“One year ago, Americans all across this country went to the polls and cast ballots for the future they wanted to see,” Obama said. A future of higher taxes, more government control, and far less personal freedom? I don’t think so.

Maybe I’m naive, but does campaigning for tax cuts equate to creating a mandate for soviet style ‘reinvention’ of the economy? No, I don’t think it does.

Vague promises of, “change,” promises of tax cuts, fiscal responsibility, and transparency were carefully calculated to deceive as many voters as possible. It worked to get Obama elected but like all lies meant to make a sale the mark eventually learns the truth once they try to take possession of the goods. What we have purchased in this President and his Congress is not a centrist government but a far far left one.

Just words

Obama’s explicit promises to have an open and transparent debate about his healthcare takeover were just words. Or lies, if you prefer.

Obama Reneges on Health Care Transparency

Count ‘Em… Obama Lied 8 Times about Televising Healthcare Debate

When a CNN commentator like Jack Kafferty calls Obama a liar…  you know damn well the jig is up.

What a far cry from the election, when then-candidate Obama pledged to- quote, ‘broadcast health care negotiations on C-SPAN, so that the American people can see what the choices are,’ unquote. President Obama hasn’t even made a token effort to keep his campaign promises of more openness and transparency in government. It was all just another lie that was told in order to get elected. ~breitbart.tv

One of Obama’s central campaign promises was tax cuts for 95% of Americans. But instead he sees his mandate as higher taxes, record deficit spending, and blaming Bush for the results of these policies as they destroy our economy. A progressive socialist-style depression is what will follow his policies.

There is no mandate for nationalizing healthcare. Which is why Pelosi, Reid, and Obama want this bill rammed through as quickly as possible in order to avoid scrutiny. No debate. No citizen participation, (that’s not how ruling works).

Obama tried to make it appear that his platform was lower taxes. His campaign of vague promises of ‘change’ was carefully calculated to deceive as many voters as possible. America didn’t vote to fundamentally transform America into a leftist country. They thought they were voting for a return to fiscal responsibility. They thought they were voting for a centrist democrat.

What we seem to have gotten is an administration willing to resemble a classic cult of personality. Public school children are made to sing songs extolling our great leader and all the wonderful things he will do for his people. Obama accepts undeserved accolades as if they were his due and expects his lapdog press to parrot his party line. These are the tactics of dictatorships, marxists, and totalitarian regimes.

From wikipedia:

Generally, personality cults are most common in regimes with totalitarian systems of government, that seek to radically alter or transform society according to (supposedly) revolutionary new ideas. Often, a single leader becomes associated with this revolutionary transformation, and comes to be treated as a benevolent “guide” for the nation, without whom the transformation to a better future cannot occur. This has been generally the justification for personality cults that arose in totalitarian societies of the 20th century, such as those of Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin. ~wikipedia

Obama and Chavez warm handshake

It certainly looks like Obama is handing over Central America to commie dictators. But then what do I know? On the other hand, Tom Hayden seems convinced. He seems to believe that Obama is in league with the commies in our southern hemisphere. At the very least he believes Obama is highly sympathetic to the cause of global communism. But maybe he just sees what he urgently hopes for.

Apparently, Obama and Chavez have had lengthy (friendly) talks.

According to eyewitness sources, under the apparently blind eye of the global media, the two leaders had lengthy conversations. The media covered the friendly photo of the initial handshake between the two leaders, then made much ado about an apparently-impertinent Chavez handing Obama a book in Spanish by Eduardo Galleano.

What has not been reported is that Obama, leaving his advisers behind, held lengthy private conversations with Chavez where only an interpreter was present.  ~tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com

Couple this with the fact that Obama has erroneously backed a leftist ally of Chavez who attempted to overthrow the constitution of Honduras and what you have is an apparent preference for 21st century socialism.

The idea that the left here in this country defends Obama and the would-be dictator Zelaya should be a caution. Is this something the left would approve of here in the US? The left views our own consitution as a, ‘flexible,’ ‘living document,’ that can be reinterpreted as they see fit for every ‘new era.’

Meanwhile Obama (and his news media) is silent about Chavez’s threats to invade Honduras to install Zelaya as a puppet of the new socialism. In fact, Chavez even printed the illegal ballots for Zelaya’s overthrow of the Honduras constitution.

