Something Wicked This Way Comes

A Socialist Agenda of Saul Alinsky Is Being Waged by Obama and the Democrats

“We are the hungry ones. Your torments call us like dogs in the night, and we’re to feed and feed well.  We stuff ourselves on other people’s nightmares and butter our plain bread with delicious pain…We suck that misery and find it sweet.  We search for more, always” – Mr. Dark,   Ray Bradbury’s Something Wicked This Way Comes

 

We are moving so fast towards a Marxist tyranny, we cannot keep up with everything that is happening and being proposed and imposed.

Just today, during the signing of Porkulus in Denver – Obama stated that we will have “smart meters” put on all our homes – to ‘monitor’ our energy use, in which he lied boldfaced about the intent of such a device.  It is NOT to cut our energy costs or cut down on power outages – but it is a device to meter and document WHEN and HOW you use that energy, and to report it to the government for taxation.

Obama said that he will be launching “other” aspects of an ambitious plan to ‘change’ the country.

Roger King from the Canada Free Press documents the Marxist agenda of the first few weeks of this regime we will suffer under.

 

Something Wicked This Way Comes

By Roger King  Tuesday, February 17, 2009 

Barack Obama’s has been in power for about a month but his promise of “change” appears to be more than just a liberal agenda. Not only is it becoming apparent that the economic crisis is being used to push a socialist agenda that would make Sol Alinsky proud but there are some very disturbing signs how the Democratic plan to win subsequent elections.

Bailout Bill

Obama campaigned on a message of “hope over fear” but his current rhetoric talks about a crisis of catastrophic scope if the bailout bill isn’t passed immediately. What makes this suspicious is the fact CBO states most of the bill will only take effect at the end of 2010 and will actually hurt our gross national product over the following 10 years. Its apparent president Obama used this bill to accomplish things that would have been much harder to pass on their own merit.

 

Religious discrimination: Buried in the bill is a section that bans religious activities in many public education buildings. Further, there are upgrades to the national school systems but they are prohibited where religious activates may occur. Democrats voted 43-54 against an amendment to strike from the economic stimulus bill language that discriminates against people of faith.

Universal Health Care: The outline for Universal Health care will be put in place through this bill. In mandating a computer system for all medical records, every person will be mandated to have their records recorded in Federal DB. 
A National Coordinator of Health Information Technology is going to be created to monitor this system. This outline will likely be used to track treatments to make sure your doctor is doing what the federal government deems appropriate and cost effective. Hospitals and doctors that are not “meaningful users” of the new system will face penalties.

ACORN: Potentially up to $4 billion for radical groups like ACORN will be dispersed. ACORN is a radical socialist group that helped the housing bust by pushing banks into making bad loans and is accused of voter fraud in over 6 states. This group openly supports the Democrats and their tactics were learned through Sol Alinsky teachings. Obama even taught these classes to ACORN in his Chicago days.

Open Ended Welfare Returns: The bill sets in motion another $523 billion in new welfare spending that is hidden by budgetary gimmicks. Although this bill pretends that most of its welfare benefit increases will lapse after two years, the intend for most of these increases to become permanent. Instead of Welfare ending for recipients in 5 years that was done during the Clinton administration, now welfare entitlements will be open ended.

 

TARP Funds to Control Business

TARP funds have been used to buy stock in banks and financial institutions which essentially is the government buying ownership stakes in these companies. The question is will the government keep this ownership and for how long. President Obama has also decided to limit the executive pay to no more than $500, 000 per year for those companies that receive the bailouts. Of course they say these are only temporary measures but no end date has been given. To top it off Barney Frank is proposing that the government regulate the pay for all executives but for some reason not for lawyers or the Hollywood elite.

Gun Control

In the first session of Congress the liberals introduced H.R. 45 (Blair Holt’s Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009). This bill targets anyone who owns a gun by requiring them to register all guns within 2 years. Every 5 years the gun owners much go through a renewal process for each gun they own. Failure to comply with these rules carry heavy penalties jail time and loosing your guns. Probably the worst provision authorizes government searches without warrants. A new federal bureaucracy will be created to monitor this process. Do you really expect the liberal elites to allow automatic gun renewal?

Silencing The Media

To anyone but the most ardent liberal, its quite apparent that the majority of the media is blatantly supporting Obama’s ever action. The revelation that for 17 years Rahm Emmanuel (Obama’s Chief of Staff), George Stephanopoulos (ABC News), James Carville and Paul Begala (CNN) have had daily hour long calls that have continued into the Obama administration is but one example. Even though CNN is selling Obama shirts they will tell you they are not bias. Actions by the Obama administration have made it quite apparent to the media you are either with Obama or you will systematically be silenced.

