Tag Archives: porkulus

Something Wicked This Way Comes

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

obamawickedthis-waycomes

“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.

     

     

    6 Comments

    Filed under News, Politics

    Senate Says American People Don’t Care About Pork

    So we “Chattering Classes” can just shut the hell up according to DEMOCRAT SCHMUCK Charles Schumer (D-NY)

    The hubris and condescending arrogance of these Marxists that think themselves kings in office go FAAAAAR beyond what our forefather’s were willing to suffer by the indifference of Parliment and King George III.

    It is getting to the time when we need to break out the tar and the feathers.

    1 Comment

    Filed under Uncategorized

    Stimulus We Need? 300 Million Dollars for Golf Carts?

    Obama Warns Of “Catastrophe” Unless Stimulus Passes Quickly

    The Entire Economy Rests on a Precipice of Disaster Unless D.C. Gets 300 Million for New Golf Carts

    Senate Democrats add 300 million for Golf Carts to Stimulus

    The U.S. Senate’s stimulus package includes $300 million for environmentally friendly modes of transportation, including “neighborhood electric vehicles” — which are, in fact, golf carts.

    The 778-page Senate bill includes this allocation: “For capital expenditures and necessary expenses of acquiring motor vehicles with higher fuel economy, including: hybrid vehicles; neighborhood electric vehicles; electric vehicles; and commercially-available, plug-in hybrid vehicles, $300,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2011.

    The Web site Townhall.com observes: “The Democrats thought they could fool you by renaming the money earmarked for golf carts in the stimulus bill as paying for ‘neighborhood electric vehicles’…

    “Most people call them golf carts.”

    4 Comments

    Filed under Uncategorized

    The Stimulus to Ban Religious Worship and Silence Christian Viewpoints

    The war to silence any opposition to the Secular and Political Left is now ratcheting itself up.

    The clarion calls from the Elite Democrats to silence Christian and Talk Radio are reaching fevered pitch, while the Omnibus Stimulus Pork bill has revealed itself to being a vehicle to ban religious worship.

     

    Stimulus to ban religious worship


    ‘This isn’t like a convenient oversight, this is intentional’

     

    President Obama’s proposed economic stimulus plan makes a deliberate – and unconstitutional – attempt to censor religious speech and worship on school campuses across the nation, according to a lawyer who argued related cases before the U.S. Supreme Court 20 years ago and won them all.

    “This isn’t like a convenient oversight. This is intentional. This legislation pokes its finger in the eyes of people who hold religious beliefs,” Jay Sekulow, chief of the American Center for Law and Justice, told WND today.

    His was the organization that decades ago argued on behalf of speech freedom on school campuses, winning repeatedly at the U.S. Supreme Court. Since then, the 2001 Good News Club v. Milford Central School District decision was added, clarifying that restricting religious speech within the context of public shared-use facilities is unconstitutional.

    The problem in the proposed stimulus bill comes from a provision that states: “PROHIBITED USES OF FUNDS. – No funds awarded under this section may be used for – (C) modernization, renovation, or repair of facilities – (i) used for sectarian instruction, religious worship, or a school or department of divinity; or (ii) in which a substantial portion of the functions of the facilities are subsumed in a religious mission.”

    The wording that specifically targets religious speech already has been approved by the majority Democrats in the U.S. House – all GOP members opposed it. In the Senate, Jim DeMint, R-S.C., proposed an amendment to eliminate it, but again majority Democrats decided to keep the provision targeting religious instruction and activities.

    Critics argued schools would accept any money offered, then impose a ban on religious events.

    DeMint warned organizations such as the Fellowship of Christian Athletes, Campus Crusade for Christ, Catholic Student Ministries, Hillel and other religious groups would face new bans on access to public facilities that would not apply to other organizations.

    “This is a direct attack on students of faith, and I’m outraged Democrats are using an economic stimulus bill to promote discrimination,” DeMint said. “Democrats should be ashamed of themselves for siding with the ACLU over millions of students of faith.”

    “These students simply want equal access to public facilities, which is their constitutional right. This hostility toward religion must end. Those who voted to for this discrimination are standing in the schoolhouse door to deny people of faith from entering any campus building renovated by this bill,” said DeMint.

    The senator said the stimulus bill now becomes an “ACLU stimulus” that has the goal of triggering lawsuits “designed to intimidate religious organizations across the nation.”