What I think this reveals is that Obama is a stealth candidate whose purpose must remain mainly concealed from the general public because his true leftist policies would be completely rejected by a majority of Americans.

Thus Obama has to rely on doublespeak and alternating liberal and conservative messages about his policies. He says one thing while doing another. He claims to be for fiscal responsibility but then increases the deficit by a trillion dollars. He claims a, “fierce moral urgency,” in ending indefinite detention but then continues the policy. He claims not to be hostile to capitalism but then begins nationalizing the auto industry and begins the nationalization of the heath care industry.

Chavez, Zelaya, Castro, and Obama, captains of a new era.

Obama and democrats: imagine that as Bush approached the end of his second term he ordered an ‘opinion poll’ authorizing a convention to write a new constitution so he could serve a third term and then a fourth. Would removing him from office at that point properly be called a ‘coup’?

Constitutional assemblies are convened to write new constitutions. When Zelaya published that decree to initiate an “opinion poll” about the possibility of convening a national assembly, he contravened the unchangeable articles of the Constitution that deal with the prohibition of reelecting a president and of extending his term. His actions showed intent.

Our Constitution takes such intent seriously. According to Article 239: “No citizen who has already served as head of the Executive Branch can be President or Vice-President. Whoever violates this law or proposes its reform [emphasis added], as well as those that support such violation directly or indirectly, will immediately cease in their functions and will be unable to hold any public office for a period of 10 years.” ~csmonitor.com

The congress of Honduras along with the Supreme Court of Honduras ordered the military to remove Zelaya from office after his illegal actions attempting to prolong his term of office. This is the definition of the rule of law not a coup. So why can’t Obama get his facts straight?

“We believe that the coup was not legal and that President Zelaya remains the president of Honduras, the democratically elected president there,” Obama told reporters after an Oval Office meeting with Colombian President Alvaro Uribe.

Zelaya, in office since 2006, was overthrown in a dawn coup on Sunday after he angered [?] the judiciary, Congress and the army by seeking constitutional changes that would allow presidents to seek re-election beyond a four-year term. ~reuters.com

Does Obama ally himself with leftist dictators because he longs to be one? It would make things easier for him in transforming America.

Continuismo – the tendency of heads of state to extend their rule indefinitely – has been the lifeblood of Latin America’s authoritarian tradition. The Constitution’s provision of instant sanction might sound draconian, but every Latin American democrat knows how much of a threat to our fragile democracies continuismo presents. In Latin America, chiefs of state have often been above the law. The instant sanction of the supreme law has successfully prevented the possibility of a new Honduran continuismo.

The Supreme Court and the attorney general ordered Zelaya’s arrest for disobeying several court orders compelling him to obey the Constitution. He was detained and taken to Costa Rica. Why? Congress needed time to convene and remove him from office. With him inside the country that would have been impossible. This decision was taken by the 123 (of the 128) members of Congress present that day. ~csmonitor.com

So why is Obama intent on reinstalling Zelaya who basically threatened to overthrow the constitution of Honduras and who no doubt would like to transform Honduras into a copy of Venezuela? Are they all just brothers-in-arms? Comrades in the struggle? Co-workers of light?

As he reveals what his actual policies are we find more and more government intervention and takeover. Total transformation of the United States of America is his stated goal and he intends to deliver.

Let’s look at the deficit. We were told that we must elect Democrats because Bush was such a profligate spender. Democrats ran on a platform of fiscal conservatism. All lies.

You can see the Bush/Congress budgets from 2000 to 2008. Notice the tall red lines to the right starting at 2008 there. These are not Bush budgets, they are the Obama/Democrat congress budgets. The difference is exponential.

What is happening since the election of Obama and a completely Democrat controlled congress is a government completely out of control. Bankruptcy cannot be far behind. These budgets are unsustainable.

Add to this the nationalization of the auto industry, the healthcare industry, and the financial industry and what you have is the beginning of total government control of every aspect of our lives. There will be no freedom of speech to criticize your employer when it is the government providing your job. There will be no free speech at all after the government ‘bailout’ of the press. The government will own the presses.

