socialist regimes. But you’ll take that huh “Rob”? Do you really want Obama to tell you what you can drive, what TV channels you can watch, the Internet pages that can be viewed, what health insurance you can have, how much electricity you can use, etc.? That is what Obama Socialism looks like with Cash for Clunkers, Net Neutrality, Fairness Doctrine, Cap and Trade and ObamaCare. Have at it. I don’t want nothing to do with it and will fight against it.

I don’t care about Jeb Bush any more than I care about Obama, Speaker Pelosi or any of the other nutty as hell “leaders” we have in our government. They ALL suck. Republican or Democrat, it doesn’t matter. They are destroying the liberties and freedoms that some, apparently fewer and fewer, love about America.

I do not understand at all how people can trust the government. I do not understand why people are insistent on government handouts. Anybody feel like making an honest living anymore? No, let’s just line up and get ourselves some Obama money. Right Detroit?

There are some very interesting political races that are being contested next week. It appears that it is a foregone conclusion the Republican will win the Virginia governorship. Surprisingly in New Jersey the Republican has a chance against the Democrat. I can’t imagine a liberal tax and spend state like NJ voting in a Republican but the tide has turned very quick against Democrats across this country. It could happen. Then there is the potential paradigm shift in NJ-23 where a third party, true conservative, could win against a Republican and Democrat. That is the game changer in my book.

The media and our politicians, especially Republicans, do not get that the a large majority of people believe in principles, family values, Constitutional adherence, limited government and low taxes. The vast majority of the ruling class in Congress do not believe in the ideals. Republicans or Democrats. The poeple attending the Tea Parties could care less about the two party system. They do not believe in them anymore. That is why Doug Hoffman has a shot at winning a House seat from New York. He has the principles that people have been protesting for over the last year.

Peggy Noonan wrote a great column in the Wall Street Journal where she opines that the problem this country has right now is that people are disheartened:

What to know what Peggy wrote? http://lipskip.com/why-do-liberals-hate-capitalism/

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505125_1...-very-rapidly/



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1378213.html

Paul Volcker sounded off on critics of President Obama in an interview with CBS's Anthony Mason.

Asked whether he agrees with accusations that the president is waging class warfare by pushing for Wall Street reforms and higher taxes for the rich, Volcker said, "I don't understand the depth of that feeling. I really don't. This business that he's a great socialist and out to undermine the free enterprise system and so forth, I just think it has no connection with reality."

He balked at the notion that Obama could have taken office without going after the banks.

"How could you have a President of the United States taking office in the midst of a financial crisis and a deep recession and not be critical of the financial system? He would have been deaf, dumb and blind," he said.

Volcker, former Chairman of the Federal Reserve and Obama adviser, is the namesake for "the Volcker Rule," a major provision in the Wall Street reforms that could take effect as early as this July.

Though Obama has been critical of Wall Street, a survey from the end of last year found that he had approved fewer regulations than President Bush had at the same point in his presidency.

As HuffPost's Jen Bendery reports, Wall Street executives actually thrive under President Obama. Still, most major Wall Street donations are heading to Mitt Romney, who is perceived as much friendlier to banks.



Volcker: Wall St. changing, but not very rapidly

Former Chairman of the Federal Reserve Paul Volcker. (CBS)
Paul Volcker was the Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board from 1979 to 1987, and he's been an advisor to President Obama. With America's economy still unsettled, Chairman Volcker sat down just a few days ago with Anthony Mason for a Q&A:

In his office in New York's Rockefeller Center, Paul Volcker fills the hallway. He is a towering figure, both in height (he is 6'8") and in reputation. He spent eight years as Chairman of the Federal Reserve.

And these days he is casting a giant shadow over Wall Street.

He says he believes the culture on Wall Street has to change.

In the aftermath of the financial crisis, Volcker has led an outspoken campaign to curb greed and speculation. His concern, he says, is for the health of the banking system.

For nearly two years, the 84-year-old economist chaired President Obama's Economic Recovery Advisory Board, helping to shape the president's banking reforms.

In January 2010, Mr. Obama urged Congress to enact "a simple and common sense reform, which we're calling the Volcker Rule, after this tall guy behind me."

The draft of the president's speech had not included Volcker's name.