For those that don’t follow “the program”, you will be punished. For example, during the election the Washington Times, Fox News, N.Y. Post and Dallas Morning News got kicked off the Obama’s plane. It wasn’t lost on the press that all these groups were McCain supporters. During press conferences Obama preselects who will be called to ask questions. Ask the wrong questions and you won’t get picked again. Again this isn’t lost on the adoring press.

Using one of Sol Alinsky’s sayings “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.”, President Obama told Republican’s “You can’t just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done.” Although so far President Obama has claimed he doesn’t want a fairness doctrine, there is a growing push to bring back some form of the “Fairness Doctrine”.

Obama has already talked about wanting more minority ownership and requiring broadcasters to operate “in the public interest” which will be over see by government or community groups. To add to the pressure shortening licensing terms will make it more likely owner will just abandon talk radio. The House Energy and Commerce Committee is also looking into policies that would allow it greater internet oversight.

Census

The census taking is supposed to be ruled in a bipartisan manner. However, the Obama administration is attempting to move the execution of the U.S. Census from the Department of Commerce to the White House under Rob Emanuel’s control. This is totally unprecedented and against federal law. Sen. Judd Gregg withdrew his name from consideration as Sec. of Commerce in large part because of this action.

So what is the problem with having the White House running the Census? The census results drive how welfare and aid to states is distributed. Further congressional seats per state and the electoral college changes with these results.

Instead of having the normal direct count, Robe Emanuel wants to estimate numbers instead of an actual count for minority groups. To make matters even more interesting, under the White House direction there would be less requirements for openness as to the process that was used to arrive at the census results. Talk about the potential for major gerrymandering that could bring a windfall of new Democrat votes.

Illegal Immigrates Getting Amnesty

Once again there is an immigration bill working its way through Congress. It would give Illegal Aliens 24 hour to get access with their lawyers paid with tax payer dollars. Temporary Visa can be renewed indefinitely. Tax payer money would also go to Mexico to have their . Illegal Aliens won’t have to pay back taxes but will get tax credits. North American Union will be fast tracked. In state tuition to college will always apply.

When our country is in such a bad recession, why would you want new citizens that inherently use over twice tax money than they play? Why would we want more workers in our country when unemployment is over 7%? Again they overwhelmingly vote Democratic.

District of Columbia to have Congressional Votes

Democrats want to give full representative to District of Columbia thereby giving them two senators and a representative for the House of Representatives. Since only states have this ability, Congress will pass a law giving the District of Columbia “the functional equivalent of a state”. On February 11, 2009 a senate committee passed this very bill and will be voted on by all members in the coming weeks. You would be right if you guessed that the District of Columbia would vote Democratic?

Civilian Expeditionary Workforce

While on the campaign trail Barack Obama said “We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.” You Tube Link

Now, the Defense Department has established just such a “Civilian Expeditionary Workforce” (Defense Department Directive 1404.10) that will see American civilians trained and equipped to deploy overseas in support of worldwide military missions.Link According to a Defense Department report the intent of this program “is to maximize the use of the civilian workforce to allow military personnel to be fully utilized for operational requirements,”

Is this an initial step towards fulfilling president Obama’s promise to form a civilian national security force as powerful as the U.S. military? Will this “Civilian Expeditionary Workforce” ever be used in the US? Will we see “youth brigades” roaming the streets to protect us? We will have to keep a close eye on this.

 

 

Obama – Design for Despotism

This entry by Mr. Keyes is perhaps one of the best historical analysis and observations of where we are in the tyranny that is now unfolding upon us.

Read it.

Ponder it.

Consider it.

It is the unabashed truth of where we are.

But let me just state an observation – that the Bush-hating imbeciles that were constantly screaming about violations of the Constitution, are today… strangely silent.

Which vindicates my total disgust, suspicion and contempt of them.

Design for Despotism? 

– ALAN KEYES

“But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism…” From the American Declaration of Independence

“Probe with bayonets. If you encounter mush, proceed…” Lenin

These days arrogant pundits have a tendency to sneer at the very thought of “conspiracy theory”. This reminds me of Verbal’s pithy pronouncement from the movie “The Usual Suspects” (not for family viewing, by the way) that “The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he did not exist.” But when I’m tempted to let snide punditry influence my thinking I more often call to mind the above quoted words from America’s Declaration of Independence. It reminds us that people who want to preserve their liberty must be willing to keep in mind the possibility that the actions of their government leaders may be part of a “design” (that is, a consciously contrived plan of concerted actions) aimed at establishing despotic rule over them. If the American Founders left room for a little conspiracy theory, why shouldn’t we? Indeed, in the cyber age we should be more open to it than ever. After all, when it comes to human activities, “conspiracy” is just another word for systematic programming. The key question in that context: What is the goal?

