A Video That Is Beyond Disgusting

Townhall.com ^ | March 20, 2012 | Chuck Norris

[Kaslin]

The video that the late Andrew Breitbart released of Barack Obama during his Harvard days revealed one more link in the president's early chain of associations with radicals. But I watched a video a couple of weeks ago that I believe is far more incriminating for our president because it shows the present fallout from his radical agenda, including the redistribution of wealth.

Obama has been called the "food stamp president" because more federal grocery subsidies have been given out under his presidency than were under most others combined. But far more than that, this president is the sultan of socialist swing with his assault of federal government entitlement expansions (Obamacare), spending, accruing of national debt, interdictions, seizures, regulations, overreaches, unilateral legislation, czars, presidential orders, Chicago-style politics, etc., and he has the uncanny ability to make most people believe he's doing none of them.

The Heritage Foundation has reported that the president has not only greatly expanded welfare but also "eliminated a program that aims to reduce the prevalence of single motherhood, one of the greatest contributors to poverty in the United States."

Heritage further documented that President Obama's 2011 budget increased total welfare spending to $953 billion, a 42 percent increase over welfare spending in 2008. And over the next decade, welfare spending is projected to cost taxpayers $10.3 trillion.

Worst of all is that rather than wean generations off government aid and create independent hardworking citizens, President Obama and his administration are further enabling and expanding the already mammoth movement of government-dependent citizens.

The infamous Judge Judy Sheindlin agrees. And she wants the government to know about it, as she recently told her courtroom and millions of people in her viewing audience.

Let me set the scene.

A female plaintiff was suing an ex-boyfriend for living with her for months and never paying a dime of rent even though he collected unemployment compensation, $437 a month from the county for rent and $22,000 a year of federal money for college tuition (though after watching this segment, even the biggest skeptic would question whether he even attended his classes).

When Judge Judy confronted the defendant for using taxpayers' hard-earned money for things other than his rent -- for which it was earmarked -- he flippantly dodged any responsibility to help his former live-in girlfriend with rent by saying, "That's what she was there for." (That is, paying his rent.)

An increasingly upset Judge Judy retorted to the defendant: "I don't even want to pay your rent. The government says I have to pay your rent."

Judge Judy then asked him, "What do you do?"

He responded by laughing and saying almost mockingly, "I'm me."

Obviously disgusted, Judge Judy turned to bailiff Petri Hawkins-Byrd and gave her commentary regarding what responsibility government bears in creating defendants such as the one standing before her: "That's what we're creating -- a him."

And just to clarify to whom she was referring, Judge Judy followed up her tirade against the subsidy-abusing defendant by categorically stating, "I'm sending this tape to Congress." (Don't worry, Judge Judy. We the people will help you send it to Washington and everywhere else via our email, Facebook, Twitter, etc.!)

That defendant reminded me of the woman who was excited four years ago to explain to a Florida news crew why she had voted for Obama: "I won't have to worry about putting gas in my car. I won't have to worry about paying my mortgage. ... He's going to help me."

Watching the video of Judge Judy on YouTube, titled "Judge Judy and the welfare state expanded under Obama," is well worth the seven minutes of your time, if you can stomach the surprising and pathetic cliffhanger ending.

Now we know what President Obama meant by "hope and change." He clearly stated that goal and mission from the outset of his election: "fundamentally transform America."

As a billboard outside Clovis, N.M., which was "paid for by a Vietnam vet who is still fighting for his country," explains, "so now we know ... 'change' equals more debt, more taxes, more welfare, more regulation, more government, more wasteful spending, more corruption."

And all of Obama's big-government expansion is creating more government-dependent citizens who feel more and more entitled to siphon all the federal, state, county and city subsidies that they can get.

All of these socialist tendencies make me want to get the bumper sticker I saw the other day that has a picture of coins all over it and the words "I'll keep my God, my guns, my freedom, and my money. You keep the change."