"I was absolutely surprised," Volcker said. "I knew nothing about it until the words came out of his mouth."

"How do you feel about having your name on part of this?" Mason asked.

"It's partly fun, partly an annoyance," he said.

The "Volcker Rule," which goes into effect in July, will prevent banks from making speculative bets that could put both themselves and taxpayers at risk.

"I think part of the problem is that that kind of mentality, trading mentality with very high incomes, distorted the culture of traditional banking," Volcker said. "It got out of hand."

He believes soaring salaries and bonuses encouraged bankers to make more risky trades.

"Do you think that's changing?" Mason asked.

"Changing, but not very rapidly," Volcker said. "There's a lot of resistance, for obvious reasons."

Volcker knows about resistance. When he headed the Fed during the Carter and Reagan presidencies, Volcker pushed interest rates above 20 percent to conquer inflation. He succeeded, but he had to take the country into recession to do it.



Keep reading by clicking on link

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505125_1...-very-rapidly/


PAUL VOLCKER IS NOW CONSIDERED A "LEFT-WING" DOGMATIST by this individual.

Absolutely hilarious. Off the charts WACKO. CLearly an individual ignorant of Paul Volcker.

Blah, blah, blah................... More extreme left wing dogma.

‘Socialists.com’ Yields a Presidential Result

March 26, 2012, 1:08 am
By MATT FLEGENHEIMER New York Times

The evidence is unmistakable, the president’s opponents say. Type “socialists.com” into your Web browser. Press “enter.” And behold the smiling face of President Obama, greeting visitors to his campaign Web site.

A trip to communists.com yields the same result.

“Not surprised!” one woman from Charlotte wrote on Twitter.

“Creepy,” said another user, who alerted @rushlimbaugh to the oddity. “Proof Obama is a communist.”

“Seems like bad campaign policy,” ruled a third.

It was unclear who purchased the domain names to engineer this bit of not-so-subliminal messaging — in the apparent hope of fueling a belief among some conservatives that Mr. Obama is a socialist or communist.

Those hoping to access information on socialism in earnest are better served at socialists.net, which bills itself as “the home of Marxism-De Leonism” and the official Internet hub of the Socialist Labor Party of America.

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2...ss&emc=rss

Accepted dogma.

By Michael Dobbs
10/27/2008
The Washington Post

"In a previously uncovered interview from September 6, 2001, Barack Obama expressed his regret that the Supreme Court hadn't been more 'radical' and described as a 'tragedy' the Court's refusal to take up 'the issues of redistribution of wealth.' No wonder he wants to appoint judges that legislate from the bench."
--McCain economics adviser Douglas Holtz-Eakin

With just over a week to go until the election, the McCain campaign is stepping up its efforts to portray Barack Obama as a closet "socialist" bent on implementing a major redistribution of wealth in American society. The Illinois Democrat's remarks to "Joe the Plumber" on "spreading the wealth around" are Exhibit A in the Son of Karl Marx argument. Exhibit B is a newly-discovered interview that Obama gave to a Chicago public radio station back in 2001 in which he mentioned the R-word several times in a generally positive context.

Did Obama really say what the McCain camp says he said?

The Facts

"Obama Bombshell Audio Uncovered. He wants to Radically Reinterpret the Constitution to Redistribute Wealth!!" runs the YouTube headline from the conservative video blog Naked Emperor News. "This video exposes the radical beneath the rhetoric."

On closer inspection, the "bombshell audio" turns out to be a rather wonkish, somewhat impenetrable, discussion of the Supreme Court under Earl Warren. Obama, then a University of Chicago law professor and Illinois state senator, argued that the courts have traditionally been reluctant to get involved in income distribution questions. He suggested that the civil rights movement had made a mistake in expecting too much from the courts -- and that such issues were better decided by the legislative branch of government.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/fac..._bombshel.html

What is the most powerful entity in the US? The US Government. Kudos to the liberals for understanding that the power of government is basically unabated. They use this ultimate power to mandate and dictate their agenda to free people (many of which don't want it). The Founders feared this abuse. They knew the power of government. They tried to build the USA to manage this. It was a huge issue in getting the Constitution ratified. In liberal ideology, we are United America (phuck the States, they don't have an Army, their own currency....)