Posts Tagged ‘Marxism’

Government Education: Please Write ‘There Is No God But Allah’ And Wear This Hijab While You’re At It. Pardon Us While We Ban Your Christianity.

December 31, 2015

This is an amazing world under our demon-possessed president:.

I want you to carefully notice that this is NOT some accident where a “teacher” (read “Obama government propaganda expert”) hastily went online and googled “Arabic sentence” and inadvertently ended up with the WORST SENTENCE IN ISLAM.  No, the form specifically points out “Here is the shahada, the Islamic statement of faith, written in Arabic.”

Please write “There is no god but Allah.  Mohammad is the messenger of Allah.”  And we’re going to grade you on how well you do it.  Just don’t you DARE ask for a Bible.”

Public School Students Told to Practice Calligraphy by Writing ‘There is No God but Allah’
By PJ Media December 16, 2015

Students at Riverheads High School in Greenville, Virginia, were told to practice calligraphy by writing out the statement “There is no god but Allah. Muhammad is the messenger of Allah.” The assignment was given by classroom teacher Cheri Laporte.

Riverbends-High-Header-600

That statement is known as the Muslim statement of faith or the shahada.  The school district defended the assignment last week when it met with outraged parents.

“Neither these lessons, nor any other lesson in the world geography course, are an attempt at indoctrination to Islam or any other religion, or a request for students to renounce their own faith or profess any belief,” the district said in a statement provided to Fox News.

Parents told The Schilling Show that their children were not given the translation of what they were writing.

Riverheads High School Principal, Max Lowe, did not directly acknowledge an inquiry requesting confirmation of the incident, clarification of policy, and disciplinary measures, if any, taken against Ms. Laporte.

The school district defended the assignment.

“The statement presented as an example of the calligraphy was not translated for students, nor were students asked to translate it, recite it or otherwise adopt or pronounce it as a personal belief,” the district stated.  “They were simply asked to attempt to artistically render written Arabic in order to understand its artistic complexity.”

Further, the district said the assignment was “consistent with the Virginia Department of Education Standards of Learning and the requirements for content instruction on world monotheistic religions.”

But parents say that other religions were not represented. Parents told The Schilling Show that “the Koran was presented to students, the Bible was not. The teacher reportedly declined to provide a Bible because all the students have either read or seen a Bible.”

Female students were also encouraged to wear a hijab, it was reported.

Now, while you kiddies are practicing your taking of the oath that there IS no god but Allah and Mohammad is his Prophet with your hijabs denoting your submission to Allah, please don’t mind us as Obama takes away ANY reference to Jesus Christ or the Holy Bible.

Meanwhile, the Obama commisars at another Obama government indoctrination center censored all biblical references from a “public school” CHARLIE BROWN/PEANUTS play.  I mean, shoot, you can’t have that: Allah doesn’t like it at all and neither does his modern prophet Obama.

Meanwhile, in yet another Obama government indoctrination center, a public high school football coach was suspended for praying.  For praying SILENTLY.  The Obama government indoctrination center – also known as a “public school” – banned prayer.  They not only banned prayer, but they officially sent “a letter banning private prayer.”  That’s right: PRIVATE PRAYER.  Because don’t you kid yourself, the Obama officials KNEW he wasn’t praying to a politically correct god.

It’s really for the kids’ own good.  Because if they keep their Christian faith, they will be flunked by liberal university professors.

I simply declare as a matter of factual historical record that my title is completely true.  No Bibles for anyone, girls put on your hijab, and join with me as we all recite the shahada which is the heart of religious Islam.  It’s an amazing thing.  And it’s going to take a while to explain why liberals are doing this.

Conservatives have been pointing out the rabid fascist fanaticism developing within our ivory towers for DECADES.  But the rot has “fundamentally transformed” beyond mere cancer and is now a viral culture-killing contagion.  I can show you Harvard’s newspaper openly calling to the banning and destruction of the 1st Amendment.  I can show you rank-and-file Yale students only too happy to end microagressions and preserve “safe spaces” by abolishing the 1st Amendment and the Constitution of the United States of America that was based on liberty and freedom.

Free speech has been abolished on liberal university campuses across the United States.  And I can document that just as easily in liberal newspapers such as the Washington Post or the Los Angeles Times as I can the Wall Street Journal:

UC’s new ‘Principles Against Intolerance’ fail free-speech test

University of California considering recognizing a “right” to be “free from … expressions of intolerance”

Intolerance of intolerance: Students are ever quicker to label offensive material as hate speech

Tolerance, Free Speech Collide on Campus: A philosophical divide is at the heart of recent protests that have roiled campuses around the country

Liberals are wicked-evil-depraved-immoral people and their way is ultimately the way of Stalinism.  Which is why they literally don’t mind the Islamists who harbor the same cherished goal: a totalitarian all-powerful State.  Which is why I can take you back to 2007 when “San Francisco State University put its chapter of the College Republicans on trial for desecrating the name of Allah.”

Which only serves to show you the left’s embrace of Islam is hardly anything new.

We have entered a time when history repeats itself, with the hell of ideas that resulted in the Marxists who swiftly became the Stalinists and the Nazis who swiftly created the Holocaust emerged from ivory tower academia.  Because ideas have CONSEQUENCES.  And just as in the past, we look to our now-rabidly fascist academia system and we see the most profound tolerance to competing ideas and free speech in general every bit as bad as the Islamic State fanatics.  Former Rhodes scholar and current professor emeritus of history at University of Toronto Scarborough Modris Ecksteins – who specializes in German history and modern culture – described Nazism thus: “Nazism was a popular variant of many of the impulses of the avant-garde.  It expressed on a more popular level many of the same tendencies and posited many of the same solutions that the avant-garde did on the level of ‘high art.'” [Rights of Spring: The Great War and the Birth of the Modern Age, p. 311]

Rights of Spring is an interest title because it points to what was THE birth of the movement known as “modernism” that the left embraced before they abandoned it in favor of the even MORE destructive philosophical view of Postmodernism that I previously described at length (How Postmodernism Leads To Fascism (part 1); How Postmodernism Leads To Fascism (part 2); How Postmodernism Leads To Fascism (part 3)).  In 1913, Igor Stravinsky created a ballet he titled “The Rites of Spring.”  Rather than the traditional (i.e. conservative) graceful, stylized music and dance of the ages, Stravinsky conducted an atonal, harsh music to which his dancers moved in a ritualistic but passionate way filled with spinning and thrashing.  The idea was to portray a primitive people who had nothing to do with the “shackles” of Judeo-Christianity, who as passionate environmentalists were at one with nature and celebrating the coming of spring.  The ballet culminated in human sacrifice.  You know, like every single abortion does.

The spirit of fascism arose out of a disenchantment culminating in a rabid rejection of the traditional, Judeo-Christian worldview.  It purported itself to be both refreshingly new and yet ancient at the same time, a return to a time before factories and oil companies and global warming, in other words.  The fascists, just like their Modernist counterparts, demonized the existing Judeo-Christian civilization and proposed revolutionary new structures and values in its place.  These people were not at all interested in the discovery of truth, but the creation of “truth” through the imposition of bureaucratic (e.g. the universities) and government power.

I want you to understand something before I move on: the spirit of Postmodernism – which is the philosophical underpinning of fascism – DOMINATES the Democrat Party.  I PREDICTED the violent Occupy Movement and the 7,775 arrests these violent liberal “demonstrators” have been handed in those articles on postmodernism that I wrote in 2008.  Consider the leftist Occupy Movement and what they did and how they actedVersus ZERO arrests for the Tea Party that was nevertheless thoroughly demonized by the leftist propaganda machine a.k.a. the mainstream media.  And now we’ve got the vicious Black Lives Matter “protests” that has resulted in police afraid to do their jobs protecting the public while “demonstrators” chant pure evil such as “Pigs in a blanket, fry ’em like bacon” and the chant from Obama’s pal Al Sharpton during his march: “What do we want? DEAD COPS! When do we want it? NOW!”

I want you to understand that back in 2008, I was pointing out that, just like the godless, Holocaust, ideas have consequences.  Liberalism and now the entire Democrat Party is pathologically secular humanist, atheistic, postmodernist, existentialist, deconstructionist, you name it.  And we are seeing the incredibly ugly consequences beginning to emerge.  Jonah Goldberg expressed this fact very powerfully in his great book, Modern Fascism:

For more than sixty years, liberals have insisted that the bacillus of fascism lies semi-dormant in the bloodstream of the political right.  And yet with the notable exception and complicated exceptions of Leo Strauss and Allan Bloom, no top-tier American conservative intellectual was a devotee if Nietzsche or a serious admirer of Heidegger.  All major conservative schools of thought trace themselves back to the champions of the Enlightenment – John Locke, Adam Smith, Montesquieu, Burke – and none of them have any direct intellectual link to Nazism or Nietzsche, to existentialism, nihilism, or even, for the most part, Pragmatism.  Meanwhile, the ranks of left-wing intellectuals are infested with ideas and thinkers squarely in the fascist tradition.  And yet all it takes is the abracadabra word “Marxist” to absolve most of them of any affinity with these currents.  The rest get off the hook merely by attacking bourgeois morality and American values – even though such attacks are themselves little better than a reprise of fascist arguments.

In a seminar there may be important distinctions to be made between, say, Foucault’s “enterprise of Unreason,” Derrida’s tyrannical logocentrism, and Hitler’s “revolt against reason.”  But such distinctions rarely translate beyond ivy-covered walls – and they are particularly meaningless to a movement that believes action is more important than ideas.  Deconstruction, existentialism, postmodernism, Pragmatism, relativism: all of these ideas had the same purpose – to erode the iron chains of tradition, dissolve the concrete foundations of truth, and firebomb the bunkers where the defenders of the ancien regime still fought and persevered.  These were ideologies of the “movement.”  The late Richard Rorty admitted as much conflating Nietzsche and Heidegger with James and Dewey as part of the same grand project. — Goldberg, Modern Fascism, pp. 175-176

I cited those paragraphs in another article I wrote armed with abundant evidence well over a year ago.  We are literally watching the rebirth of Nazism in the Democrat Party.  The only thing different now is that in the 1930s it was Aryan white people using racism against other people and now its the racist liberal race coalition that is using the same tactics against white people.

We talk about political correctness and many people – including those who claim to be opposed to it – have an incredibly cavalier attitude toward it.  It is incredibly dangerous and it is performing exactly as those who created intended.  Being politically correct is not just an attempt to make liberals feel better.  It is a very large, very sophisticated, very coordinated effort to change Western culture as we know it by  redefining it. Early Marxists designed their game plan long ago and the same leftists continue to execute that plan today: to control the argument by controlling the “acceptable” language.  If you use the wrong words or phraseology today, you won’t just get corrected or even screamed at; you’ll lose your job and be ruined.  Those with radical agendas understand the game plan and are taking advantage of an oversensitive, overly gullible, and frankly amoral public.

I’ve got news for you, liberal: Nazism was born out of YOUR vile mindset, not conservatism.  It was the same damn leftist artsy-fartsy elitist avant-garders in Germany doing the same damn things the same leftist artsy-fartsy elitist avant-garders are doing today in this country.