    “This language is so vague, it’s not clear if students can even pray in a dorm room renovated with this funding since that is a form of ‘religious worship.’ If this provision remains in the bill, it will have a chilling effect on students of faith in America,” he said.

    DeMint cited Obama’s statement at the National Prayer Breakfast this week that faith “can promote a greater good for all of us.”

    “This provision is an assault against both. It’s un-American and it’s unconstitutional. Intolerant and it’s intolerable,” DeMint said.

    The ban on religious organizations is linked to the $3.5 billion intended for “renovation of public or private college and university facilities.”

    The ACLJ, which focuses on constitutional law, said the provision “has nothing to do with economic stimulus and everything to do with religious discrimination.”

    “The thing is I litigated these cases on these exact issues 20 years ago,” Sekulow told WND. “Not only did we win, two of the decisions were unanimous and the other was 8-1.

    “We’re seeing a rollback to the 1970s regarding church-state relations,” he said. “That’s what is troubling. It is a complete rollback that now institutionalizes discrimination through targeting religion.”

    Sekulow said he already is drafting a complaint that will challenge the constitutionality of the provision, to be used if it isn’t removed.

    However, he also warned that the problem is the damage that can be done within the probable four years it would take to get the issue to the U.S. Supreme Court and what that court would look like at that point.

    Under Obama, he said, “there will be an ideology shift.” New appointments to the bench by Obama, he said, would be “much more left of where Justices (Ruth Bader) Ginsburg and (Stephen) Breyer are.”

     

     

    Obama is following the Saul Alinsky rule (in his book, Rules for Radicals) to ‘clothe everything you do in morality’ because this is what most effectively fools the ‘middle class’ into agreeing with what you want to do.”

    But the news today does not end there. There are efforts to not only silence Conservative Talk Radio, but to water down and silence Christian radio as well.

    New ‘Fairness Doctrine’ ‘threat’ to Christian radio

    Gospel needs to be ‘balanced’ with Islamic, atheist programming. 

     

    As the National Religious Broadcasters convened today in Nashville, an ominous shroud cast by political chatter about the reimposition of the so-called “Fairness Doctrine” in the nation’s capital hung over the gathering.

    NRB President Frank Wright said he sees the move as a credible threat under a Democrat-dominated Congress and with President Obama in the White House.

    “And we have a personal concern,” Wright told Broadcasting & Cable. “The only radio station that ever lost its license under the fairness doctrine regime was a Christian radio station in Red Lion, Pa. We are only responding now to the statements the Democrats themselves are making.”

    Representing 1,400 organizations, including large ministries and TV and radio stations, NRB said it is “girding itself for a major battle over broadcasting freedoms,” and was prepared to go to court, lobby Congress, or take its message to the public.

    “We have talked before about many of these issues, but now, with the shift in the political landscape, I think these same things have a much higher probability of being enacted or at least having legislation and hearings and debates, and on the regulation side at the FCC,” said Wright.

    He said the new political climate doesn’t just threaten broadcasters, but even churches that have no broadcast outlet.

    “The fairness doctrine has a tremendous potential for constraining free speech, but hate crimes (legislation) has the potential of criminalizing it,” he said. “In the short run, the fairness doctrine has the immediate threat of being applied to Christian broadcasters and to the church in a very deleterious way. Hate crimes legislation, if that is enacted, will evolve over time and bleed over into speech and have a negative effect, but not right away. The fairness doctrine will have a negative impact the day it is implemented.”

    He said he expects religious broadcasters, largely Christian, to be particularly hard hit because of the doctrine’s requirement for so-called “balance.” If an opposing view must be found for every matter of controversy, Christian broadcasters could find themselves in the unenviable and untenable position of seeking out other religious viewpoints – Islamic, Hindu, Buddhist or atheist – to counter what ministers of the Gospel say on the air.

    “I have had a number of conversations with NRB members who operated under the old ‘Fairness Doctrine’ regime,” he said. “What happens is there is a chilling of free speech because the license-holder tends to take off the air the programmer whose content is deemed to be controversial.

    This weekend’s meeting will offer up ideas about fighting back the prospects of government-controlled speech on the airwaves.

    “I don’t want to tip our hands on strategy except to say that if the approach taken by the administration is an FCC approach, we believe we can bring enough pressure to bear on the commission at the point of enactment to bring enough heat to get them to see the light, so to speak,” he said. “I don’t think we can stop it in the House or Senate.”

    Just last week another Democratic U.S. senator went on record as supporting the reinstatement of the so-called “Fairness Doctrine,” adding, “I feel like that’s gonna happen.”

