Sunday, March 30, 2014

Witnessing the Fundamental Transformation Pt. 9


"We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America."
Barack Obama, 5 days before Election Day, November 2008
 
THE WHY OF OBAMA
Barack Hussein Obama comes from a complex network of influences, all of which seem to have impacted on his ideals growing up and ultimately on his achievement goals for his Presidency.  On the one hand, he had Marxist influences from his mother's side. On the other hand, he had anti-colonialist influences from his father's side. Together the combination would create one of the most consequential political leaders in our country's history; one who would be intent on dismantling the very institutions which helped create the world's superpower.

Peering into Barack Obama's past, we learn he was born to an unusual mother, Stanley Ann Dunham (named for the son her parents never had), a white atheist woman raised in midwest America, whose parents specifically moved to Washington state so that their daughter may attend Mercer Island High School, a school known at the time for teaching a radical curriculum. Included were philosophy courses that emphasized Marxism; in fact, the school employed several pro-Marxist teachers; two of whom taught "a critical theory curriculum to students which included rejection of societal norms, attacks on Christianity, the traditional family, and assigned readings by Karl Marx."  http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Mercer_Island_High_School   Dunham would soon embrace the ideas of cultural Marxism. http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/02/cultural_marxism.html Her parents were members of the Unitarian Church near Seattle, aka the 'little red church' for its communist leanings.

Dunham ultimately married and divorced two foreign men, one from Kenya, the other from Indonesia, both Muslim.  She studied economic anthropology and rural development.  After Dunham divorced from Barack Sr., she met Lolo Soetero at the University of Hawaii and got re-married. When Jr. was a little boy they all went to live in Indonesia, where he spent the next several years of his life. Returning to Hawaii, he lived with his maternal grandparents, who introduced the young Barack to Frank Marshall Davis, card-carrying and well known member of the Communist Party, and therein began a seven year mentorship that Barack's maternal grandfather set up.

Barack's birth father, Barack Hussein Obama Sr., was born in Kenya, strongly influenced by his own father with strong anti-colonialist ideals. In fact, father and grandfather were both very active politically, in a country that was struggling to gain independence from its colonial powers. Although the relationship with his biological father was short lived, long after his father was gone, Barack was left with a legacy of  'dreams from his father', and wrote a book of the same title. These dreams included a deep rage against the Western colonial powers of his father's native country, where he was an important figure in the struggle against Western oppression.

Keen insight into part of the thinking of where Barack Obama 'comes from' ideologically is illustrated in the best selling book by Dinesh D'Souza, The Roots of Obama's Rage, which became the basis for the movie "2016 Obama's America."  In this book, D'Souza describes Barack's  'education' about his paternal family's disdain for the Western dominance in the world. He writes about the tenets of anti-colonialism: 1) "empires are produced by murderous conquest and sustained by unceasing terror and violence" 2) "colonial regimes are racist - they systematically produce the dehumanization of the colonized" 3) "colonialism is a system of piracy in which the wealth of the colonized countries is systematically stolen by the colonizers" and 4) "the colonial powers have a new leader; the United States."  These ideas seem to have been adopted and internalized by this President. How do I know? Look at how he governs. Look at how, at every turn, he tries to divide and weaken this country, on both the domestic and foreign fronts. Look at how redistribution of wealth is at the cornerstone of his policies.  Is America exceptional? Not if Barack Obama could help it.

It's not hard to understand why Obama does what he does when one looks into his formative years. The confluence of beliefs from all primary influences in his life all lead to the same road; bring down America's power in the world.  Transform this nation from a superpower to a powerless one. Is he accomplishing what he set out to do? Yes. And he is doing this systematically; he is doing this economically, militarily, and culturally. Are we weaker now as a nation than we were when he took office? Yes. On all fronts. Soon, I imagine, he hopes to claim "Mission Accomplished."  It is, after all, the fundamental transformation of the United States of America we are witnessing.


P.S. There is an abundance of information on Obama, his life, his influences, his associates, etc. Look up some of it, including his college years and his early years in Chicago, which were not addressed here. When you understand where he comes from, you'll understand where he's going.
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=1511
http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/07/what_barack_obama_learned_from.html
http://dailycaller.com/2012/08/15/in-harvard-essay-young-michelle-obama-argued-for-race-based-faculty-hiring/
http://www.conservativedailynews.com/2012/03/americas-race-to-the-bottom-barack-obama-and-critical-theory/
http://www.dineshdsouza.com/books/the-roots-of-obamas-rage/

Sunday, March 16, 2014

Minimum Wage, Minimum Benefit

In an eye-opening segment on TheBlazeTV, Glenn Beck and Stu Burguiere broke down the truth behind minimum wages.