That’s why we see the same damn thing today that we saw as Nazism rose: Then as now, those who attacked democracy, ridiculed morality and celebrated violence did so in highly sophisticated ways that ultimately boiled down to “ends justify the means” arguments that are embraced by the same thug-socialists mobs who pushed Germany into Nazism.  You look at the Occupy Movement and its violent rights-abusive “occupations.”  You look now at Black Lives Matter.  And see how they openly violate other people’s free speech and other people’s rights on the SAME DAMN ARGUMENTS that we have seen before.  It was white Aryans doing it in Nazi Germany; it is black liberals doing it now.  Same abusive tactics, different screaming faces.  Just imagine the Nazis who couldn’t acknowledge that “all lives matter” because of course some of those lives were Jewish lives.  These people are DEHUMANISTS.  It’s the inevitable product that comes from the ideology responsible for the murder of sixty million innocent human beings in the abortion mills and then selling their body parts like meat at a deli.

Which again is why I can readily display the nexus between Islamic State and the American Democrat Party as BOTH are personally and morally vested in the trafficking of HUMAN BODY PARTS as the consequence of an innocent human being’s life being brutally ended by depraved people who will all one day scream in hell for what they did to human dignity.

IF you cite the Bible, you can ONLY do so as a pretense to bring in Muslims whom we CANNOT screen for terrorist connections from terrorist-ridden Syria.  Because at the core of liberalism is 1) gargantuan hypocrisy and 2) a vacuum of any legitimate transcendent values that they could actually refer to as grounds for their depraved views.

Any prayer in the name of Jesus makes the demons that inhabit Democrats’ crawl.  It is apparently an unpleasant feeling that Democrats cannot tolerate for long unless they stop that prayer.

What is funny is how liberalism is akin to a cockroach that devours her young.  Blacks, Hispanics, feminists, homosexuals, etc. think they are going to benefit from the rise of progressive liberalism (i.e., fascism), but they will ultimately be dismayed when the whip cracks down on them the way they are helping to crack the whip on Christians and conservatives and white men.  The negativism, iconoclasm, race-polarizing, divisiveness that characterizes todays special interest leftist groups to attack the established order, but just you wait until the left becomes the firmly entrenched order because suddenly any new complaint from you will be subversive to their order.  That’s exactly what happened to homosexuals as the Third Reich arose: Hitler rose to power on the homosexual-driven SA.  But when he no longer needed them and they became an obstacle to his greater rise, he ruthlessly crushed them.  And homosexuals perished in the very death camps they had helped to create.  It’s going to happen to you, too, rank-and-file liberal turd.  Because if you truly believe a Barack Obama or a Hillary Clinton give one damn about you, you are a true fool.  You are truly a means to their ends.

And when that day comes, you will have no Judeo-Christian transcendent values to appeal to – because YOU ARE THE ONES WHO DESTROYED THOSE VALUES.

But a far more awful fate ultimately awaits you:

When you’re screaming in hell for all of eternity, Democrat, just please realize that you truly deserve to be there.  YOU did all these things that unleashed hell on earth.  Your voting record caused all this wickedness to happen.  You are personally to blame and you WILL ultimately be held to account.

The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse of Revelation chapter six are coming.  Any wise person can hear their approaching hoofbeats as I write these words.  They’re not coming for me, liberal, because Jesus is going to return to take me to be with Him at the Rapture of believers.  No, the Four Horsemen and the Antichrist you will soon be cheering for and worshiping are coming for YOU.  Pretty soon you’re going to get EVERYTHING you voted for; because you voted for hell and hell is coming for you first in this world, and ultimately in the world to come.

 

Advertisements

Progressive Liberals Are The Pharisees And Sadducees Of Modernity In America

January 16, 2013

Liberals love to castigate conservatives by labels such as “fascist” and “pharisiacal.”  But in both cases, they are actually looking into a mirror when they point their finger and hurl out that label.

First, allow me to make a very important distinction between “progressive liberalism” and “classical liberalism.”

Here is classical liberalism:

Classical liberalism is a political ideology, a branch of liberalism which advocates civil liberties and political freedom with limited government under the rule of law and generally promotes a laissez-faire economic policy.[1][2][3]

Classical liberalism developed in the 19th century in Europe and the United States. Although classical liberalism built on ideas that had already arisen by the end of the 18th century, it advocated a specific kind of society, government and public policy as a response to the Industrial Revolution and urbanization.[4] Notable individuals whose ideas have contributed to classical liberalism include John Locke,[5] Jean-Baptiste Say, Thomas Malthus, and David Ricardo. It drew on the free-market economics of Adam Smith and on a belief in natural law,[6] utilitarianism,[7] and progress.[8]

The term classical liberalism was applied in retrospect to distinguish earlier 19th-century liberalism from the newer social liberalism.[9]

With that understanding, the fact of the matter is that conservatives are the inheritors of classical liberalism.  We are the ones who want limited government under the rule of law with a laissez-faire economic policy.  The progressive liberals who dominate today are the “social liberals” whom we can now accurately call “socialist liberals.”

Liberalism is good in the classical sense; it is truly evil in the socialist sense.

I have many times asked liberal Democrats to explain how they disavow Karl Marx’s central defining statement of economic Marxism: “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.”  To this day I have never received a response.

But I understand that our liberals are not honest people and will not wear the label “socialist” no matter how much it applies to them and to their purpose in establishing a giant totalitarian government that increasingly centrally plans the economy.  So I’ll call them “progressive liberals” instead.

The word “progressive” helps us understand Obama’s prophecy that his administration would “fundamentally transform America.”  That’s what they want: to reshape America not in the founding fathers’ image, but in their own self-image.

I have described liberals as trying to establish “Government as God.”   It is also called “statism.”  Here’s another way to put it: Who is your Savior? Do you turn to the God of the Bible – Who actually rather specifically warned man against big government – to provide to you?  Or do you want to turn to your government to meet your needs?  Our coins say, “In God we trust,” and progressive liberals have been trying to stomp that nonsense out for decades.  Because they trust in human government, not in God.

Here let me again cite Karl Marx.  In one of his most famous statements, after first stating that man invented religion, Marx said:

“Religion is … the opium of the people.  The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is the demand for their real happiness. To call on them to give up their illusions about their condition is to call on them to give up a condition that requires illusions.”

Aside from the obvious fact that it is the Democrat Party who removed God from their party’s platform and cynically and frankly illegitimately put Him back in to a loud chorus of boos by the Democratic National Convention, aside from the fact that it is the Democrat Party that is at open war with religious freedom in America today, what did Karl Marx mean by this statement?

Basically, Marx taught that the world is divided into the economic haves and the economic have-nots – which is everywhere being shouted around us today by the Democrat Party and by progressive liberals who energize that party.  And the have-nots were being oppressed by the haves, in both Marx’s and Democrats’ understanding.  But rather than the people rising up in rage and taking what is theirs by force as Marx wanted them to, they were happy in their religion, which had been invented by the rich to keep the proletariat in bondage.  Since religion is an illusion, and materialism is all there actually is, the happiness that the people had in their Christianity was nothing more than a narcotic that kept them in bondage.  The only “real” reality is economic reality.  And therefore the solution presented by Marx was for the people to set aside their shackles of religion and rise up in a spirit of rage and take what was theirs by force.  Only then could the people have actual, “material” happiness.

And how is the Democrat Party today not arguing the same damn case that Marx made?

As we shall see, this is important.  Marx’s anti-God message has been supplanted by a cynical Democrat Party who has replaced God with a flagrantly anti-God ideology (e.g., homosexual marriage and abortion) while dishonestly refusing to acknowledge that they did so.

The message of Barack Obama and the modern Democrat Party is not the message of Jesus Christ, who most assuredly did not come to earth to either make Caesar’s government larger or to replace him with another version of big human government totalitarian tyranny.  The message of the former is that the poor should be angry and rise up to seize what is rightfully there’s either by vote or by force; the message of the latter was for the poor to be cheerful and content in the God Who watched over them and to trust in Him for His provision.

It’s interesting what does not happen when Jesus says, “Show me a coin.”  What Jesus does NOT say is that giving to Caesar (human government) is the same thing as giving to God.  Jesus makes a very clear contrast between the two.  Which do you want to empower?  Which do you want to give to?  Giant totalitarian human government, or God?  I want to give more to God; liberals want to stop me and force me instead to give more to government.

So why do I call the progressive liberals the “Pharisees and Sadducees” of modern America?

Well, first understand who the Pharisees and Sadducees were.  The Sadducees were the secular branch of Judaism.  They did not believe in a resurrection or an afterlife; they were the closest things to secular humanists or atheists in their day.  And thanks to the Romans the Sadducees largely controlled the lucrative Temple and the money and political clout that went along with it.  The Pharisees were a group who had the people behind them because they were the champions of the Law.  And yet they were no longer using the Law of Moses as their guide; they had long since turned to the Mishnah, which they considered “a hedge around the Law.”

Basically, the Pharisees piled laws on top of laws on the backs of the people that had nothing to do with the Word of God.  That’s what Jesus rails on them for in Matthew 23.  When I hear Jesus say, “They tie up heavy burdens and lay them on men’s shoulders, but they themselves are unwilling to move them with so much as a finger,” I think of Barack Obama taking away guns from parents’ while his own family will be safely protected by men with guns for their entire lives.  I think of the liberals like Obama’s Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner who put people in prison for not paying their taxes when he himself was a tax cheat.  I think of Jesus’ takedown of the most vile human beings in the world of His day – government-power-seeking thugs who used the law to exploit and burden the people – and I think of the Democrat Party and the stubborn ass that is its symbol.

If you broke the laws as handed down by the Pharisees and Sadducees, you were punished by the system.  With the full weight of the government backing that system.

Which is the same thing the progressive liberals who run the Temple of big government do.  They burden the people with taxes and regulations and laws and tell the people that thinking like them is the only way to be a good person.

Pharisees and Sadducees had different agendas, but John the Baptist said they were both the same in their hostility to God and called them both “a brood of vipers” (Matthew 3:7).  Jesus also lumped them together (Matthew 5:17).  Both exploited the Law to get what they wanted and to burden and oppress those whom they wanted to burden and oppress.

In Jesus’ day, when you talked about “the law” it connoted the religious laws.  But our progressive liberals today talk about the law, the law the law every bit as much with every bit as much of an intent to impose their will on the people they are determined to dominate and rule over.  I can assure you that there are a LOT more laws that have been erected in the United States than there ever were in the Mishnah – as burdensome and unjust as that was.

Democrats are the Pharisees and the Sadducees of American culture today.  They are the priests of big government who demand more and more control the laws and by controlling the laws they exploit and burden the American people.  They erect more and more and more onerous and burdensome and loathsome laws and force us to abide by them or be punished.

By the way, Jesus did a lot of denouncing of the scribes, too.  Who were they?  They were the lawyers of the day.

Just look at which party the lawyers of our day support and which party has a buttload of system-manipulating lawyers, and my case is made complete.

The scribes, Pharisees and Sadducees murdered Jesus in his day.  They are murdering America in our own.

United Nation’s Global Tax, Amazing Liberal Hypocrisy And The Frightening Reality Of How Truly DANGEROUS Obama’s Policies Are To America’s Poor

October 2, 2012

Ask your liberal friends to finish this sentence: “If the rich get richer, the poor get ______.”

Betcha a dollar your liberal will reflexively say, “poorer.”

The problem is that that is simply not true.  Unless an economy is a fixed sized pie such that if you get more of the pie, I by definition get less.  And as I shall try to explain, that is NOT the way a free market economy works.

