Democrats embrace the rhetoric of “compassion,” but look past the rhetoric to the results

 

watergate role 2 Hillary Restructure the Family Through Daycare .Your child belongs to us.

With Hillary we’ll most likely see the ‘final solution’ of social control, which is for the state to monopolise child raising. This would eliminate from society the parent-child bond, and hence family-related bonds in general. No longer is there a concept of relatives, just fellow members of the hive. The family must be demonized.

Democrats embrace the rhetoric of “compassion,” but look past the rhetoric to the results. This country is polarized as never before because of their relentless agitation for extremist positions on every issue, and the outrageous tactics they use to promote them. But while Radical Saul Alinsky’s tactics guide today’s Democrat electoral game plan, the Cloward-Piven Strategy describes the overarching goal of almost every leftwing organization/movement/ideal today.
The United States of America is the world’s marketplace. Without the worldwide trade generated by American demand, the international marketplace will fail. Today we are witnessing an undeniable demonstration of this fact as world markets reel in response to our domestic financial crisis. This lesson must be burnt into our collective conscience. Our nation is the last repository of free market economic principles, and a fundamental change in our government toward socialism will spell worldwide economic disaster from which we may never recover.

Yet this is exactly the endgame of the American radical Left – increasingly indistinguishable from today’s Democrat Party – and offers the only internally consistent explanation for their historic obsession with divisive policy. From their central role in the current financial crisis, the Left’s contribution to domestic and foreign policy at federal, state and local levels can only be described as wantonly destructive. Their takeover of schools and popular culture has been equally toxic. Their environmental radicalism has spawned the energy crisis, while offering no viable alternatives. It defies logic.

But there is logic, a deadly logic, and in the ’60’s, two radicals gave it a name: the Cloward-Piven Strategy. As explained in my prior article, the goal was to create a groundswell of demands for public services to overwhelm government, create crisis and usher in a widespread call for fundamental economic reform at the federal level, with socialism the ultimate goal.

Cloward and Piven focused on welfare, voting, housing and immigration “rights.” But leftist positions on any issue, whether championing equal “rights,” abortion “rights,” education “rights,” rights to health care, housing, legal protections of antisocial or even criminal behavior, to the point of absurdity, are intentionally divisive. They add new fiscal and regulatory burdens on government, and set new precedents that undermine the limited government concepts embedded in our Constitution, while conferring discriminatory special benefits on legally defined groups the rest of us are forced to pay for. They deliberately put our society at war with itself. And as Cloward and Piven made clear, the true purpose is not even to help those groups, but rather to duplicitously enlist them as part of an offensive to collapse our society from within!
.
How do they Survive?

These organizations rarely produce anything of value, yet are extremely adept at not only surviving but flourishing. Many receive their financial backbone from prominent philanthropies. They also receive subsidies and tax breaks with the help of friends in federal, state and local government. This fact is unknown to most voters, who would be outraged if they fully understood how their tax dollars were being spent. For example, the radical group, ACORN, responsible for widespread voter fraud, gets about 40 percent of its revenues from federal, state and local government.

Our mass media is mostly to blame for the current state of affairs. The Left’s strategies could not survive the light of day. Radicals require a sympathetic media to deliver their message in an acceptable fashion and actively
suppress inconvenient facts that reveal these organizations’ true character and agenda. Barack Obama’s presidential campaign is perhaps the most poignant current example of this. Without mass media’s shamelessly biased support, he would still be community organizing, or perhaps in jail.

obama the musli It is a tangled web of radical interconnections with the ultimate goal being an end to our Constitutional framework, the fall of our Republic and its replacement with a radical vision of socialist utopia – finally removing the last major roadblock to world socialism.

These radical individuals are highly motivated, in many cases intelligent and talented, and sometimes even driven by what they would describe as altruistic motives. Yet the impacts of socialist central planning are inarguably destructive.

Marx may have had some interesting insights on history, but despite his ponderous three volume “Das Kapital” he was no economist. Instead, Kapital provided the intellectual excuse for Marx’s anarchistic Communist Manifesto.

And the severe verdict of history on his perverted vision is without equal: over 100 million people murdered by their own governments in times of peace, more than all the wars of history combined.

The rest face abject poverty, mass starvation, economic and environmental ruin, all overseen by smothering, indescribably brutal governments – a grey, barren existence for all but the apparatchiks.

So why are so many Westerners infatuated with this demented vision?

Entrepreneurial Parasites

The high-minded types are driven by a galling sense of superiority. They are addicted to their own egos. They know better and can defy the verdict of history because people as smart as they are weren’t around when Russia, China, Vietnam, Cambodia, North Korea, Ethiopia, Angola, Zimbabwe, Zambia, Congo, Nicaragua, Cuba, Venezuela, etc., went Red.

