Posted on 03/30/2012 4:10:23 AM PDT by Kaslin
You can't even casually surf the Internet on any given day without numerous reminders of just how radical President Obama is -- and this is during an election year, when it should be in his political interest to mask his radicalism.
Minding my own business, I happened on an article by Jacob Laksin on FrontPageMag.com, titled "Obama's Pick for World Bank Hates Capitalism." I'd heard a bit about this before but hadn't yet studied it. I'm so used to Obama's extremism that such revelations hardly move me, much less surprise me. I know where he stands; I just wish everyone else did.
Obama has nominated Dartmouth College President Jim Yong Kim to head the World Bank. In 2000, Kim edited a collection of studies under the title "Dying for Growth: Global Inequality and the Health of the Poor."
The "book's radical central premise," writes Laksin, is that "capitalism and economic growth (are) bad for the poor across the world." Kim co-wrote the introduction, which includes the claim that the book shows "that the quest for growth in GDP and corporate profits has in fact worsened the lives of millions of women and men." It says that even in those instances in which free trade and free markets have led to economic growth, they've done so without benefiting "those living in 'dire poverty,' one-fourth of the world's population." Can't you just hear Obama himself in those words?
One thing that helps the plight of the very poor, according to one chapter, is a socialized health care system, such as the one in Communist Cuba. The chapter's author touts that system because of the Cuban government's "commitment not only to health in the narrow sense but to social equality and social justice." As we opponents of Obamacare have said repeatedly, Obamacare is hardly just about making health care more affordable or more accessible, neither of which it will do in the end, but is a stealth vehicle to greatly expand governmental control over limitless aspects of our lives to enable the leftist central planners to effectuate "social equality and social justice" under the innocuous guise of providing health care.
As with so many of its ideas, the left is wrong about the record of free markets on the poor, notes Laksin, who points to "overwhelming evidence" that economic growth raises income levels and reduces global poverty. But again, leftist ideologues aren't motivated by a desire to improve the lot of the downtrodden, domestically or globally, but by a burning passion for statism.
This book is right out of Obama's playbook. Can you not see the common thread running through these alleged glories of the Cuban system and Obama's approach to health care and his war on oil, coal and gas, along with his corresponding commitment to green energy and his various stimulus bills, all of which increase our national deficits, debt and unemployment but greatly increase governmental control?
Obama's nomination of Kim should be no surprise to anyone, considering his consistent record of radical associations and appointments, from Van Jones to transnationalist Harold Koh. For Obama, one's radicalism is not a deterrent to one's resume, but an enhancement. His appointment of Van Jones was not a mistake owing to the administration's failure to vet him as Obama's defenders later claimed once Jones' radicalism was exposed. Obama appointed Jones precisely because his administration was intimately familiar with Jones' views; indeed, the White House carved out a new position -- green energy czar -- specifically tailored for his worldview and then happily placed him in it.
Tearing myself away from this uplifting article, I next encountered one detailing Obama's ongoing fulfillment of his promise to bankrupt the coal industry -- with his Environmental Protection Agency's issuance of new proposed rules on carbon emissions, which will please the goddess Gaia but won't do much for the production of energy, economic growth, jobs or the poor, for that matter. This was after watching a report on Fox News earlier that morning highlighting Obama's obstruction of oil shale production based on other dubious environmental doom-saying.
Next, I saw John Fund's piece on National Review Online outlining Obama's background in the sordid community organizing tactics of famed leftist radical Saul Alinsky and Obama's close ties with the now fallen ACORN. According to New York Times reporter Jodi Kantor -- in her new book on Obama -- Obama still thought of himself as a community organizer when he was senator. He still does today, and, Fund warns, conservatives should be prepared for his Alinsky tactics in the 2012 campaign.
Maybe this all wouldn't be so exasperating if Obama didn't hold himself out as a uniter, but he is the furthest thing from it, as he, if anything, is doubling down on his polarizing radicalism and his unswerving commitment to a statist agenda for America.
There are two choices:
Ration by means(what we had)
Or ration by government fiat (obamacare)
Romney's going to be the nominee. I didn't want it either. I don't know why better conservative candidates didn't run. Santorum and Gingrich can't win the primary, why in the world do people still think they can win the general? The writings on the wall: sit it out and we become a communist nation.
Virtually everything Obama has done as president screams out that he’s a radical leftist. And as usual, the media says: what’s so radical about appointing people who hate free-market economics to positions of power? I’m sure, like in the socialized Obama-health care muddle, the media can’t understand what all the fuss is about.
The single most powerful argument for Romney is that he does not hate the country. That is the single most important contrast they must make and keep on making to get this devoted Stalinist out of the White House
Three out of the four basically concluded that the Constitution is insignificant -- the Supreme Court would be making a terrible decision if it construed ObamaCare to be "unConstitutional", because that simply doesn't matter. What matters is "morality". And what they mean by that is "Marxism". Redistribution of healthcare resources is far more important than anything like the Constitution.
These people are making no attempt to hide anything now.