The reality that liberals are too morally stupid to understand is that if I start a business, I start making my OWN pie.  By starting a business and becoming successful, I’m not stealing from anyone and I’m not exploiting anybody; rather, in direct opposition to what Barack Obama and Elizabeth Warren – the brains behind Obama’s Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to go along with a genuine fake American Indian (read, “fake oppressed minority = fake victim”) believe – I AM BUILDING SOMETHING if I create a business.  And no, you liberal dumbass, I am NOT stealing from somebody else; I am building something where there had been nothing before.  I am putting a positive attitude that you have never had and will never understand into action and I am starting something.

That’s right. I said the “A” word, liberals.  I said ATTITUDE:

“The longer I live, the more I realize the impact of attitude on life. Attitude, to me, is more important than facts. It is more important than the past, the education, the money, than circumstances, than failure, than successes, than what other people think or say or do. It is more important than appearance, giftedness or skill. It will make or break a company… a church… a home. The remarkable thing is we have a choice everyday regarding the attitude we will embrace for that day. We cannot change our past… we cannot change the fact that people will act in a certain way. We cannot change the inevitable. The only thing we can do is play on the one string we have, and that is our attitude. I am convinced that life is 10% what happens to me and 90% of how I react to it. And so it is with you… we are in charge of our Attitudes.”  — Charles R. Swindoll

That 10% versus 90% is particularly relevant with Obama, who has the tiny little insect testicles to say he’s ninety damn percent not to blame for his insane and frankly demonic government spending.  When like everything else the man thinks he’s completely back assward.

That’s right, liberal.  Nobody’s taken anything from you; nobody’s oppressed you; and the only reason that you’re a victim is because you have spent your life victimizing YOURSELF and allowing your messiah Obama and liberals like him to talk you into being a weak, useless human being.  If you have the kind of positive attitude that Swindoll is describing, nothing is going to hold you down or hold you back – and the LAST thing you’re ever going to do is start whining like a liberal victim who is pathetic and cannot do anything unless government does it for you.

Here’s the thing: I’d love it if somebody asked Obama to complete that sentence I began with: If the become richer, the poor become ______.  And after the Marxist said “poorer,” I’d ask him what he thinks Americans should do given the fact THAT AMERICANS HAVE ABOUT THE WEALTHIEST DAMN LIFESTYLE ON THE PLANET.  I would demand that Obama explain on his view why Americans should redistribute trillions of dollars of American gross domestic product so that the desperately poor people in Africa and China and India and the Middle East and pretty much all over the damn planet could have more.

Here’s the thing. “If the rich get richer, the poor get poorer” the way liberals will invariably say, then what about the question, “If America gets richer, the rest of the world gets ______”???  How would the answer not be the same???  If America gets richer, then by liberal doctrine the rest of the world – particularly the poorest regions of the world – must necessarily get poorer.

Go to the Congo, where the GDP per capital is just $348.  That means the average person is forced to live (“subsist” is probably more fitting) on the currency equivalent of just 348 dollars per year.  That’s 29 bucks a month total.  That’s living the good life on 95 cents a day.  These people have NOTHING.  They don’t have houses; they have tiny little shacks that they build from whatever they can find; they don’t have air conditioning or refrigerators or laundry machines or for that matter electricity or plumbing.  Their kids don’t have disposable diapers.  Because they’ve never tried the free market economics or limited government you liberals despise, they’ve got squat diddly butkus and they’ll never have anything BUT squat diddly butkus.  And so hey, liberal poor person, unless you’ve never had more than $348 of welfare benefits or permanent unemployment benefits or allowance from daddy or however the hell you get your money and benefits in the course of a year, YOU DAMN WELL OWE THAT TRULY POOR SONOFABITCH IN THE CONGO.   And by your own rhetoric if you don’t send pretty much everything you get to the Congo, to Liberia, etc. etc. etc., then you are a greedy one percenter and shame on you.  You owe those poor people every single SCINTILLA as much as the rich guy in America owes YOU.  And what you know if you’ve ever had an honest moment in your entire life is that you keep demanding somebody ELSE give to YOU but YOU’VE never given people who’d rejoice on a tiny fraction of what you’ve got SQUAT.

I’m talking to you, resident of Detroit’s poorest neighborhood.  Because if you aint nearly starved to death you’ve got it FAR better than most of the population of the planet have it.  And it’s damn time you quit reaching your hand out and being a liberal TAKER and instead putting it in your wallet and becoming a liberal GIVER.

I’m talking to you, you damn liberal socialist hypocrites.  All you know how to do is justify redistribution when it applies to YOU or, in the case of liberal politicians, when it applies to your constituency as you pimp somebody else’s money in exchange for your damn votes so you can live like a fat cat like Charlie Rangel.

So a truly consistent liberal must therefore need to require America to lose wealth so the rest of the world can get richer instead.

So what’s Obama’s answer to the United Nations imposing a global tax?  Is Obama going to say he’s against the people of the Congo getting richer?  Then how DARE he allow America to produce more wealth?!?!?  What’s YOUR answer for why YOU shouldn’t have to pay right out of your ass because if you live in America, then compared to the majority of people on earth, you are a greedy one percenter compared to them???

The UN says America should pay a tax:

Global Taxes Are Back, Watch Your Wallet

Like a bad sequel to a rotten horror movie, the debate over global taxation once again is rearing its ugly head — courtesy of the United Nations. And, despite lacking the requisite hockey mask and chain saw, the seemingly countless proposals for the imposition of global taxes are truly terrifying.

In July, Inter Presse news service reported that a top U.N. official was preparing a new study that will outline numerous global tax proposals to be considered by the General Assembly at its September meeting. The proposals will likely include everything from global taxes on e-mails and Internet use to a global gas tax and levies on airline travel. If adopted, American taxpayers could wind up paying hundreds of billions of dollars each year to the United Nations.

U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan is among those leading the charge, having stated that he “strongly supports finding new sources of funding” for the U.N. through global taxes, according to Inter Presse. In fact, Annan made very clear his support for the imposition of global taxes in a 2001 Technical Note that he authored for a U.N. conference. “The need to finance the provision of global public goods in an increasingly globalized world also adds new urgency to the need for innovative new sources of financing,” Annan wrote. The Note goes on to describe and evaluate the merits of several global tax proposals.

Global tax proposals are not new. Various plans have been flitting around in academic circles and liberal and socialist think-tanks for decades. And while the United States and other developed nations have staved off such proposals in the past, third world nations have increasingly dominated the U.N. General Assembly by sheer numbers since 1970. As a result, they have begun to see promise in their quest to take and keep for themselves the wealth of citizens from nations like the United States — specifically using the term “redistribution.” Recent U.N. actions have also provided a new excuse and set the stage for the third world to not only renew its pursuit of global taxes but also hold out hope for eventual success.

What do the poor liberal whiners in America have?  They not only have television sets (plural); they have CABLE television.  They’ve got refrigerators.  They’ve got air conditioning.  They’ve got cell phones.  They’ve got computers and video games.  They have got stuff coming out of their EARS compared to the poor in most of the rest of the world.

A lot of conservatives hate using the good word “liberalism” to describe liberals.  That’s because classical liberalism is actually a refutation of everything your progressive “liberal” Democrat stands for:

Classical liberalism is a political ideology, a branch of liberalism which advocates individual liberties and limited government under the rule of law and emphasizes economic freedom.

That aint modern liberalism, boys and girls; that’s MODERN CONSERVATIVISM.  And the more you explain what classical liberalism is, the more modern liberal progressives are disqualified from it.

So if modern liberals aren’t really “liberals” at all, then what are they?  They are a bunch of self-centered, greedy, narcissistic little whiners who harbor the basic worldview, “Everybody owes me something and forced redistribution is wonderful as long as its somebody else’s money that’s getting redistributed.”  That’s what they are.  They are people who have perverted the teachings of Christ and warped American history and the Constitution and system of government our founding fathers gave us to mandate socialism.  Unless you can find where Jesus taught, “Rendering to Caesar IS rendering unto God.”  Unless you can find where Jesus taught that a giant socialist government (or ANY kind of government for that matter) should forcibly seize and redistribute people’s property based on naked demagoguery and cynical political partisanship.

Hey, tell you what: just show me where Jesus taught, “If you earn less than $200,000 a year, you don’t have to give ANYTHING to the less fortunate; you get to use the raw power of government to take stuff from others so you can vote to redistribute it to yourselves.”

No, that’s not in the teachings of Jesus and it’s not in the writings of the founding fathers who forged a republic for Americans based on the principles of liberty and freedom.

Instead you pervert the wisdom of Jesus and of the American founding fathers and distort them to falsely claim that they taught the doctrine of your REAL ideological master:

“From each according to his ability, to each according to his need” – Karl Marx

If you want to know where modern liberalism comes from, THAT’S WHERE IT COMES FROM.

Jesus never absolves the poor from giving; to the contrary, HE calls for the poor to give:

Jesus sat down opposite the place where the offerings were put and watched the crowd putting their money into the temple treasury. Many rich people threw in large amounts. But a poor widow came and put in two very small copper coins, worth only a few cents.  Calling his disciples to him, Jesus said, “Truly I tell you, this poor widow has put more into the treasury than all the others.  They all gave out of their wealth; but she, out of her poverty, put in everything—all she had to live on.” — Mark 12:41-44

So you aren’t off the hook any more than that rich guy you feel so self-righteous to hate and demonize and demagogue, poor liberal.

You, who judge and condemn the rich and demand the state confiscate more and ever more of what they work to earn, another teaching of Jesus applies to YOU:

“For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.” — Matthew 7:2

It’s time you lived up to your own damn hypocritical rhetoric and slogans, you liberals (and especially you POOR liberals).

But don’t you worry, you pathological hypocrites who would never DREAM of paying taxes yourselves that you want everybody else to pay for YOU, if Obama gets reelected, HE’LL FORCE YOU TO REDISTRIBUTE YOUR WEALTH THE SAME WAY YOU WANTED HIM TO FORCE RICH PEOPLE TO REDISTRIBUTE THEIRS.

If the so-called “rich” don’t deserve their money because they’ve got more than you do, poor, stupid liberal; what the hell makes you think that YOU deserve YOUR money given that you’ve got a damn sight more than most of the world’s poor?

Somebody ought to take all your stuff away that the poor people in the Congo don’t have, have never had, and probably never WILL have (because the poorest countries are usually also the most socialistic countries and their failed economic system guarantees the constant destruction of wealth as corrupt government officials keep “redistributing” a shrinking economy into their own pockets).  Because that’s “economic justice” by your own rhetoric.

And Obama’s just the man to do it.  Because that’s the way he thinks; it’s the “Dream From His Father.”  And Obama literally “became” an American in order to chop America down to the size he believed as a “citizen of the world” that it ought to be.

And Obama has done an incredible job advancing that vision of America.

He’s the man whose entire history is that of anti-colonialism and hating the West for its prosperity when the have-nots of the planet have naught.

If we taxed the wealth of those who earned more than $250,000 a year at 100% – literally confiscated their wealth and left them with nothing – we would ruin those people and still only get 38% of what we needed to close Obama’s massive budget deficitWe’d have to tax them at the logically impossible rate of 134%, which means we would seize everything they owned and them demand that they pay MORE than everything they owned.  And with the rich people ruined, where would Obama go to collect the other 62%?  We’d have to then have ANOTHER group of people to demonize and confiscate from, wouldn’t we???

You can’t win with what the left is saying.  What they claim is guaranteed destruction and it is only bought by bad people who are selfish and greedy hypocrites who demand that somebody else should be forced to take responsibility for their failed lives.

As I pointed out earlier, liberals often use an incredibly flawed perversion of the Bible to try to justify their flawed Marxist economic system.  But when you understand what the Bible has to say about taxation, you realize that the left pretty much takes everything the Bible actually says and turns it completely upside down.