Little Known Facts:
-1% of the U.S. labor force earns minimum wage
-Of the 1%, teens make up the largest age group; these are not people trying to support a family
-32% of minimum wage workers are full time workers
-In 2014, a full time minimum wage worker earns $3,410 more than the federal poverty limit

Little Known Facts:  When minimum wages are hiked, union wages are also hiked.  This is often built into union contracts; a raise in the minimum wage triggers a wage hike for union members. When union wages are hiked, more dues money is available to go into the Democrats' campaign coffers, giving them the incentive to push for minimum wage hikes.  An increase also means more security for the workers, because it restricts businesses from hiring low skilled workers who would otherwise gladly take less pay for experience.What a convenient circle of events.  http://www.glennbeck.com/2014/02/13/americans-love-the-minimum-wage-unless-you-tell-them-the-truth-about-it/

The sad truth: The Congressional Budget Office projects that if the minimum wage is increased to $10.10, there will be a loss of 500,000 jobs.  Although this issue has been championed by the left, I wonder if  they see the irony in the net effect of this mandate: the very people they speak about helping (the poor, the minorities, the youth) are the very people that will be negatively impacted by increases in the minimum wage. 

When employers are forced to pay a higher wage for unskilled or low skilled labor, they will then outsource that work because they can't afford to pay a higher wage for it. Hence, the loss of jobs for low level workers. In this case, the majority of these workers are young people. Additionally, when a business incurs more expense, often that expense is passed on to the consumer. Again, a more expensive product hurts those for whom this act is looking to help.

In sum, a fraction of 1% of the country works for minimum wage and is already above the poverty line. When Americans were polled, the vast majority (75%) supported an increase in minimum wage. When told that it meant the loss of jobs, only 37% favored it. Minimum wage, minimum benefit.

Thursday, March 13, 2014

Stay Out of Our Business!

Clearly this President never worked in private industry. Obama's new decree, is to have employers of salaried employees (not hourly employees) pay them for their overtime. Now, on the surface this may sound 'fair', but just scratch with a thumbnail and see the unfairness in this.

If Barack Obama had worked in private industry, he would know that working late and putting in extra hours was something you did if you wanted to get promoted, earn a bonus, get a salary increase, or all of the above. It's how you stood out from the other employees, it's how you demonstrated your work ethic, it's how you proved you could handle more work, it's how you showed your boss you were dedicated to your job. And you did this voluntarily. Maybe, one could argue, there was an unwritten expectation...to an extent this was true. But it was your option to take. And if you took it, it was usually acknowledged at the next job evaluation.

So where does this President get off dictating to employers that they must pay extra to salaried employees who work overtime? As if intruding on private businesses with Obamacare wasn't enough of a hit for employers, now they must compensate for work which previously was done voluntarily by workers to get ahead? The consequence? The boss will now just tell you to go home. How then, do we demonstrate our willingness to climb the ladder? How then, does one distinguish themselves from the other employees?

Obama's objective to equalize income is absurd and un-American on so many levels. And like he does so often, he says one thing and does another. "If you work hard, you can get ahead," he tells young people. Well, Mr. President, you just took that option away. And like so many things this man does, he just added another disincentive to work harder.

Saturday, March 8, 2014

Witnessing The Fundamental Transformation Pt. 8

"We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America."
Barack Obama, 5 days before Election Day, November 2008

THE HOW OF OBAMA
Some call him the founder of modern community organizing, who profoundly influenced Barack Obama. Some claim his book on revolutionary tactics influenced the 60's radicals, who have since infiltrated all institutions of our society, in order to destroy a system they viewed as oppressive and unjust.

Saul Alinsky was a Communist/Marxist from Chicago, (1909-1972), born of Russian parents, whose "Rules for Radicals", published in 1971, impacted a generation of left wing radicals. Alinsky had strong convictions that America needed a dramatic overhaul, that the Have-nots must learn strategies on how to take from the Haves, as this country, in his belief, was rife with economic injustice. But not just economic injustice; he felt that all of society's problems were interrelated - crime, unemployment, disease, racism, inadequate housing, etc. In his view, what was needed was a revolution to turn the society upside-down and inside-out. Destroy it. Rebuild it in the utopian vision held by these leftist radicals.

In the Alinsky model, community organizing was a euphemism for revolution; "the goal is to foment enough public discontent, moral confusion, and outright chaos to spark the social upheaval that Marx, Engels and Lenin predicted..." As writer Richard Poe put it, "Alinsky viewed revolution as a slow, patient process. The trick was to penetrate existing institutions such as churches, unions and political parties.” He advised organizers and their disciples to quietly, subtly gain influence within the decision-making ranks of these institutions, and to introduce changes from that platform. This was precisely the tactic of “infiltration” advocated by Lenin and Stalin.  In David Horowitz's analysis of  "Rules for Radicals", he quotes Alinsky: "From the moment an organizer enters a community, he lives, dreams, eats, breathes, sleeps only one thing, and that is to build the mass power base of what he calls the army." "The issue is never the issue. The issue is always the revolution." Organizing for power was supreme. And one of the guiding principles was,  'the ends justify the means'. One vehicle for achieving the ends is miscommunication; it "is the precise art that he teaches radicals who are trying to impose socialism on a country whose people understand that socialism destroys freedom:  Don’t sell it as socialism; sell it as as "progressivism", "economic democracy" and "social justice."
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2314
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/Articles/Rules%20for%20Revolution%20%282%29.pdf

Forward to 1986. Barack Obama is hired by the Alinsky team to organize residents on the South Side of Chicago. Three of Obama's mentors were trained in Alinsky's 'rules', and Obama himself, for several years,  taught workshops on the Alinsky methods.

