| There are many lessons in history that can aid us, as we are key players in the repeating and epic battle of Socialism versus Capitalism. Please read on (more insight on Fabien Socialists and Revolutionary Communists) from Post 28 above: In 1890, Woodrow Wilson wrote an essay entitled Leaders of Men.
Wilson said that a “true leader” uses the masses of people like “tools.” Wilson continued, “The competent leader of men cares little for the internal niceties of other people’s characters: he cares much–everything–for the external uses to which they may be put ... He supplies the power; others supply only the materials upon which that power operates ... It is the power which dictates, dominates; the materials yield. Men are as clay in the hands of the consummate leader.” “Woe be to the man or group of men that seeks to stand in our way,” said Wilson in June 1917 to counter protesters of his Progressive policies. Obama has made similar statements. In just two months of early 1913, Wilson and Congress passed the Federal Reserve Act, the Federal Trade Commission, the Clayton Antitrust Act, the Federal Farm Loan Act and America’s income tax in the Revenue Act of 1913. All of these measures were attempts to expand the tax base while defining the basic policy of the United States with respect to the organization and control of industry. It is utterly staggering how much Progressive legislation Wilson, with the help of the 62nd Congress, passed in the first few months of 1913 — take a look at the Wiki page on the 62nd Congress to see the whirlwind of legislation they enacted in February and March 1913: the 62nd Congress - Major Legislation. Thankfully, Pelosi and Reid screwed up in 2009 while trying to pass their Progressive ObamaCare changes in one MASSIVE omnibus bill; the 62nd Congress did their changes the “right way,” QUICKLY and in smaller pieces. Expect the Progressive Congressional Democrats in 2010 to try this tactic next!
If you compare Obama and Woodrow Wilson, you’ll notice a lot of similarities. One key difference however is obvious — Obama’s appeals to disaffected groups such as blacks, Hispanics, Arabic and other minorities — a quality he is more than willing to exploit for his own political gain and for the advancement of Socialism. Note that Obama's approval rating with Blacks and Hispanics still remains around 90 percent!" Since Obama no longer has control of a filibuster-proof Senate, he will be forced to try a more aggressive strategy with his most-loyal supporters. He will use the anger of minorities to nudge and pressure Banks and other industries to fall under more government influence, to ensure the "fat cats" don't cause a financial crash again. Obama will try to pit the throngs of inner-city minorities against the growing tide of Conservatism that comes from the Tea Party movement and other Conservative groups. He wants a fight as it suits his goals of division and rebirth from chaos — THAT is the chronological evolution that Communists and Socialists believe in. It’s important to note that Obama does not seem to want to TAKE OVER industry (at least at this stage) — just REGULATE IT SO SIGNIFICANTLY so he can usher in his Social Change and redistribution of wealth. In this regard, Obama who was a New Party Socialist when he first ran for office in 1996, acts more like a Western Marxist.
There's one other important lesson of Wilson's era I wish to point out. Progressive Woodrow Wilson was ushered into the White House when in-fighting between Theodore Roosevelt (with his Bull Moose Party) and William Taft divided the Republican Party vote in 1912. We saw this in 1992, with nearly 20 percent of the Independent vote going to Ross Perot, helping to elect Bill Clinton. I suspect that the Socialists and their Democratic Party offshoots will try to cause a rift between the Tea Party movement and less-Conservative aspects of the Republican party (aka, RINOs). They want the Tea Party to form a third party, or the RINOs to sit out of the next elections. Glenn Beck has changed his tune from his initial calling for the formation of a third party, back to Rush's and Hannity’s ongoing theme of "forcing" Conservatism back WITHIN the GOP. Sarah Palin recognizes the perils of a third party, too. Subversive elements right here on Free Republic, in some cases ON PURPOSE, are trying to divide the “anti-socialist” voting block (Center-Left, Center-Right and Conservative). As much as I despise RINOs, we need to realize that forcing them to leave the GOP on the national level may likely set up in 2012 a historical repeat of 1912 and 1992 — allowing the Progressive candidate to win the Presidency. It will be a balancing act, in the months and years ahead leading into 2012, to restore Conservatism to the GOP, while not forcing these less-Conservative elements of the Republican Party to feel shut out and fail to vote with the Conservatives.
Obama’s next moves will be to enrage his devout followers to rebel against the system — we are already seeing that in his post-Scott Brown "pivot." He will say that the Republicans support the Banks and the status quo which are “destroying the country,” as Wilson did before him. Obama’s use of Wilson’s “masses of people” is best countered by Educating the "masses" — who Obama wishes to exploit — that self-reliance, competition and a smaller federal government gives them more opportunities than dependency on a Socialist American government to fix high unemployment and other of "society’s ills and inequities."
|