The truth is this: Wealth is not a fixed-sized pie.  The left is wrong; human creativity and ingenuity is such that people can always come along with new ideas that make them rich and create jobs for other people and improve the lives of other people who use their product or service.  They won’t be getting rich at somebody else’s expense; they’ll be building a pie where no pie existed before and that pie will make the overall pie of an economy larger.  If the rich get richer, other people can learn from that rich person’s example and be encouraged by it and also get richer.  The left is simply flat-out wrong.

If Spain Collapses, Europe Collapses. And If Europe Collapses, America Collapses. And Terrified Spaniards Are Bailing Out Of Spain As I Write This.

September 5, 2012

Be afraid.  Be very, very afraid.  Because to paraphrase Obama’s demonic reverend for 25 years, the chickens of socialism have come home to roost:

Fears Rising, Spaniards Pull Out Their Cash and Get Out of Spain
Published in the New York Times: Monday, 3 Sep 2012 | 9:22 PM ET By: Landon Thomas Jr.

After working six years as a senior executive for a multinational payroll-processing company in Barcelona, Spain, Mr. Vildosola is cutting his professional and financial ties with his troubled homeland. He has moved his family to a village near Cambridge, England, where he will take the reins at a small software company, and he has transferred his savings from Spanish banks to British banks.

“The macro situation in Spain is getting worse and worse,” Mr. Vildosola, 38, said last week just hours before boarding a plane to London with his wife and two small children. “There is just too much risk. Spain is going to be next after Greece, and I just don’t want to end up holding devalued pesetas.”

Mr. Vildosola is among many who worry that Spain’s economic tailspin could eventually force the country’s withdrawal from the euro and a return to its former currency, the peseta. That dire outcome is still considered a long shot, even if Spain might eventually require a Greek-style bailout. But there is no doubt that many of those in a position to do so are taking their money — and in some cases themselves — out of Spain.

In July, Spaniards withdrew a record 75 billion euros, or $94 billion, from their banks — an amount equal to 7 percent of the country’s overall economic output — as doubts grew about the durability of Spain’s financial system.

The withdrawals accelerated a trend that began in the middle of last year, and came despite a European commitment to pump up to 100 billion euros into the Spanish banking system. Analysts will be watching to see whether the August data, when available, shows an even faster rate of capital flight.

More disturbing for Spain is that the flight is starting to include members of its educated and entrepreneurial elite who are fed up with the lack of job opportunities in a country where the unemployment rate touches 25 percent.

According to official statistics, 30,000 Spaniards registered to work in Britain in the last year, and analysts say that this figure would be many multiples higher if workers without documents were counted. That is a 25 percent increase from a year earlier.

“No doubt there is a little bit of panic,” said José García Montalvo, an economist at Pompeu Fabra University in Barcelona. “The wealthy people have already taken their money out. Now it’s the professionals and midrange people who are moving their money to Germany and London. The mood is very, very bad.”

It is possible that the outlook could improve if the European Central Bank’s governing council, which meets Thursday, signals a plan to help shore up the finances of Spain and other euro zone laggards by intervening in the bond markets.

But right now, if anything, Spain’s picture is growing dimmer.

On Friday, the government’s bank rescue fund said it would need to pump up to 5 billion euros into the failed mortgage-lending giant Bankia, which the state seized in May. And on Monday, Andalusia became the latest of Spain’s semiautonomous regions to ask the central government for rescue money.

The wider prospects for the euro zone are also still bleak. Moody’s [MCO 39.72 0.12 (+0.3%) ] Investors Service said on Monday that it had changed its outlook on the AAA rating of the European Union to negative, and that it might downgrade the rating if it decides to cut the ratings on the union’s four largest budget contributors.

Spain’s gathering gloom comes despite a gradual return of capital to banks in Greece and the relative stability of deposits in those other euro zone trouble spots, Italy, Ireland and Portugal.

The continued exodus of money and people from Spain could be a warning to European policy makers that bailing out the country — a step now widely expected — may not stem the panic as long as the Spanish economy remains in a funk.

It was a lesson learned in Greece, where despite successive European bailouts, about a third of deposits have been withdrawn from its banks since 2009, as the public worried that Athens might have to return to the drachma.

Spain is still a far cry from a nearly bankrupt Greece: it has a much larger and more diverse economy, lower levels of debt and a bond market that is still functioning.

It might be more accurate to say that money is leaving Spanish banks at more of a jog than anything close to a sprint.

Although retail and corporate deposits are down 10 percent compared with those of July 2011, the country remains relatively rich in savings, with 2.3 trillion euros in overall deposits, according to data from Morgan Stanley.

But once under way, the flight of bank deposits can easily overwhelm rational facts and analysis.

Setting off the flight was the failure of Bankia, which came as a shock to Spanish savers who had been assured by government officials that the bank was in good shape.

Instead of calming fears, the state takeover prompted comparisons to Argentina in 2001, when peso bank accounts denominated in dollars were frozen in order to stem the flight of deposits.

The corralito, or corral, as the Argentine action is known, has become part of the public conversation in Spain. The million-plus Argentines who have since immigrated to Spain have provided ample and gory stories of desperate legal battles and wiped-out savings.

Eduardo Pérez, a Spaniard who was working in Argentina during that period, remembers the events all too well. He said he lost four-fifths of the money he had kept in an Argentine savings account, though he declined to say how much money was involved.

“Some of my friends lost everything,” Mr. Pérez said. “So yes, everyone in Spain knows about the corralito.”

Recently, Mr. Pérez, who lives in the northern city of Bilbao, removed about a third of his euros from his Spanish savings account and sent them to Singapore, converting them to Singapore dollars.

Having lost his job at a multinational company a few months ago, Mr. Pérez, 48, is trying to make ends meet by focusing on his travel Web site and blog, which aggregate Spanish-language travel videos.

But as the job outlook worsens, he is contemplating following in the path of his savings and starting a new life in Singapore with his wife.

“Two years ago, we never would have thought of this, but now I have real fears that there will be a breakup with the euro,” he said. “And when you keep hearing people saying, ‘Don’t worry, it’s not going to happen’ — well, that is when you have to start worrying.”

Analysts said that the record-high outflow from Spain in July was probably spurred in part by July’s being a taxpaying month for many corporations, which prompted them to withdraw cash from deposit accounts.

Also playing a role were investment funds that moved cash reserves to foreign banks in light of the credit downgrades at Spanish banks.

Still, as the examples of Mr. Vildosola and Mr. Pérez show, individual deposit flight is becoming more pronounced.

Some people are willing to fly to London for the day just to open an account there, as most banks in the city require such transactions to be made in person.

Spanish bankers working for British financial institutions say they have been hit with a barrage of questions about how to open savings accounts in London.

“It seems as if everyone I know in Spain is getting on an easyJet to come to London and open a bank account,” said one such banker, who spoke on condition of anonymity, citing his company’s policy.

That is what Mr. Vildosola did before he took the more drastic step of moving his family to England.

“It’s sad,” he said. “But I just don’t think there is a future for me in Spain right now.”

This story originally appeared in The New York Times

You want scary?  CNBC reported that the withdrawal rate is equal to 52% of the entire GDP of Spain:

The flight of capital from Spain is now worse than what Indonesia, one of the hardest hit countries during the Asian financial crisis, experienced in the late 1990s, according to analysis by Nomura.

On a three-month rolling basis, portfolio and investment outflows from Spain totaled 52.3 percent of the country’s gross domestic product (GDP), (that’s) more than double the outflows from Indonesia, which reached 23 percent of GDP at the time of the Asian crisis, Jens Nordvig, global head of G10 FX strategy at Nomura wrote in a note to clients on Tuesday.

Spaniards and foreign investors have been pulling money out of Spanish banks as the economy has worsened in recent months, and Nordvig said without the single currency and the flows from the ECB, Spain would already be going through a major currency crisis. (Read More: Depression, Suicides Rise as Euro Debt Crisis Intensifies)

We would stress that the broad-based nature of the capital flight, which involves both banking claims and securities and flows from both residents and non-residents, makes for a rather extreme overall outflow, and one that raises serious concerns about the implications for banking sector stability and economic growth,” Nordvig wrote.

For the record, the French are fleeing France and they are making it very clear that they are fleeing France because of the socialism that France just chose for itself:

Indigestion for ‘les Riches’ in a Plan for Higher Taxes
By LIZ ALDERMAN
Published: August 7, 2012 763 Comments

PARIS — The call to Vincent Grandil’s Paris law firm began like many others that have rolled in recently. On the line was the well-paid chief executive of one of France’s most profitable companies, and he was feeling nervous.

President François Hollande is vowing to impose a 75 percent tax on the portion of anyone’s income above a million euros ($1.24 million) a year. “Should I be preparing to leave the country?” the executive asked Mr. Grandil.

The lawyer’s counsel: Wait and see. For now, at least.

“We’re getting a lot of calls from high earners who are asking whether they should get out of France,” said Mr. Grandil, a partner at Altexis, which specializes in tax matters for corporations and the wealthy. “Even young, dynamic people pulling in 200,000 euros are wondering whether to remain in a country where making money is not considered a good thing.”

A chill is wafting over France’s business class as Mr. Hollande, the country’s first Socialist president since François Mitterrand in the 1980s, presses a manifesto of patriotism to “pay extra tax to get the country back on its feet again.” The 75 percent tax proposal, which Parliament plans to take up in September, is ostensibly aimed at bolstering French finances as Europe’s long-running debt crisis intensifies.

Europe is imploding.  Spain is one of the PIIGS (the ‘S’ in PIIGS, in fact) who are leading that collapse.  And Obama is pushing for an economic and environmentalist model that most copies collapsing Spain.

And liberals are DETERMINED to do the same thing here.  Go to Illinois, the king of the deadbeat states.  You watch a 60 Minute Story and you will be PISSED at what slimebag Democrat cockroaches have done.  Go to California, where Democrats have created a $500 BILLION unfunded pension black hole of doom.  Look at America under Obama and take note that America just passed the $16 trillion mark that was $10 trillion when Bush left office.  Barack Obama DEMONIZED George Bush for increasing the debt by $4 trillion over eight years – look what that Marxist weasel has done in HALF the time by piling on $6 trillion in debt in only FOUR years!!!  Oh, and America’s REAL debt isn’t a paltry $16 trillion; it’s actually a supermassive $222 trillion.  And all that debt was created by Democrat boondoggle-takeovers of what should have been privatized.

Democrats have murdered America.  And we are merely waiting for our turn to completely implode before the Antichrist comes and the Book of Revelation prophecy becomes the news story account of the end of human history.  You can hear the hoofbeats of the four horsemen of the Apocalypse riding hard toward us even now.

The last couple of years, as Europe has slowly imploded, the dollar has been given a boost as terrorized Europeans seek some haven from their weakening Euro.  But if Europe goes – and it WILL go – America will fall right afterward because Europe is our largest trading partner and there won’t be anybody to buy our stuff from us.  And because Obama has spent the last four years racing us toward that same direction and that same catastrophic collapse.  And when America goes the dollar will flush down the toilet right down with it.  And you better take a look at the terror on the faces of Spaniards; because YOU will have that same look on YOUR face soon thanks to your vote for Obama and Democrats in 2008.

In 1980, the last year of Jimmy Carter’s failed presidency, 300,000 businesses filed for bankruptcy.  In this last failed year of Obama’s failed presidency, 1.4 million – very nearly FIVE TIMES as many – businesses have filed for bankruptcy.  If we vote for Obama, we vote to die as a nation just as Spain previously voted to die and just as Europe previously voted to die.