Living well in affluent, capitalist America, it is all theoretical, so they can indulge their fantasies while promoting this destructive agenda with impunity. For these people ignorance is literally a blessing, for if they soberly analyzed their ego-driven beliefs, they would be embarrassed.

If you examine their pasts closely, you learn that most of these people also came from upper class backgrounds. PhD Chemistry Professor George Wiley, the black radical who led Cloward and Piven’s National Welfare Rights Organization, was a well-to-do son of a Rhode Island family.
Wade Rathke, the NWRO veteran who started ACORN, was from a similarly well-to-do background, although he dropped out of Williams College.

Obama’s radical friend Bill Ayers’ family was very wealthy. Looking at his arrest photos, and listening to his smug self-righteousness, you really get the impression that he was little more than an arrogant, spoiled brat, with a titanic sense of entitlement that allowed him to rationalize mass murder.

This is a familiar story throughout the American left and indeed with many of the most infamous communist leaders around the world. For example, Communist China’s first leader, Mao Zedong, the inspiration for Ayers and many other radicals, was son of the wealthiest man in his home town.

According to the incredible biography, Mao: the Unknown Story, he was lazy, arrogant, and refused to work, despite his father’s repeated attempts to find him suitable employment. He finally saw an opportunity for real advancement working for the Soviets. During the Long March he was carried by porters.

As young idealists, many of these people are initially snared into this ideology by the exaggerated sense of self-importance that is often a characteristic of youth. But we all have to live, and as they grow up they discover that the radical profession can be a pretty lucrative racket. Despite their high-minded rhetoric about saving the poor and oppressed, communists and socialists are what I call entrepreneurial parasites.

Consider what they demand of us: sacrifice of all worldly goods to the state, penurious, barren lifstyles, slavish observance of their dictates and full-time commitment to the well-being of the state, while our jobs, careers, industries, the environment, even our lives are threatened.

But how do they live?
Obama’s pal Ayers, who describes himself as a “small ‘c’ communist,” lives in a lavish home, in the upscale Hyde Park neighborhood, with a six-figure (or more) income. It is easy to see how, given the open spigot of money his organizations receive from the various non-profit funds he’s ingratiated himself to. Bill Ayers father, Tom, had been CEO of Commonwealth Edison, so he’s used to money, and later developments in his career point to a hand up from Daddy.

Barack lives in Hyde Park too. It is difficult to find anyone in the American Marxist elite who doesn’t fully enjoy the fruits of capitalism in his or her personal life. In fact, Obama’s early career seems to have been centered on dispensing foundation money as a means to secure his career in politics. Here and here are perfect examples.

Running left-wing movements has always been the prerogative of spoiled rich kids. This pattern goes all the way back to the days when an over-indulged and affluent young man named Karl Marx combined with another over-indulged youth from a wealthy family named Friedrich Engels to create the Communist ideology.

The phoniness of the claim to be a movement of the working class was blatant from the beginning. When Engels was elected as a delegate to the Communist League in 1847, in his own words, ‘a working man was proposed for appearances sake, but those who proposed him voted for me.’ It may have been the first rigged ‘election’ of the Communist movement but not the last.
Marxist austerity is only meant for the rest of us.

This taste for wealth is not limited to American socialists. Every socialist dictator from Stalin to Saddam has lived in opulent surroundings with multiple estates, scores of servants and every kind of luxury and indulgence available to them.

See for example, Gorbachev’s dacha in Foros, Crimea; a testament to communist modesty if ever there was one. Same with all the leaders of communist countries. Indeed, Bulgarian defector Georgi Markov was murdered for his extensive reporting on the opulent, decadent lifestyles of Bulgarian Communist leaders. It’s a good racket, if you don’t mind blood.
Gorbachevs dacha Gorbachevs dacha

110420obamamansion Obama’s Chicago Mansion

While socialist leaders live in lavish style, in every country where socialist policies are imposed, they measurably worsen the lives of everyday citizens in direct proportion to their scope. Even countries with vast natural resources,  because their economies are constructed on the fatally flawed economic principles of socialism.
Despite this, they still manage to live on, in many cases hanging by mere threads for years.
How?
The dirty little secret of socialism is that it cannot survive without capitalism – capitalist countries provide the resources necessary for these socialist governments to continue. In addition to providing a market for their goods, Western nations keep socialist countries afloat through grants and loans from the World Bank, the U.S. Agency for International Development and other governmental institutions, as well as huge investments by private companies.

Even China, widely misunderstood as the next “free market,” only practices market economics one-way in international trade while maintaining iron fisted central planning internally, and could not maintain its current level of economic growth without the markets provided by the United States and other Western countries.