Is this the type of hope and change you were counting on with the Obama administration? (And to think, nearly 40 percent of Americans still want to re-elect him for another four years!) It all smells to me like more BO (Barack Obama).

If you're ready for real reform and bold solutions for our welfare state, then you'll love former speaker of the House and current GOP presidential candidate Newt Gingrich's plan, "Unleashing Growth and Innovation to Move Beyond the Welfare State."

Growth and innovation means liberating the poor from the trap of the welfare empire through new programs that are tailored to local communities, promote work and incentivize lifelong study. Building on the success of the 1996 welfare reforms, block-granting all federal means-tested welfare programs back to the states would help millions move from dependency to prosperity while saving taxpayers trillions.

You can read more at http://www.newt.org.

Thomas Jefferson summarized my views, as well as those of most patriots I know, in a prospectus for his translation of Destutt de Tracy's "A Treatise on Political Economy": "To take from one, because it is thought that his own industry and that of his fathers has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, 'the guarantee to every one of a free exercise of his industry, & the fruits acquired by it.'"

[StonyBurk]

How much of this video discloses the root to the modern Gay Rights movement? I can see many parallels. But then I know the queers piggybacked their movement on the “civil Rights” movement—and on the Communist formula for creating new revolutions.And they were also playing the Holocaust images.

[thirst4truth]

Is BO pulling a Cloward/Piven on the USA? 6 Trillion more debt added in three years, food stamp recipients doubles in three years, all welfare spending up. I think these Marxists have found the way to take her down, with debt. He is succeeding beyond his wildest dreams. But it will take more than four years, this is it for them they may never have another chance, for “fundamentally transforming America” as Saul Alinsky teaches, “when you get resistance, step on the gas”.

[Elsie]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VuCKkOkQcHY&feature=player_embedded

[ETL]

Is BO pulling a Cloward/Piven on the USA?

The Cloward-Piven Strategy of Manufactured Crisis
[Obama's strategy for destroying the economy]
frontpage.americandaughter.com
| August 31, 2008 | Jim Simpson

Liberals self-righteously wrap themselves in the mantle of public spirit. They ardently promote policies promising to deliver the poor and oppressed from their latest misery — policies which can only find solution in the halls of government. But no matter what issue one examines, over the last fifty plus years, the liberal prescription has almost always been a failure.

Why is this so? Why does virtually every liberal scheme result in ever-increasing public spending while conditions seem to get continually worse? There are a number of reasons:

1. The programs usually create adverse incentives. This is especially true in so-called “anti-poverty” programs. The beneficiaries find government subsidies a replacement for, rather than a supplement to, gainful employment and eventually become incapable of supporting themselves. This in turn creates a dependent culture with its attendant toxic behaviors which demand still more government “remedies.”
2. The programs create their own industry, complete with scads of “think tanks” and “experts” who survive on government research grants. These are the aptly named “Beltway Bandits.”
3. They create their own bureaucracies, whose managers conspire with interested members of Congress to continually increase program funding, regardless of merit.
4. Members of Congress secure votes and campaign donations by extorting them from beneficiaries of such programs, either through veiled threats — “vote for me or those mean Republicans will wipe out your benefits” — or promises of still more bennies.

In short, all develop a vested interest in the program’s survival. But if the result is always more and more government, of government, by government, and for government, with no solution in sight, then why do liberals always see government as the solution rather than the problem?

Similarly, liberals use government to promote legislation that imposes mandates on the private sector to provide further benefits for selected groups. But the results are even more disastrous. For example, weighing the laws or stacking the courts to favor unions may provide short term security or higher pay for unionized labor, but has ultimately resulted in the collapse of entire domestic industries.