Everything about this failed president is Marxist – including his damn Marxist slogans:

New Obama slogan has long ties to Marxism, socialism
By Victor Morton – The Washington Times
April 30, 2012, 06:56PM

The Obama campaign apparently didn’t look backwards into history when selecting its new campaign slogan, “Forward” — a word with a long and rich association with European Marxism.

Many Communist and radical publications and entities throughout the 19th and 20th centuries had the name “Forward!” or its foreign cognates. Wikipedia has an entire section called “Forward (generic name of socialist publications).”

“The name Forward carries a special meaning in socialist political terminology. It has been frequently used as a name for socialist, communist and other left-wing newspapers and publications,” the online encyclopedia explains.

The slogan “Forward!” reflected the conviction of European Marxists and radicals that their movements reflected the march of history, which would move forward past capitalism and into socialism and communism.

The Obama campaign released its new campaign slogan Monday in a 7-minute video. The title card has simply the word “Forward” with the “O” having the familiar Obama logo from 2008. It will be played at rallies this weekend that mark the Obama re-election campaign’s official beginning.

Vote for Obama.  March “forward” right into hell, you fools.  Because that’s what you’ve got to look “forward” to under your demonic false messiah Obama.

You just watch what will happen to the DOW the day Spain goes the way of the Dodo bird.  And you realize that we’re going down hard in our own day of reckoning because we chose the same stupid and immoral course that Spain chose.

What’s Obama’s “strategy” to deal with this crisis???  To try to call on Europe to not collapse until after he’s reelected so he won’t have to face the voters’ wrath over what hell has befallen America under his failed leadership.

The collapse is coming.  Democrats gave us that when they voted for Obama and let him kill America with his socialism.  The Antichrist is coming.  He’ll be riding in on his white horse to save the day from the disaster and collapse caused by the previous false messiah Obama.  And Democrats will welcome the beast even more enthusiastically than they welcomed Obama and they will worship him and they will take his mark.

Get ready for hell on earth.  And then get ready for hell itself.  Because the beast is coming.

Why The Logic Of Obama’s And Democrat Party’s Class Warfare Ultimately Leads To Gulags For The Poor

September 3, 2012

What is it that Democrats always say?  Republicans are greedy and evil because they don’t believe that the rich shouldn’t pay more than 70% of their income in city, state and federal taxes (and the myriad of taxes the government takes out of damn near everything).  Take a look at the taxes – and the percentage of taxes relative to income – that the average U.S. citizen pays.  A middle-class taxpayer will pay nearly half of his or her income in taxes to the government.  Here’s a partial list of taxes:

  • Accounts Receivable Tax
  • Building Permit Tax
  • Capital Gains Tax
  • CDL license Tax
  • Cigarette Tax
  • Corporate Income Tax
  • Court Fines (indirect taxes)
  • Deficit spending
  • Dog License Tax
  • Federal Income Tax
  • Federal Unemployment Tax (FUTA)
  • Fishing License Tax
  • Food License Tax
  • Fuel permit tax
  • Gasoline Tax
  • Hunting License Tax
  • Inflation
  • Inheritance Tax Interest expense (tax on the money)
  • Inventory tax IRS Interest Charges (tax on top of tax)
  • IRS Penalties (tax on top of tax)
  • Liquor Tax
  • Local Income Tax
  • Luxury Taxes
  • Marriage License Tax
  • Medicare Tax
  • Property Tax
  • Real Estate Tax
  • Septic Permit Tax
  • Service Charge Taxes
  • Social Security Tax
  • Road Usage Taxes (Truckers)
  • Sales Taxes
  • Recreational Vehicle Tax
  • Road Toll Booth Taxes
  • School Tax
  • State Income Tax
  • State Unemployment Tax (SUTA)
  • Telephone federal excise tax
  • Telephone federal universal service fee tax
  • Telephone federal, state and local surcharge taxes
  • Telephone minimum usage surcharge tax
  • Telephone recurring and non-recurring charges tax
  • Telephone state and local tax
  • Telephone usage charge tax
  • Toll Bridge Taxes
  • Toll Tunnel Taxes
  • Traffic Fines (indirect taxation)
  • Trailer Registration Tax
  • Utility Taxes
  • Vehicle License Registration Tax
  • Vehicle Sales Tax
  • Watercraft Registration Tax
  • Well Permit Tax
  • Workers Compensation Tax

But that isn’t enough for Democrats, and them damned rich people who don’t pay enough:

  • Taxes paid by highest incomes
  • The top 1% [of income-earners] pay 22.7% of taxes.
  • The top 10% pay 50% of taxes.
  • The top 20% pay 65.3% of taxes
  • The top 40% pay 84.3% of taxes.
  • Taxes paid by lowest incomes
  • The bottom 20% [of income-earners] pay 1.1% of taxes.
  • The bottom 40% pay 6.1% of taxes.

I’ve heard conservatives (and way too few journalists) ask liberals and Democrats the following question: how much more should the rich pay in taxes?  At what percentage of their wealth have they “paid enough”?  And I’ve never yet heard the left give an honest answer to that question; because the quintessential essence of the left is abject deceit and abject hypocrisy.

Democrats are the party of lies and Marxist class warfare.  They are the party that says that tries to stir up envy and hate with lies, such as the lie that the rich pay less in taxes than their secretaries.  It doesn’t matter if the claim is a lie to Democrats, because that would mean they valued honesty and integrity and they DON’T; rather, all that matters to them is that fifty percent of the voters plus one believe their lies.

Democrats are pandering liars who say, “I’m going to give you free stuff and I’m going to make that greedy bastard over there pay for it.”

That’s the essence of the left.  And the essence of the left has run into the problem of “reality” every single time it has ever been tried.

Let me put it this way: let’s take the Democrats’ position on higher taxes to help the poor. On the Democrats’ logic, couldn’t we do more for these poor people if we just taxed a little more? And couldn’t we do even MORE if we just taxed a little more than that? And what if we taxed even MORE?  Wouldn’t that help the poor more?  Democrats demonize the rich (like the good Marxists they are) and say we can have more money to help the poor if we just taxed the rich more; but the obvious fact given their own logic is that we could have a LOT more money if the government just took everything from everybody to give to the poor, right?

FACT: A study by the Joint Tax Committee, using the same static methodology that I refer to in my opening paragraph, calculate that the government will “lose” – again, because Democrats are communists and literally believe that they own EVERYTHING the people earn, such that such that the government “loses” money if it doesn’t tax people more – $700 billion in revenue if the tax cuts for the top income brackets are extended. And that sounds bad, doesn’t it? But they also conclude in that same study that the Bush tax cuts on the middle class will cost the Treasury $3 TRILLION over the same period. If we can’t afford to “give” the rich$700 billion, then how on earth can we afford to “give” the middle class” $3 damn TRILLION? And then you’ve got to ask how much the Treasury is losing by not taxing the poor first into the poorhouse, and then into the street? And how much more revenue could we collect if we then imposed a “street” tax?

And there’s the rub.

That’s exactly the way the old Soviet Union worked, for the record; if you DIDN’T work you were defined by the State as a shirker and then you went to the gulags to be a slave laborer until the system ground you into dirt:

In capitalist economies, firms pay higher wages to motivate workers who fear unemployment. In Soviet Russia, Stalin used the Gulag to discipline workers. The economic rationale of the ‘efficiency wage’ model helps explain the cruel brutality of Stalin’s prison camps. Marcus Miller and Jennifer Smith have a summary of their research looking at the economics of the Gulag at VoxEU.org. The research itself is available as CEPR Discussion Paper 6621: Punishment Without Crime? Prison as a Worker-Discipline Device.

In the 1930s Stalin faced a problem, If the labour discipline needed for creating a Socialist Utopia was not to be the threat of unemployment – as in the West – what else could it be? His answer, the Gulag.

Estimates by Miller and Smith imply that about half of one percent of the civilian labour force was incarcerated each year, and around one fifth of existing prisoners released (or died in custody). These flows average just under 400,000 per year. Under Stalin’s rule the implied equilibrium for the size of the Gulags was about 2 million persons, i.e. almost three percent of the working population in labour camps.

It has been argued that work incentives in capitalist countries are preserved because those caught shirking face the threat of unemployment and loss of income. The ‘No Shirking Condition’ for wages constitutes the effective labour supply curve for the economy.

It’s not just being fired or losing money that hard workers word hard, of course; there’s a very positive side to hard work in a capitalist system: you get rewarded for it.  You earn more money in a free market.  But if the State steps in the way the State STOMPS in in any leftist political system, the incentive is “progressively” taken away.

There is a reason that the more a society embraces the policies of the left, the more “gulags” and slave labor you ultimately have.

You need to understand something about history: the Marxists who took over Russia and “fundamentally transformed it” into the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics were just like Obama and the Democrats when they took over. They promised the damn world with their “hope and change” Utopia. About the only thing you can say in comparison to the Marxist Soviets is that they weren’t as grandiose in their promises as Obama was; because at least the Soviets never promised they would lower the level of the oceans and heal the damn planet like Obama did. But the rubber met the road, and once the Soviets got their power with their promises of “hope and change” for everybody that the “rich” would pay for and those promises failed, well, things started getting increasingly nasty.

Why did this happen? You need to understand something about economics: if you take away the incentive to work harder and longer and more expertly and intelligently by taking away the reward for working harder, for working longer hours, for risking more, for saving more, for investing more, then the incentive to work invariably diminishes. It is a necessary result of the class warfare that the communists played in Russia and that the Democrats are playing now. And so as measured by participation in the labor force, fewer people are working under Obama than ever.  With more people on food stamps and more people on disability than we’ve ever seen.  And as fewer and fewer people work, and the rich are demonized and taxed more and then demonized and taxed some more after that, you will necessarily get exactly what we are seeing: fewer people working, fewer people paying taxes, more people on welfare and disability. That’s when you get to the “dark side” of what Michelle Obama predicted: “Barack Obama will require you to work… Barack will never allow you to go back to your lives as usual, uninvolved, uninformed.” And Arbeit Macht Frei.

The more a government taxes income, the less incentive there is for workers to seek more income as their marginal tax rates become more and more punitive.  It particularly becomes an issue for investors, for instance – because every time they invest they risk their entire principal.  As capital gains taxes increase, as Obama wants, they can still lose everything if their investment choice goes south, but are allowed to keep less and less if their investment makes a profit.  Punishing investment is counterproductive; if you tax something, you get less of it.  Why would anybody actually want less investment?  For a small business, they not only risk all of the money they invest in their business should that business fail, but they also find themselves having to work longer and longer hours to generate a profit for themselves.  The pressure to shut down becomes increasingly insurmountable.  And if you’ve got a president literally saying, “If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that.  Somebody else made it happen,” you should understand that you’re going to end up with fewer people willing to start businesses.

Obama heralded something that the human race had never seen: a trillion dollar annual budget deficit. Not only was Obama the first president or leader to ever do that in human history, but he’s pulled off this insane feat every single year of his presidency. One year – just one year – the reckless Marxist racked up a staggering $1.6 trillion budget deficit making his bullcrap promises. If you vote for Obama, you are voting for insane spending and staggering debt and for the collapse of America.  You simply are.  The day is going to come when Democrats get the power they want, and they will take over to become “the State” just as leftists have taken over every government they have ever truly dominated. And then will ultimately come the gulags. There will just be no other way out, just as there was no other way out for the Russian communists.