This is the left’s top down approach to democracy and it is Obama’s method of madness. The best and the brightest make decisions and plan the economy for the benefit of all the people. In essence, the government controls the people. Since we are the government, they say, it’s all ok. But this is how socialism works, (or rather doesn’t work). This is a giant left turn off the cliff and into total government control. Total as in totalitarian. Eventually nothing is exempt from that control.

Once the government is paying for your healthcare, guess what, they will be deciding what foods you will be allowed to eat,  and how much you exercise.

The left has no plans or principles that will prevent every minute detail of your life coming under the control of some government agency, basically allowing some beauracrat to step in and hassle you to death. As government takes over more areas there will be more reason to take over more. You will be fined, harrassed, monitored and eventually incarcerated if you do not do whatever some government busy body wants you to do. –And it will all be for your own good of course.

This is nothing less than slavery. But it is the change that Obama promised. This is the way he will ‘set us free’.

Sounds familiar. Sadly, this experiment never ends well. How unwell it will end in our case depends on how far Obama and his congress take us down the road to serfdom.

There’s nothing worse we could do than put politicians in charge of the economy. The argument is an old one, discredited and debunked, but one held as tightly as belief in the trinity, baptism by water, or that buddha is enlightenment; in essence it is this: that business is greedy and the rich are rich because they take wealth from the poor. The history of this nation and of the system of capitalism that has developed over many years says otherwise. Wealth in free capitalist countries benefits rich and poor alike because it is the thing called capital in capitalism that works for society, to improve, invest, and return a higher standard of living to both rich and poor alike.

The truth is that however bad you think free markets are– political markets are far worse. America is a country that has never been perfect, being peopled by persons of imperfection, but in the combination of freedom, individualism, property rights, classical liberal morality, and dare I say Judeo-Christian morality, we have achieved a standard of living unparalleled by any other civilization in the history of the earth. The poor in the United States live like no other class of poor in history.

It is not by chance or fickle fortune that wealth has accrued to the capitalist system. Even as Marx fundamentally misunderstood what was happening before his eyes he nevertheless recognized that capitalism does indeed produce wealth and this wealth produced higher standards of living for all.

Dismantling the structures of American capitalism and replacing it with the structures of a politicized economy will destroy wealth creation in this country and likely the world economy will follow. The transformation that Obama and his congress are now pursuing is nothing less than a grand looting. Eventually, if we follow it to it’s logical conclusion, it will effectively end American democracy and destroy personal freedom.

The financial crisis hit the United States because its business is governed by the “unlimited free market principle” and the U.S. administration squandered money for overseas aggression and war moves, the article notes, and goes on:

In the capitalist market economy antagonism and contradictions and unbalanced development among countries bring about instability in equilibrium between foreign incomings and outgoings and foreign exchange rate and these create conditions for sparking off a financial crisis.

The economy in the capitalist countries is structurally dependent on the U.S. Many capitalist countries are in such economic relationship that they are entangled with one another with the U.S. consumer market as the axis. Precisely for this reason the financial crisis in the U.S. put major capitalist countries in the grip of economic crisis.

Capitalism is an unpopular society which diametrically runs counter to the intrinsic wishes of the popular masses in all aspects of material, spiritual and cultural and political lives, and it is an old corrupt and weak society bound to go to ruin due to the struggle of the popular masses for independence.

By its intrinsic class nature the capitalist system cannot overcome the imbalance between deformed material life and impoverished spiritual and cultural life and that between the growing demand of the popular masses for independence and the worsening political life. Herein lie the uncontrollable contradictions in the capitalist society and consequently capitalism is bound to go to ruin inevitably.

The capitalist countries are also going to decay and ruin, depending on the exploitation and plunder of developing countries.

The developing countries are standing in confrontation with the capitalist countries by strengthening the south-south cooperation as evidenced by their energetic endeavors to put an end to the outdated international economic order and, instead, build a new and fair one.

The advance of the popular masses’ cause of independence, the cause of socialism is precipitating the doomsday of capitalism.

Socialist Korea demonstrating its might by winning victories by dint of Songun serves as the beacon of hope and the banner of victory for the world people desirous of independence.

The 21st century will prove to be a century marked with historic changes in which capitalism is bound to meet its end and socialism is sure to triumph thanks to the struggle of the popular masses for independence. ~kcna.co.jp

Brought to you by the Korean Central News Agency of the People’s Republic of North Korea.