According to Awr Hawkins, of Breitbart.com, Alinsky's impact on Obama has manifested itself demonstrably in his ability to say one thing and do another. This  duplicitousness is perfectly acceptable behavior within the model; "For it was Alinsky who spent his life teaching would-be radicals (like Obama) that you can say what you have to say to get over the hump, but once you're over the hump, you do whatever you want to do.  In other words, it's okay to present yourself as something moderate, even centrist, for the purposes of securing power, and once you've secured that power it is perfectly acceptable to revert to who (and what) you really are."   Hence, Obama's pose as a moderate in the run-up to an election, but sharply leftist after his victories.  http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/04/05/how-saul-alinsky-taught-obama-to-say-one-thing-and-do-the-opposite

Examples of Alinsky's tactics manifested in Obama's methods include: Change is brought about through relentless agitation and "trouble making" of a kind that radically disrupts society as it is.  Think about the very disruptive and violent Occupy Wall Street movement triggered in large part by the endless speeches about the wealthy 1% (the Haves) and the disadvantaged 99% (the Have nots).  Think about all the anger and racial resentment stirred up during the Trayvon Martin case, when Obama had made clear which side of the case he was on. These two examples, of many, served to 'make trouble' and divide the country, since Obama clearly does not want unity. Obama wants polarization.
  
The organizer can never focus on a single issue. He must move inexhaustibly from one issue to the next. Obama constantly moves from one issue to the next. From taxing and spending at an unmatched pace, to amnesty for illegals, to health care, to gun control, to climate change policies, to education...the list goes on and on.

In the list of Alinsky's rules, Rule #5: "Ridicule is man's most potent weapon."  The mocking of climate change skeptics, policy critics, gun owners, conservative talk show hosts, Fox News...The president himself has actually resorted to name calling and has recruited his minions to do the same.

 Rule#12: "Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it." Nothing is more illustrative of this than the Tea Party, which has been targeted, by the media, by the government, and by the President himself, as an extreme right-wing faction of the Republican Party, which is to be feared and destroyed. Many Americans have a negative view of the Tea Party, not because of who they are and what they stand for, but because of the successful polarization tactics.
For a list of the 'rules': http://www.bestofbeck.com/wp/activism/saul-alinskys-12-rules-for-radicals

While Alinsky provided the tactics for Obama, Alinsky also provided the inspiration for other '60's radicals, Cloward and Piven, who devised the strategy in Obama's playbook. Richard Andrew Cloward and his wife Frances Fox Piven, both formerly of Columbia University and long-standing members of the Democratic Socialists of America, created a strategy of crisis to help empower poor people. They believed that only when the rest of society is afraid of them, poor people can then advance.  

The Cloward-Piven Strategy, as it has become known, is to overwhelm the government bureaucracy system, flooding it with impossible demands beyond the capacity of those agencies to handle it. This is designed to break the budget, force them into gridlock and bring the system down. This then results in fear, turmoil, and violence - conditions they believed were just ripe for bringing in radical change. And that radical change was to collapse the capitalist system and its institutions and usher in socialism. There are several examples of their strategy at work, one of which is the aggressive attempt to get more people on welfare rolls. We have seen in the past few years, the explosive rise in food stamp recipients, the extended handouts of long term unemployment benefits, and increased benefits going to illegal immigrants. For further information on other crises designed to overwhelm the system (e.g. voter fraud,  the mortgage meltdown, and ACORN's role in all of this, including Obama's role, as their lawyer and supporter in his early days), see these articles. 
http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/obama-voter-fraud/2008/09/22/id/325456
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/Articles/recenteffortstooverloadtheamericansystem.html

Since the start of his administration, Obama has surrounded himself with advisers and czars who share his socialist/communist utopian vision. He has appointed far left thinkers to the federal bench and to his cabinet. For further information on many, but not all of his extreme left wing appointees, go to: http://www.westernjournalism.com/exclusive-investigative-reports/obama-surrounds-himself-with-the-most-extreme-appointees-in-american-history/ 

After reading about Obama's inspirational 'advisers' - Saul Alinsky and Cloward and Piven, it's easy to see how Obama is pursuing his objectives. And judging by the goals of these revolutionaries, it's also easy to see that they all share the same endgame. Destroy this country as we know it and replace it with socialism or communism. Or, as Obama puts it, the fundamental transformation of the United States of America.

Oh, by the way, another notable official was inspired by Saul Alinsky. This person interviewed him and wrote a 92-page college thesis on Alinsky's theories and methods.  Upon graduation, this person was offered a job by Alinsky, but instead chose to go to Yale Law School. This person could very well be the next President of the United States.  This person was Hillary Clinton.