The communists didn’t promise gulags for workers when they promised their way into power; the gulags came because their policies were immoral and ultimately suicidal and murderous.

We’re watching the European “socialist lite” system collapse before our very eyes, but even as that system is teetering on the verge of bankruptcy and chaos Democrats are demanding that we too go the same way of the same Dodo  bird.

The far left in America have been dreaming of this day.  Bankruptcy, implosion, collapse and chaos are not things they fear, but rather things that they have actively hoped for and even planned to cause:

The Cloward And Piven Presidency

Contemplate the words spoken by a man who was one of the very top people at the SEIU union that President Obama has most powerfully identified himself with:

We need to figure out in a much more through direct action more concrete way how we are really trying to disrupt and create uncertainty for capital for how corporations operate.

The thing about a boom and bust economy is it is actually incredibly fragile.

There are actually extraordinary things we could do right now to start to destabilize the folks that are in power and start to rebuild a movement.

For example, 10% of homeowners are underwater right their home they are paying more for it then its worth 10% of those people are in strategic default, meaning they are refusing to pay but they are staying in their home that’s totally spontaneous they figured out it takes a year to kick me out of my home because foreclosure is backed up.

If you could double that number you would you could put banks at the edge of insolvency again.

Students have a trillion dollar debt

We have an entire economy that is built on debt and banks so the question would be what would happen if we organized homeowners in mass to do a mortgage strike if we get half a million people to agree it would literally cause a new financial crisis for the banks not for us we would be doing quite well we wouldn’t be paying anything.

“We wouldn’t be paying anything.”  Because you wouldn’t have any damn thing LEFT to pay anything.  Whatever money you had would be utterly worthless paper.

That should scare the holy crap out of you.  There is an agenda coming out of the very top of the left that is quite simply evil.

Please read that to understand the nature of the left and therefore the nature of the Obama regime.  These people are INTENTIONALLY trying to implode the United States of America because they believe that through collapse they will be able to step in and use the ensuing panic and fear to get the people to turn to the government for help.  And the moment that happens the socialists will seize totalitarian power just as they did in Soviet Russia, in Maoist China, in Nazi Germany (“Nazi” stood for “National SOCIALIST German WORKERS Party“), etc. etc. etc.  It is simply what they do.  They’ve done in over and over again and they very much want to do it here.

Where Economic Marxism – And LIBERALISM – Truly Comes From: Hostility Toward God And Religion

August 27, 2012

Few casual liberals realize the fact that the entire economic premise underlying economic Marxism flows from a hostility toward God and toward religion.

Atheism and a spirit of hostility and hatred toward God and toward religion is at the very core of Marxism.  In the words of Karl Marx:

The foundation of irreligious criticism is: Man makes religion, religion does not make man. Religion is, indeed, the self-consciousness and self-esteem of man who has either not yet won through to himself, or has already lost himself again. But man is no abstract being squatting outside the world. Man is the world of man – state, society. This state and this society produce religion, which is an inverted consciousness of the world, because they are an inverted world. Religion is the general theory of this world, its encyclopaedic compendium, its logic in popular form, its spiritual point d’honneur, its enthusiasm, its moral sanction, its solemn complement, and its universal basis of consolation and justification. It is the fantastic realization of the human essence since the human essence has not acquired any true reality. The struggle against religion is, therefore, indirectly the struggle against that world whose spiritual aroma is religion.

Religious suffering is, at one and the same time, the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people.

The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is the demand for their real happiness. To call on them to give up their illusions about their condition is to call on them to give up a condition that requires illusions. The criticism of religion is, therefore, in embryo, the criticism of that vale of tears of which religion is the halo.

Criticism has plucked the imaginary flowers on the chain not in order that man shall continue to bear that chain without fantasy or consolation, but so that he shall throw off the chain and pluck the living flower.

What did Karl Marx mean by this?

Basically, Marx taught that the world is divided into the haves and the have-nots – which is everywhere being shouted around us today.  And the have-nots were being oppressed by the haves.  But rather than the people rising up in rage and seizing what Marx declared was theirs by force as Marx wanted them to, the people were instead happy in their religion, which according to Marx had been invented by the rich to keep the proletariat in bondage.  Marx acknowledged that in his day, religion was the order of the world; but he determined – and in fact succeeded – in imposing a NEW world system.  Since religion is nothing but an illusion, and materialism is all there actually is, the happiness that the people had in their Christianity was nothing more than a narcotic that kept them in bondage.  The only “real” reality is economic reality.  And therefore the solution presented by Marx was for the people to set aside their shackles of religion and rise up in a spirit of rage and take what was theirs by force.  Only then could the people have actual, “material” happiness.

The eight commandment in the Holy Bible is “You shall not steal,” and the tenth commandment is, “You shall not covet.”  Both ultimately flow from violation of the first commandment, “You shall have no other gods before Me.”  Marxism – as Marx acknowledged – overthrew this system and imposed one in which the State replaced God.  And where God in the Bible had commanded man NOT to covet anything that belonged to his neighbor, Marxism was in fact BASED on coveting.  “Hey, look at those damn rich people!  They’ve got everything!  Let’s take their stuff!”  Because apart from that looking over the wall at your neighbor’s house and coveting what he had and becoming angry that he or she had things that you did not have, Marxism never gets off the ground.

God said, “Thou shalt not covet.  Thou shalt not steal.”  And Marxists – and frankly liberals and Democrats – declared instead,  “Thou shalt covet thy neighbor’s possessions, and thou shalt seize them and redistribute them.”

The sin of Achan as described in Joshua chapter 7 (especially 7:21) follows this order: first you covet, THEN you steal.  And thus economic Marxism, based on atheism and upon replacing God with the all-powerful socialist State, first ordains abolishing God, then ordains materialism and demagogues coveting, and then ultimately empowers the all-powerful government that they have erected to steal in the name of the people.

The book of Ephesians 5:5 identifies coveting with idolatry.  And this idolatrous coveting is a root-sin from which all others flow.  Covetousness comes from idolatry because you are taking God off the throne and replacing Him with yourself – or in the case of Marxism, with the State – in God’s place.  We covet what belongs to others because we have a misplaced value system.  As our desires and our pleasure are directed more and more toward more material things, we covet and begin to feel entitled to take – or allow the State to take – what others have built and worked for.  And many people as a result of this system have a seething anger toward those who have more than they because their unrealistic expectations aren’t being met.  God created us to find our fulfillment and our happiness in Him, but Marxism – and liberalism – says piss on that.  God is an illusion, and we can take what we want from others to make ourselves happy.

Glenn Beck featured a Jewish Rabbi named Daniel Lapin who described the Tower of Babel in the Book of Genesis chapter 11.  Lapin says that these nine verses in Genesis 11:

reveal this dark secret that lies at the deepest recesses of the human soul, which is our susceptibility to become slaves. It’s there. It’s ready. It can pounce at any moment and transform us into serfs.”

Rabbi Lapin points out that King Nimrod didn’t actually come out and say, “Let’s build a tower.”  Rather, he said, “Let’s make bricks.”  And united the people in the endeavor of making bricks.  And this is important, as Lapin explains:

Bricks are really important things here. Later on in the five books of Moses, ancient Jewish wisdom highlights the fact that that an altar — an altar to God must not be built of bricks, right? It has to be built with stones.
 
Why? Because this tension between the bricks and stones is absolutely crucial. Bricks and stones are a biblical metaphor for the way people should be stones, and the way we are easily pulled to be bricks.

Two differences between bricks and stones.
 
Number one, every brick is the same as every other brick. That’s the whole point. They’re totally interchangeable. If you want to turn people to bricks, you are able to turn them into interchangeable social economic cogs that can be just plugged around society.
 
The second thing about bricks is they’re made by man. Stones are each unique. When we have a tradition in Western civilization that man is created the image of God, what it really means is that just as God is unique, so is every single human being is unique, just like a stone.
 
Don’t allow other people to turn you into bricks, retain the personality of a person for which you are created.
 
It’s a difference between “yes, I can,” and “yes, we can.” […]

And one way it really works is that in every epoch, there is always going to be somebody who tries to seize power. What these 11 verses — these nine verses in Chapter 11 tell us is here are the things you have to watch out for. Here are the things that a potential tyrant is going to do in order to seduce you.
 
Number one, he is going to have a tower. Now, a tower means reaching for the skies — appealing to everything that is great in human nature.
 
Now, look, any leader, whether you’re taking care of your family, whether you’re running a business, whether you’re a military leader — you know, military recruiters don’t say: Hey, come join us. The food is horrible. You’re likely to get killed and you’re going to be a horribly hot — they don’t do that. Step forward and play a role to defend your country, be all you could be. You appeal to the highest in human nature.

That’s what tyrants learn to do as well.

And we don’t need God. We don’t need stones. We don’t need anything that God created because you are great, people are great. All of this is going to be built with bricks and we’re going to make you all interchangeable. That’s why tyrants will do exactly that.

Conservative thought emphasizes that individuality of the Bible as told by the God who created us in His image.  We’re not interchangeable bricks unified by an all-powerful State, we’re individual stones.  But Barack Obama is firmly rooted in man as bricks.  He says of small business owners, the most individualistic people of all, “You didn’t build that.  Government did.”   But back in this ancient time, just as they were when Karl Marx emerged onto the scene, people had been worshiping God and content in their religion.  But then this King Nimrod came along.  The Bible described him as a “hunter of men.”  Why?  Lapin explained:

Why on earth would this one man, Nimrod, be identified as a hunter? Because he hunted, not animals, he hunted people. Not to kill them, he hunted people to seduce them into becoming his subjects and to allow him to become their master.

Karl Marx and Barack Obama haven’t presented anything new, as Rabbi Lapin explains:

The new idea is — and is presented as the Babel blueprint. This is not long forgotten story. This is actually something which is as relevant today as it will be tomorrow, as it was when Robespierre was conducting the French Revolution. The principle is always the same.
 
The two competing ways of organizing human society: One is the Abraham vision of individual independence, individual accountability, God-centric — versus the idea of centralized control.

So, Abraham gives the vision of individual independence, which always has to include economic impendence. That’s absolutely crucial. And sure enough, Abraham, first man in the Bible described as a wealthy man, a blessing, a good thing. Not a curse — a good thing.

And what is it that binds all of these interchangeable bricks that Marxism and liberalism want us to become?  Mortar.  And what is mortar?  Lapin again:

Yes now, in Hebrew, mortar is very related — same word really as the word materialism. And you can actually even hear the similarity transfer into the English language. Mortar — M, T, R are the key consonants. Material — matter — same word essentially.
 
And it’s very important because the lesson from ancient Jewish wisdom here is that you can bond people and unify people with a sense of common spiritual purpose, but if you’re going to eliminate the spiritual — if you’re going to take God entirely out of the picture — then you can unify people through materialism.
 
Get people in debt, use your credit cards, folks. Buy stuff. Acquire stuff. And then you can rent storage facilities to keep the stuff you bought that you don’t need.
 
But that way, we’re all in this together and we can all talk about the great commercials we saw during the football game. And we’re all in this great materialistic splurge because it will unite people.

Materialism that flows from the denial of God:

And what any tyrant knows is that you cannot enslave a people that believe in the Boss. You just can’t. And so, therefore, any tyranny will always begin to develop a hostility to traditional biblical faith, a hostility to the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, a hostility to biblical commitment of any kind at all.
 
You always find that, whether it’s Cuba or the Soviet Union or anywhere else, secularism becomes the religion of the day. In fact, I gave it a name — secular fundamentalism, I think, is the religion of the day.