Another example is health care. The Dems are always trying to impose backdoor socialized medicine with incremental legislation. Why do you suppose American healthcare is in such crisis? Answer: the government has already become too deeply involved. For example, many hospitals are closing their doors because they are overwhelmed with the burden of caring for indigent patients, illegal immigrants and vagrants who must, by law, be admitted like everyone else, despite the fact that they cannot pay for services. Read about it here — Destroying Our Health Care. The net result is reduced availability of care for everyone, exactly the opposite of what liberals claim to want.

To further complicate things, liberal jurists and lawyers have created new theories of liability that utilize the legal system as a means to further redistribute income. This too, has resulted in higher costs and prices in affected industries, higher insurance costs, or in some cases, complete elimination of products or services.

Liberals’ endless pursuit of “rights” for different groups also does little but create increasing divisions in our society. Liberal policy pits old against young, men against women, ethnic and racial groups against one another, even American citizens against illegal aliens, all in the name of “equality.” The only result is anger, tension and equal misery for all.

How does any of this improve our lot?

Finally, when companies relocate overseas to avoid the high cost of unionized labor and heavy domestic regulation, liberals sarcastically excoriate them for “outsourcing” America. Yet, when it comes to certain domestic industries, liberals in Congress suddenly become free marketers and choose to buy from overseas contractors rather than domestic suppliers. This happened most recently with a huge military contract being outrageously awarded to the heavily subsidized European consortium, AIRBUS, over America’s own Boeing. Since liberals claim to be so determined to “save the American worker,” what gives?

You have to take a step further back and ask some fundamental questions. Why is the liberal public policy record one of such unmitigated disaster? I mean, even the worst batter hits one occasionally. No one bats zero. No one that is, except liberals.

Prior to the Republican takeover in Congress in 1994, Democrats had over fifty years of virtually unbroken power in Congress with substantial majorities most of the time. With all the time and money in the world — trillions spent — they couldn’t fix a single thing, not one. Today’s liberal has the same complaints, and the same old tired solutions. Can a group of smart people, studying issue after issue for years on end, with virtually unlimited resources at their command, not come up with a single policy that works? Why are they chronically incapable?

Why?

When things go bad all the time, despite the best efforts of all involved, I suggest to you something else is at work — something deeper, more malevolent.

I submit to you that it is not a mistake, the failure is deliberate!

There is a method to the madness, and the method even has a name: the Cloward-Piven Strategy. It was first elucidated in the 1960s by a pair of radical leftist Columbia University professors, Richard Andrew Cloward and Frances Fox Piven:

The strategy of forcing political change through orchestrated crisis…. …the “Cloward-Piven Strategy” seeks to hasten the fall of capitalism by overloading the government bureaucracy with a flood of impossible demands, thus pushing society into crisis and economic collapse.

[Part II of this article will explore those organizations created to implement the Cloward-Piven strategy and their ties to the presidential candidacy of Barack Obama.]

---

The Complete Cloward-Piven Series

The Cloward-Piven Strategy, Part I: Manufactured Crisis
The Cloward-Piven Strategy, Part I — print copy
The Cloward-Piven Strategy, Part II: Barack Obama and the Strategy of Manufactured Crisis
The Cloward-Piven Strategy, Part II — print copy
The Cloward-Piven Strategy, Part III: Conspiracy of the Lemmings
The Cloward-Piven Strategy, Part III — print copy
Hate Crimes Legislation — Back Door Censorship
_______________________________________________________________

Also see (from David Horowitz's DiscoverTheNetworks.org) ...

THE CLOWARD-PIVEN STRATEGY (CPS):

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=7522
_______________________________________________________________

Cloward, Piven and the Fundamental Transformation of America

Tuesday, January 05, 2010
By Glenn Beck

Meet Richard Cloward and Francis Fox Piven,
authors of the Cloward-Piven strategy

"I'm going to give you a hard concept to get your arms around: It's the concept that there are people in this country who want to intentionally collapse our economic system."-Glenn Beck

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,582097,00.html

Cloward, Piven and the Fundamental Transformation of America

Cloward, Piven and the Fundamental Transformation of America