    Sen. Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich., told radio host and WND columnist Bill Press \ when asked about whether it was time to bring back the so-called “Fairness Doctrine”: “I think it’s absolutely time to pass a standard. Now, whether it’s called the Fairness Standard, whether it’s called something else – I absolutely think it’s time to be bringing accountability to the airwaves. I mean, our new president has talked rightly about accountability and transparency. You know, that we all have to step up and be responsible. And, I think in this case, there needs to be some accountability and standards put in place.”

    Stabenow’s husband, Tom Athans, was executive vice president of the left-leaning talk radio network Air America. He left the network in 2006, when it filed for bankruptcy, and co-founded the TalkUSA Radio Network.

    Asked by Press if she could be counted on to push for hearings in the Senate this year “to bring these (radio station) owners in and hold them accountable,” Stabenow replied: “I have already had some discussions with colleagues and, you know, I feel like that’s gonna happen. Yep.”

    CC Commissioner Robert McDowell, a Bush appointee whose term runs through June, however, warned that Democrats may be adopting a stealthier approach to shutting down conservatives on talk radio.

    In a speech to the Media Institute in Washington, Multichannel News reports, McDowell suggested there are efforts to implement the controversial policy without using the red-flagged “Fairness Doctrine” label.

    “That’s just Marketing 101,” McDowell explained. “If your brand is controversial, make it a new brand.”

    Instead, McDowell alleged, Democrats will try to disguise their efforts in the name of localism, diversity or network neutrality.

    McDowell further suggested that the FCC may already be gearing up to enforce the “Fairness Doctrine” through community advisory boards that help determine local programming. While radio stations use the boards on a voluntary basis now, McDowell warned if the advisory panels become mandatory, “Would not such a policy be akin to a re-imposition of the Doctrine, albeit under a different name and sales pitch?”

    And while Republicans’ prediction of “Fairness Doctrine” legislation remains unfulfilled and highly speculative, a WND investigation has revealed that McDowell and Walden aren’t just fear-mongering, as some have suggested. A think tank headed by John Podesta, co-chairman of Obama’s transition team, mapped out a strategy in 2007 for clamping down on talk radio using language that has since been parroted by both the Obama campaign and the new administration’s White House website.

    In June of 2007, Podesta’s Center for American Progress released a report titled “The Structural Imbalance of Political Talk Radio,” detailing the conservative viewpoint’s dominance on the airwaves and proposing steps for leveling the playing field.

    “Our conclusion is that the gap between conservative and progressive talk radio is the result of multiple structural problems in the U.S. regulatory system,” the report reads, “particularly the complete breakdown of the public trustee concept of broadcast, the elimination of clear public interest requirements for broadcasting, and the relaxation of ownership rules including the requirement of local participation in management.”

    The report then demonstrates how radio stations owned locally, or operated by female and minority owners, are statistically more likely to carry liberal political talk shows.

    Therefore, the report concludes, the answer to getting equal time for “progressives” lies in mandating “localism” and “diversity” without ever needing to mention the “Fairness Doctrine.”

    To accomplish the strategy, the report recommends legislating local and national caps on ownership of commercial radio stations and demanding radio stations regularly prove to the FCC that they are “operating on behalf of the public interest” to maintain their broadcasting license.

    And if stations are unwilling to abide by the FCC’s new regulatory standards, the report recommends, they should pay spectrum-use fees directly to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting “with clear mandates to support local news and public affairs programming and to cover controversial and political issues in a fair and balanced manner.”

    In this way, the report concludes, between $100 million and $250 million could be raised for public radio, which will be compelled to broadcast via the old standards established by the “Fairness Doctrine.”

    Since the report’s release in 2007, the Obama camp has twice gone on record advocating positions identical to Podesta’s think tank.

    Last summer, in denying the presidential candidate’s support of the “Fairness Doctrine,” Obama’s press secretary said, “Sen. Obama supports media-ownership caps, network neutrality, public broadcasting, as well as increasing minority ownership of broadcasting and print outlets.”

    Further, the White House website lists on its technology agenda page that the president plans to “encourage diversity in the ownership of broadcast media, promote the development of new media outlets for expression of diverse viewpoints, and clarify the public interest obligations of broadcasters who occupy the nation’s spectrum.”

    The president’s position and proposals match the language of his transition co-chair’s think tank report almost word-for-word.

    12 Comments

    Filed under Culture War, Politics