Now, it usually doesn’t begin with religious belief and God-centric thought and then get replaced by atheism.  There is, rather, very often a process by which religion is eroded away until it can be overthrown altogether and replaced.  And so atheistic Marxism was itself officially repackaged into a pseudo-Christian heresy called “liberation theology” that Barack Obama bought from his pastor for 23 years. I described this movement and its relationship to communism in my very first article:

But even allowing that Obama somehow never heard – and even more amazingly, never heard of – anything offensive ever coming from the mouth of his pastor, anyone even remotely familiar with Jeremiah Wright, Jr. and the Trinity United Church of Christ knows full well that both the pastor and the church are leading proponents of an extremely radical ideology known as “black liberation theology.” In short, liberation theology is a giant nut of Marxism covered with a candy coating of Jesus. Liberation theology is a reading of Christianity through Marxist eyes, and very pointedly NOT vice versa. Rather than forgiving its enemies, its adherents all over the world have routinely claimed that oppressors should be overthrown by violent means.

Liberation theology was developed in the early 1970s to pave the way for the communist Sandinistas to infiltrate – and subsequently dominate – Nicaraguan society. The Sandinistas understood full well that they had no hope of installing a Marxist regime in a country that was well over 90% Roman Catholic unless they could successfully subsume Catholicism into their cause of Marxism. And the wedding of Marxism with Christianity was brought about in a clear effort of the former to crush the latter.

Marxism – atheistic though it is – has frequently been characterized as a Christian heresy, in which a glorious new age utopia (a Marxist perversion of heaven) is to be ushered in by a transformation of human nature in a grand historical dialectic. In traditional Christianity, the ennobling of human nature takes place because of the creation of man in the image of God and because of the divine Christ’s Incarnation; in Marxism, the State assumes God’s place. Marxism offers rival theories of sin (private property) and salvation (collective ownership), a church that dispenses grace (the State), and a litany of saints (the proletariat and their Marxist leadership) and sinners (the bourgeoise and their capitalists enablers). In actual historical practice, in every single case, Marxism in a single century has led to more human slaughter and more degradation than all the religions of the world combined led to throughout all of human history.

Thus we see that it is not too much of a stretch for Christian heretics to embrace Marxism as a creed, since, as G.K. Chesterton pointed out, heresy is often truth gone mad. Liberation theology is the subsumption of one tiny truth (that God cares about the poor) wrapped by so much error that it resulted in a form of insanity that saw “Christians” embrace what clearly amounted to terrorism against governments and the very poor and innocent that they claimed to champion.

That last sentence about “terrorism against governments and the very poor and innocent that they claim to champion” is simply true: Marxism has been responsible for the murder of 100 million of its various regimes’ own people in less than a single century. It has crushed the human spirit more than any other system in the history of the world. It offered fantastic promises to create a Utopia for the poor and then ended up taking everything from the poor before ultimately destroying and murdering them.

Marxism was NEVER about the poor; Marxism was ALWAYS about the State.

Liberalism as a movement has LONG realized what hard-core Marxism understood through “liberation theology” in the 1970s.  Namely, that you could “Christianize” socialism by taking that little kernel of truth – that God cares for the poor – and then exploiting that to build a gigantic totalitarian nanny state that is itself a massive lie out of that tiny kernel of truth.

Don’t tell me that liberalism isn’t a close relative of Marxism that is only waiting to be given enough power to become exactly LIKE Marxism.  Karl Marx provided a key statement about economic Marxism when he said:

“From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.”

What we have here is the grounds for a State to seize wealth from those who produce and redistribute it to those who do not.

And I defy any liberal to explain how ideological liberalism repudiates and denounces this central premise of Marxism.

I have more to say about liberalism and how it has perverted the essence of Jesus and Christianity, and will do so in an article I have yet to write titled, “Why Do Depraved Democrats Deceitfully Distort Jesus To Demagogue Republicans???”

An Excellent Short Summary Of Obama’s ‘If You’ve Got A Business, You Didn’t Build That’ View

July 24, 2012

What makes this nice is that it is short and sweet:

7/17/2012 @ 10:43AM
Obama: Small Business Didn’t Build It

President Obama just threw a grenade at small business. He implied that everything is done in a community setting with the government or outside help. He is implying that individualism and individual achievements should not be highlighted, as everyone and everything needs help. In his speech yesterday, President Obama referenced the involvement of the government in the development of the internet and in building roads and bridges. He is correct to say the government did involve themselves in those endeavors. That was the government of the people, by the people and for the people.

If we get into a discussion whether business owners want the government as their partners, the President is on the wrong side of the tracks. What is being debated is the matter of degree. How much government? How big should government be? Small businesses give back through taxes, jobs and charity but not by enlarging government. This is all about an attack on individualism and individual achievement. The implications is clearly is that we need the government and we need big government. Not a great position for capitalism, small business or entrepreneurs.

There’s your short summary of Obama’s rhetoric.  If you’d like to hear a little more, then please keep reading.

The two major groups representing small businesses – the Chamber of Commerce and the National Federation of Independent Businesses – have both publicly decried Obama’s “you didn’t build that” attack against small business owners (I found the link available here).

What do the small businesses that together historically create 3 out of every 4 jobs in America say?  77 percent of small business owners have been saying that the Obama administration has been HURTING them.  And only 1 in 5 small businesses plan to hire any workers under Obama; and nearly 80% of small businesses want Obama to get his government the hell out of their way; and 90% of them are concerned about Obama’s massive social spending and their being demonized to pay for it all.

When both the Chamber of Commerce and the NFIB repeatedly say a president sucks for creating business growth, and when survey after survey of small business owners validate what these two small business organizations are saying, then that president SUCKS.  If you want Marxism, then don’t listen to the Chamber of Commerce or the NFIB.  If you want a job and the opportunity to advance your fortunes in a nation that has historically been better than any other at allowing the opportunity to do do, then get this joker out of the White House.

Obama – the failed president who a short time ago said “the private sector’s doing fine” – has demonstrated that he has no business talking about businesses.  He is simply an ignorant fool who does not understand how a free market functions.  And that is why he has spent the last four years unsuccessfully attempting to “fundamentally transform” America into a centrally planned economic system that has failed wherever it has taken root.

This is what Obama said in context (an expanded section of Obama’s words and a link to Obama’s entire speech is available at that link):

There are a lot of wealthy, successful Americans who agree with me — because they want to give something back. They know they didn’t — look, if you’ve been successful, you didn’t get there on your own. You didn’t get there on your own. I’m always struck by people who think, well, it must be because I was just so smart. There are a lot of smart people out there. It must be because I worked harder than everybody else. Let me tell you something — there are a whole bunch of hardworking people out there. (Applause.)

If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you’ve got a business — you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.

Obama’s fellow liberal Democrat Elizabeth Warren helps us understand what Obama was saying and what he intended to say:

“I hear all this, you know, ‘Well, this is class warfare, this is whatever,’” Warren said. “No. There is nobody in this country who got rich on his own. Nobody.

“You built a factory out there? Good for you. But I want to be clear: you moved your goods to market on the roads the rest of us paid for; you hired workers the rest of us paid to educate; you were safe in your factory because of police forces and fire forces that the rest of us paid for. You didn’t have to worry that marauding bands would come and seize everything at your factory, and hire someone to protect against this, because of the work the rest of us did.”

These two doctrinaire liberals couldn’t be more clear – which makes it frankly amazing that the left would now try so hard to twist their words now that their policies are being exposed for what they clearly and truly are: they are saying that businesses do not deserve to take pride and responsibility in their own success because the Government (with a big “G” because that is how they view government) contributed to that success by building roads and bridges and providing schools and other infrastructure.  And they are using that as their justification that business owners therefore owe far more in taxes than they have been paying.  Because the Government is more responsible for their success than they are. 

That is PRECISELY what Obama was saying.

And that is why Jack Gilchrist as a successful small business employer is so pissed off at Obama:

Obama is saying that we should all be worshiping Government and wanting it to expand more and more because it made every “independent” human success possible.  I pointed out that on that reasoning we should really be worshiping the sun because, heck, it made Obama’s Government possible, didn’t it?

In another comment I explained this to a liberal who never has and never will comprehend how the American economy functions:

There is absolutely no question and any honest person knows there is no question that what Barack Obama and Elizabeth Warren are saying is that all people who build businesses are really just pirating off government infrastructure, such that they have no right to take any meaningful credit for the success of their businesses. And therefore business owners ought to be willing to pay their real god the Government what it is due with their sacrificial offering of high taxes.   But that is simply bullcrap because: 1) Given that both successful people and unsuccessful people alike have all benefited equally from schools and roads, how can the schools and roads then possibly be the cause of the successful people’s success? It was those business owners’ hard work, risk, more hard work and good decisions that made them successful, not the public schools and roads that welfare slackers get just as much of as small business owners get.  And 2) Given that these business owners were already forced to pay for this stuff by their already too-high taxes, it is frankly despicable for Obama to suck out business owners’ tax money for services, and then turn around and argue that because the government provided those services that Obama forced the business owners to pay for therefore meant that the business owners who were forced to pay for those services aren’t truly responsible for all the hard work and risks that they took that had nothing to do with the government.

As an example, I went to a public school when I was a kid. Do you know why I went to a public school? Because liberals forced my parents to pay property taxes that went into public schools and ONLY into public schools. My parents wanted us to go to Christian schools, but at that time they couldn’t pay the taxes that funded the government schools AND at the same time pay in addition to those taxes to send us to a Christian school. If my parents had been allowed to use their property tax money to instead send us to Christian schools, then THAT’S where we would have gone. If liberals had any decency they would be for VOUCHERS that allow parents to choose which schools to send their kids to.  Instead, they condemn millions of children to failing government schools.  And then take credit for it.

So what liberals are in fact doing is 1) forcing Americans to contribute to a government system and then 2) saying that since we benefited from the system that we were forced to contribute to, we are therefore not allowed to take any credit for our success that was based on our risks, our initiative, our investments and our time and our work. Instead Government should get all the credit and liberals can then justify their forcing people to pay even higher taxes on the basis of the taxes that they have already been forced to pay.

You can sum Obama’s policies up with three words “Government as God.”

When Karl Marx said that “religion is the opiate of the masses,” the point he was driving home was that God is an illusion that was keeping the people satisfied in their economic misery.  Marx believed that economic reality was the ONLY reality.  And he believed that if his economic and political Marxism replaced God with “the State” (i.e., “the Government”), that the people would find the true happiness they had wrongly been seeking in God.

And of course all they found was misery and death.  Every SINGLE time any form of Marxism was tried.

When Obama says – as a false, heretic “Christian” – that salvation is “collective salvation,”  (see also here) you can understand that in light of Marxist liberation theology (and see also here) that he is referring to “collectivist salvation.”  For Barack Obama, salvation is not related to sin, but rather to poverty, and the solution to poverty is not individuals improving their lot with hard work, but a Utopian redistributive state.

Karl Marx was wrong.  History has proven that his ideas were wrong for the world.  And Barack Obama is wrong and history has proven that his ideas are wrong for America.

Thank God For The Canadians (At Least SOMEONE Cares About US Veterans While Obama Destroys Their Country)

July 9, 2012

This story makes me want to start singing “Oh, Canada.”

Thank God for the VFW, too. 