I’ve been asking myself that question as I consider the Alleged Usurper’s recent power grab involving the Census Bureau. And I’m not just referring to the obviously partisan purposes it may serve. What struck me more was the unnecessarily arrogant fashion in which the Obama faction declared control over an activity that the Constitution clearly states shall be determined by law. Existing law places the Census bureau under the supervision of the Secretary of Commerce. A change must be made in the law before the White House can constitutionally alter that arrangement. Admittedly, with a Democrat majority in both Houses, Obama will have things his way. But at the very least, appearing to issue orders not authorized by law (as the Constitution requires) smacks of a hasty if not dictatorial temperament. However, my concern isn’t about temperament, either.

Years ago, I wrote my doctoral dissertation at Harvard. I focused on Alexander Hamilton’s contribution to the U.S. Constitution. As I researched and ponder this subject, I was struck by the dangerous abuses of executive power that might arise, under certain circumstances, because of the assumptions the Framers made with respect to the characteristics of the American people. The Constitution’s famous system of checks and balance works only on the assumption that the different branches of government will jealously guard their own Constitutional prerogatives and the prerogatives of the people they are supposed to represent; and will therefore adamantly resist encroachments upon them. If one branch or another takes unconstitutional initiatives, the judiciary has means to forestall the effects in some cases. In others, the legislature has the power to remove the offending officials. The executive can simply refuse to carry out unconstitutional actions. But, by the same token, only the executive has frequent opportunity to carry on an unconstitutional initiative until it produces a concrete result that can be challenged only after the fact. An individual might, for example, be unconstitutionally arrested, tortured and killed under the auspices of executive authority long before either of the other branches even hear about the action, much less have any chance to intervene. The first safeguard against such abuse is the character of the one vested with executive power. But if that person has the disposition to move beyond the law until met with hard resistance (to probe with bayonets, as Lenin put it), great and perhaps fatal harm could be done before such resistance sufficed to stop him.

There will be a special danger in this regard if the executive in question has enough support in the Congress to make him confident that his abuses will not be challenged, or that challenges will never have sufficient support to achieve the only outcome that will definitely remove him from Constitutional authority, which is to say, impeachment and removal from office. Can we say with any confidence that we are not in this situation of special peril to liberty?

The present occupant of the White House assumed residence while refusing to provide credible evidence that he is in fact constitutionally qualified to serve as President. Neither the judiciary nor the Congress, nor any other government officials, showed any disposition to defend the terms and authority of the Constitution. Unlike Arnold Schwarzenegger and others, Obama took the initiative to run for President despite whatever knowledge still impels him to withhold from public view the document that would rebut the substantial allegation that he is not a natural born U.S. citizen, and therefore unqualified to serve. Following Lenin’s dictum, he probed. He met no resistance. He has so far gotten away with it.

Does his dictatorial presumption with respect to the administration of the census reflect the same tactical disposition? If he so casually crosses the line of respect for Constitutional formalities with no shred of cover from the circumstances of his action, what will he do when some emergency actually seems to authorize extraordinary measures? He has already called for a domestic security force as large and well funded as the military. He has already begun to tout the economic crisis as something that can only be solved by centralizing more and more power under his control. His supporters have already begun an effort to replace allegiance to the Constitution with personal allegiance to him. Taken alone, such things might be meaningless. But altogether, like the threads of a tapestry, they begin to suggest a design.

Someone who plays the party dictator when nothing is at stake may just be practicing for the moment when everything hangs in the balance. And if Congress is willing to tolerate such infringements of the Constitution when there’s nothing to fear, what must we expect if and when some catastrophe calls for armed forces in the streets, and the prerogatives of disaster arm executive whims with raw power to do things far more threatening than the partisan rearrangement of the bureaucracy?

Let’s not pretend that we live in times when such events are at all unlikely to occur. On the contrary, the last terror attack hit upon our soil in a time of relative prosperity. If the next one wrenches us in the midst of an economic depression, will the twin demons of fear and economic misery leave people with much heart for liberty? Or will it seem a pointless distraction from the imperatives of survival. Such times call for a leader whose heart will be the repository of America’s love of freedom, keeping the flame alive in spite of all. But human history suggests that they are more likely to spawn leaders that seize the opportunity to do what their ambition, their ideology, or their resentful disposition has inclined them to do all along: seize the day; seize the power; and use that power to snuff out the flame of liberty, and scatter its dying embers.

I know that there are some Americans so far gone that they look without concern upon the prospect of such despotism. For them, the so-called economic stimulus boondoggle is like the distribution of money a new Roman Caesar would make to woo the support and loyalty of the Praetorians and the Roman rabble. Like such Romans, they are doubtless the ones who will gladly serve as servile henchman of despotic ambition, as it works to cow, seduce and subdue the rest of us. But are they so many that the little harbingers of tyranny, carried upon the winds of so-called change, have no audience capable of understanding and responding to their significance? 

Are there no Americans left willing to see with an eye jealous of our freedom, and stand, with hardy, God struck spirits upon the rights He has designed for us?