Dictator Baby-Doc Barack has ALWAYS ignored The US Constitution, ESPECIALLY with Obama”care.”
The cancer of Obama”care” now has invaded World Finances as Obama last week choose a “Public health expert” for the World Bank Presidency.
Romney has promised to “Repeal and REPLACE” Obama”care.”
Senator (R Tn) Son-of-a-Mitch McConnell has promised to “Repeal and REPLACE” Obama”care.”
According to Michelle Bachmann (R Min), there are currently over 10, 000 REGULATIONS attached to Obama”care.”
_______
The major problem with THE NINE SUPREMES is that they are chosen for political reasons by the POTUS, and then they vote as an un-accountable democracy, for a Nation that is NOT a Democracy, but a REPUBLIC.
As a result, THE NINE SUPREMES commonly vote 5 to 4 on most issues. Constitutionality is seldom a consideration, and their up-coming ruling on Obama”care” will prove my point.
Now is the time to stand and deliver to address our grievances to the dictates of the Left.
Oppose the dictates of Dictator Baby-Doc Barack!
Our ONLY chance to ABOLISH Obama”care” rests with THE NINE SUPREMES, because Romney will be defeated by Obama.
IMHO, if Romney is anointed as the RNC Nominee, THE main issue in the National Election, Obama”care,” will be taken off the campaign table. Hence, Romney will not only lose, but suffer another crushing, and sadly typical, RINO defeat.
____________
To those who want poster ideas, here are a few ideas for demonstration posters:
Obama”care” was robo-signed by Congress, and is therefore illegal.
Obama”care” was 2409 pages long, and is still being written, but not by Congress: witness the forced contraception coverage recently added by HHS Regulators.
Obama”care” has caused “The Catholic Spring.”
Obama”care” reduces competition, and therefore is illegal by the 1890 Sherman Anti-Trust Law.
Obama”care” is designed to be a US Federal Government monopoly, with no competition.
Obama”care” also is illegal according to the US Constitution, because it violates our freedom of choice.
Will THE NINE SUPREMES notice any of these three violations? I seriously doubt it.
BTW, impeached Bill Clinton proved that the US President is above US Federal Law, so anything that the President wants he gets, regardless of the Federal Laws that he has violated.
Romney is a globalist and wants to enslave the US to the UN’s global warming agenda.
He’s no saviour and he will overcome America’s sovergnity for his international bankster pals without GOP resistence. He loves America so much he sold Romneycare to the Nation and is not love of freedom. That is love of centralized power and oppression.
Bush had no resistence when pushing through “free” drug benefits in medicare without GOP resistence while the nation was going broke. It would be the same for leftist Romney. He’s to the far left of Bush.
Excellent post. I agree wholeheartedly.
I heard the same argument for John McCain in 2008.....
If all these people were so concerned about the poor & the very poor, they should have become missionaries or joined the Peace Corps. Stop taking from those who work & giving to those who don’t or won’t.
“These people are making no attempt to hide anything now.”
The scary part is that many members of the electorate agree with them and will vote accordingly. (Some might even impersonate Minnie Mouse, Donald Duck and Mickey Mouse and have their votes forcibly honored.)
IMHO
Obama is hitting up his leftist base for campaign money now-overtly. When it gets closer to the election, he’ll pretend to be a centrist publicly, but he’ll still sneak off to NY and CA for private fund raising events with no reporters allowed.
It’s almost surreal watching how he’s working hand in hand with the media and his DOJ to create racial tension. It makes it far easier to believe there are far more sinister motives we can expect to be fulfilled through groups like occupy Wallstreet and assorted other socialist sycophant groups.
If the Supreme Court dumps Obama”care,” then the Republicans must be ready to dump Obama”care” also.
To Replace or modify Obama”care” would result in The Republican Party ceasing to represent the 66 % of Americans that for years have opposed Obama”care.”
The overwhelming endorsements by the RNC-E of Romney, the Godfather of Obama”care,” is a very convincing indication that the RNC will betray the voters and Replace Obama”care.”
Replace Obama”care” and the voters will replace the Republican Party.
The era of the “Big Tent” Republican Party will be over.
Obama and the Democrats passed Obamacare and labeled it the “Affordable Care Act”. It mandates the 40 million without health insurance buy it even though most of them can’t afford it. Obamacare isn’t lowering health insurance rates. That was just another lie. Will the SCOTUS shaft these people by going along with Obama and the Democrats?
The "poor" people in the US are better off and in better health than most of the people in any markist country.
I have flip-flopped from being able to vote Romney/will never vote Romney/may vote Romney as the Left and Obama forge forward towards tyranny.
Your point?
“I have flip-flopped from being able to vote Romney/will never vote Romney/may vote Romney as the Left and Obama forge forward towards tyranny.”
I, too have gone back and forth on the voting-for-Romney issue. I’m not sure voting for Romney is a long-term negative at this point, though (assuming elections are allowed this year).
If Obama is re-elected, it will be the end of America until the civil war is over.
If Romney is elected, it will be the end of the GOP as a major party - forever.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.