CANADA WANTS U.S.VETERANS FOR PIPELINE WORK
VFW-backed VetJobs now posting thousands of new vacancies
July 02, 2012

The Veterans of Foreign Wars of the U.S. is proud to announce that its partly owned veterans jobs board has secured an exclusive employment initiative with Alberta, Canada, that could see thousands of U.S. veterans heading north to work on their oil pipeline.

“This is a great opportunity for veterans, transitioning military, National Guard and reservists, and their family members,” said Ted Daywalt, founder and CEO of VetJobs (www.vetjobs.com), a recognized industry leader in helping veterans find work.

“Though America’s Keystone Pipeline is delayed, the Canadians are moving forward on their side of the border and have an immediate need for tens of thousands of workers,” said Daywalt, whose website averages more than 55,000 daily job postings by employers strictly interested in hiring veterans. He said the Edmonton Economic Development Corporation anticipates a shortage of 114,000 workers in the Alberta area, and they want to hire American veterans to fill that shortage.

According to the development corporation, the positions being offered are long term, with many paying as much as 30 percent more than similar industry positions in the United States. Some positions will require a move to Canada, but many others will allow veterans to commute — working several weeks in Canada, then one week back home.

The skilled positions they are currently hiring for include journeymen pressure pipe welders, heavy equipment technicians, steamfitter-pipefitters, structural ironworkers, millwright and carpenter/scaffolders. Professional staff vacancies include construction quality auditors, quality examiners/inspectors, cost estimators, high voltage construction managers, refinery shift supervisors, planners/schedulers, power engineers (operators), project control leads, project managers/coordinators, and health, safety and environment professionals.

“This is a fantastic opportunity and I’m proud of our affiliation with VetJobs,” said VFW National Commander Richard L. DeNoyer, of Middleton, Mass. “Helping thousands of veterans to get well-paying jobs in an important industry just further proves that no one does more for veterans than the VFW.”

To apply for the new positions, go to www.vetjobs.com, click on Search Jobs, then type “opportunity awaits” into the company search field. Additional job postings will be added in the coming months as the Canadian pipeline project progresses.

Barack Obama is a job-killing Marxist.

114,000 jobs on the Canadian side of the border.  We could have had that many damn jobs on OUR side of the border if Obama wasn’t a Marxist posing as an environmentalist.

The very brilliant Charles Krauthammer captured the essence of eco-Marxism the year that Obama was elected to “lower the level of the oceans and heal the planet” among his other promised messianic miracles:

Socialism having failed so spectacularly, the left was adrift until it struck upon a brilliant gambit: metamorphosis from red to green. The cultural elites went straight from the memorial service for socialism to the altar of the environment. The objective is the same: highly centralized power given to the best and the brightest, the new class of experts, managers and technocrats. This time, however, the alleged justification is not abolishing oppression and inequality but saving the planet.

Krauthammer wasn’t the first to notice this “first red, then green” movement from hard-core Marxism to hard-core environmentalism.  From a 1997 article about Greenpeace founder Patrick Moore:

He (Patrick Moore) says the fall of communism brought an influx of anti-corporate extremism to the environmental movement because, “suddenly, the international peace movement had a lot less to do. Pro-Soviet groups in the West were discredited. Many of their members moved into the environmental movement, bringing with them their eco-Marxism and pro-Sandinista sentiments.

“A lot of those in the peace movement were anti-American and, to an extent, pro-Soviet. By virtue of their anti-Americanism, they tended to sometimes favor the communist approach. A lot of those people, a lot of those social activists, moved into the environmental movement once the peace movement was no longer relevant.” Social activists, he suggests, “are now using the rhetoric of environmentalism to promote other collectivist agendas, such as class struggle — which I personally believe is a legitimate area, but I don’t believe it’s legitimate to mix it up with environmentalism.”

Van Jones – Obama’s selection for “Green jobs czar” in addition to being a self-acknowledged communist – is merely one profound example of Barack Obama’s ideology.

The last four years of economic ruin are the profound example of the results of Barack Obama’s ideology.

Obama is killing America hundreds of thousands of jobs at a time.

110,000 jobs from Keystone that Obama destroyed here, 200,000 jobs in Ohio there.  And the consistent plan is to make sure that America will never be strong or energy independent.

Canada is going ahead with the Keystone pipeline on its side of the border because they are not evil unlike our own demon-possessed administration.  If Obama is re-elected, the jobs will go anywhere but America and the oil will go to China.  Not that not having oil will matter to those who vote for Obama; they believe they’ll be riding around on winged unicorns.

I hope 114,000 veterans can escape Obamination and start a new life in Canada.

It’s pretty amazing.  Up until Obama, people from ruined nations fled north TO America.  Now under Obama, Americans from a ruined nation are fleeing north to Canada to get the hell away from what used to be the greatest nation in the history of the world.

Black BET Founder Robert Johnson Says To Obama, ‘Stop Demonizing The Wealthy’

October 3, 2011

Whenever a wicked leader of any stripe comes to power, the corruption and the despicable policies don’t end until that wicked leader’s own supporters turn on him.

Hopefully that is beginning to happen now to Marxist ideologue Barack Obama:

Posted on October 2, 2011
BET’s Robert Johnson To Obama: Stop Attacking The Wealthy

BET founder Robert Johnson on the “FOX News Sunday” program: “Well, I think the president has to recalibrate his message. You don’t get people to like you by attacking them or demeaning their success. You know, I grew up in a family of 10 kids, first one to go to college, and I’ve earned my success. I’ve earned my right to fly private if I choose to do so.

And by attacking me it is not going to convince me that I should take a bigger hit because I happen to be wealthy. You know, it is the old — I think Ted and Fred and I we both sort of take the old Ethel Merman approach to life. I’ve tried poor and I tried rich and I like rich better. It doesn’t mean that I am a bad guy.

I didn’t go in to business to create a public policy success for either party, Republican or Democrat. I went in business to create jobs and opportunity, create opportunity, create value for myself and my investors. And that’s what the president should be praising, not demagoguing us simply because Warren Buffet says he pays more than his secretary. He should pay the secretary more and she will pay more.”

I really like the way Robert Johnson said that.  Because Warren Buffet has literally been held up as a moral hero for stating that he pays less in taxes than his secretary.  Apparently, it is a morally good thing to oppress and actually continue to oppress your personal secretary as long as you go out in public and say what you are doing and have been doing and are continuing to do is wrong.

Then you add to that that Warren Buffet is slime.  And the actual claim that the rich aren’t paying their fair share is both demagogic, Marxist and false all at once.

Barack Obama is a Marxist.  Think of the central defining economic statement of Marxism as described by Karl Marx himself: “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.”

Now, you go back over the “spread the wealth” statements of Obama, and I dare you to explain and demonstrate how Barack Obama and Karl Marx are somehow not saying the same damn thing.

The words of two of the greatest modern British leaders put Obama’s Marxism into perspective:

“Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.” — Winston Churchill

“The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people’s money” — Margaret Thatcher

Please turn against this Marxist fool and his failed socialist class-warfare policies, Democrats.

Because when there’s a rightwing backlash, and the hard-core rightwing takes over and imposes policies on America with the very same reckless disregard as did Barack Obama before them, it will be YOUR FAULT.  It will have been your support for this incredibly far leftist socialist ideologue that inspired the coming backlash.  And don’t you forget that.  You still have a chance to turn against Obama and demand a spirit of moderation that could yet shape the debate.

It’s up to you.  But there isn’t much time left.

64% Of Small Businesses Planning To Wait Out Obama, Will NOT Be Adding New Jobs (12% Say They Will CUT Jobs)

July 13, 2011

There’s the old conundrum about the wolf, the goat and the cabbage:

A farmer and his wolf, goat, and cabbage come to the edge of a river they wish to cross.  There is a boat at the river’s edge that only the farmer can row.  The farmer can take at most one other object besides himself on a crossing, but if the wolf is ever left with the goat, the wolf will eat the goat; similarly, if the goat is left with the cabbage, the goat will eat the cabbage.  How can the farmer get all of them across?

There’s actually a solution to that problem.

Now we’ve got an even more intractable problem, involving a healthy job-creating economy, a Marxist president and a Marxist Democrat Party.

This one is unsolvable, because unlike the above dilemma involving the wolf, the goat and the cabbage, BOTH the Marxist President AND the Marxist Democrat Party will devour the economy unless it is somehow taken away from them.  Like the goat with the cabbage, they will insatiably eat every job they can and turn those jobs into dead crap.  Like the wolf with the goat, they will kill the economy and systematically devour it until only bones are left.

We are still over a year away from getting the chance to save ourselves from this insoluble dilemma.

And here’s the consequence:

Little Hiring Seen by Small Business
JULY 11, 2011
By SIOBHAN HUGHES

WASHINGTON—The U.S. labor market could stay sluggish for a while, with small-business executives reluctant to hire amid the murky economic outlook.

A survey of small business owners shows a lack of
confidence in the U.S. economy. More than two-thirds indicated they do not plan
to add payrolls in 2011 or 2012. WSJ’s Siobhan Hughes reports. Photo: Justin
Sullivan/Getty Images

Almost two-thirds—64%—of small-business executives surveyed said they weren’t expecting to add to their payrolls in the next year and another 12% planned to cut jobs, according to a U.S. Chamber of Commerce report to be released Monday. Just 19% said they would expand their work forces.

This comes after a Labor Department report Friday showed employers added few jobs in June, and unemployment rose to 9.2%. The bleak figures joined other data showing the recovery losing momentum in recent months, which has caused many analysts and policy makers to lower their forecasts for economic growth in the second half of the year.

The Small Business Administration says small businesses, defined as companies with fewer than 500 workers, employ about half of the workers in the private sector. In the Chamber’s survey of 1,409 executives, conducted by Harris Interactive, small businesses were defined as firms with revenue of $25 million or less.

More than half of the small-business executives in the June 27-30 survey cited economic uncertainty as the main reason for holding back on hiring. About a third blamed lack of sales, while just 7% pointed to problems getting credit.

“I think it’s safer to stay on hold and not hire workers,” said Harold Jackson, chief executive of Buffalo Supply, a Lafayette, Colo., distributor of high-tech medical equipment used in operating rooms.

[JOBS]

Mr. Jackson said he has halved his staff to 15 workers since 2009 and was unlikely to start hiring soon even if his business picked up. “I can handle a reasonably large increase in business without having to increase the staff.”

Many of the executives surveyed were gloomy about the economy’s prospects. About 41% see the business climate getting worse over the next two years, compared with 29% who expect the climate to improve.

The modest hiring plans of small businesses don’t make up for the job losses in the past year, when some 29% let go workers, far outpacing the numbers that now plan to hire.

As the wise philosopher Scoobert Doo once put it upon hearing dire news, “Roh-roh.”

Between ObamaCare and the massive $500 billion in taxes it’s going to take out of the private sector, along with the 158 government bureaucracies and the thousands of pages of regulations; between the trillion dollars in NEW taxes Obama is demanding as part of any debt ceiling deal; between the Obama EPA which is simply ruling by fiat and imposing regulations that were actually voted down by Congress; between the fact that Obama won’t let us drill for our own oil even as his green energy sends the cost of energy (in his own words) “skyrocketing”; between the Obama NRLB that is openly warring with companies like Boeing for creating jobs in non-union states; between the Obama Labor Department, which is putting together some 100 job-killing regulations to strangle businesses from further hiring as we speak; and between the Dodd-Frank legislation which will systematically cut businesses off from credit, we are pretty well screwed.

We can have jobs, or we can have Obama and his Democrats.  But we’re not going to get jobs until we get rid of the people who are demonizing the job creators.  And that should just be an obvious fact by now.