Finally, there is a vast network of American enterprises, owned covertly by foreign dictators, whose true purpose is to provide underground income for these leaders and their socialist governments, while offering convenient cover for industrial and military spies. This fact is rarely mentioned and largely unknown.

At its core, socialism can only be parasitic. It cannot survive without its capitalist host. Therefore, if the United States becomes a socialist country, worldwide capital will soon dry up. Remaining market economies around the world will succumb either to their own internal socialist movements or direct military threat from abroad. Without the protective umbrella of American military might, they will have no other choice.

Without the markets and resources capitalist economies provide, the many socialist countries that have survived on our largesse until now will find their income stream shut off. The world will plunge into an unprecedented, cataclysmic depression. This depression will be of indeterminate length because the wherewithal for recovery – a large capitalist economy – will no longer exist. With a world controlled by parasites, the host will die.

*At this point even the parasites will be in danger. The socialists’ internationalist agenda truly is a Conspiracy of the Lemmings. It is not merely a criminal conspiracy, it is criminally insane.

Barack Hussein Obama has been chosen as standard bearer to bring this agenda to fruition here.we can expect a sea change in Washington. But it will not be for the better. The socialist economic agenda he has publicly articulated is enough in the current financial crisis to plunge our economy into deep recession. The disarmament agenda he has publicly articulated is enough to strip us of the meager defenses we currently have against a rogue missile attack, and Iran has already telegraphed plans to launch such an attack.

What is even more frightening is the agenda he has not shared, but is implicit in his radical upbringing, his radical connections, and his
limited but demonstrative experience.

Obama’s Radical Roots

dawn of the muslim brotherhood President Obama’s step-father, Lolo Soetoro, was a colonel in the Indonesian armed forces. Lolo Soetoro took part, in a coup with the net total of Indonesians killed ranging from 250,000 to 1 million. President Obama’s mother arrived in Indonesia to join Soetoro with young Barack Obama, Jr. This is the environment that Obama’s mother chose to raise her son. There is a distinct possibility that the President of the United States was raised within a household where mass murder of civilians was not considered a crime against humanity.

President Obama’s former physician claims Barack lacks “passion, feeling, and humanity.”

 

Are we beating this subject to death? Sorry, we have to. And there’s much more, if you still need convincing. Obama hates being “associated” with radical individuals and organizations. But the truth is he hasn’t been associated with them at all, he has been immersed in them. He is one of them. And it goes back to his youth.

There is no doubt that “Frank” in Obama’s Dreams from My Father is longtime communist Frank Marshall Davis. It is probable that Davis convinced Obama to initiate his career in radical-friendly Chicago – birthplace of the American Communist Party – where Davis was a very active communist party member before moving to Hawaii.

Obama was inspired by Chicago’s first black mayor, Harold Washington, even writing for a job in his administration. Washington’s successful campaign relied on a coalition of the American Communist Party, Democratic Socialists of America and other radicals. Washington may have been a secret communist party member himself.

Finally, given his unwillingness to release his birth certificate, some are conjecturing that Davis may be Obama’s father. If so, it explains a lot about Obama’s very radical political orientation. But it is not necessary in order to make the connections.

From Obama’s earliest days as a community organizer and throughout his political career, he has been involved with and supported by a broad network of radical groups. It is likely that he was similarly influenced in college, but since he won’t release any information about classes, grades, teachers, clubs or affiliations – no information whatsoever – we don’t have a complete picture.

Who Sent You?

obama-communism.jpg rothchilds

There is an old story about getting into Chicago politics that ends with the quote: “We don’t want nobody that nobody sent.” According to this article, the person who “sent” Obama was former Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) Weather Underground bomber Bill Ayers. The reasons are many and compelling.

Chicago Annenberg Challenge (CAC) – Ayers chaired the Chicago School Reform Collaborative which was responsible for recruiting Barack Obama to chair the board of CAC in 1995. Barack remained chairman until 1999 and stayed with the board until CAC folded in 2001. Obama and Ayers shared the same 50 X 50 3rd floor office for three years when Obama chaired the CAC. How is it they didn’t know each other? By the way, the CAC was not endowed with $49.2 million, as initially reported. Matching grants and tax dollars brought the total to three times that amount.

In addition to his work on CAC, Ayers ran the Small Schools Workshop out of the same address. Another former SDSer, Mike Klonsky co-chaired the Workshop and shared that office as well. Remember that name. Despite Chicago’s failing schools, this project was intended to create charter schools focused not on basic skills, but developing young anti-capitalist partisans.

As chairman of CAC, working from the same office, Obama gave over $1 million to the Small Schools Workshop run by Ayers and Klonsky. Oh yes, Klonksy’s wife, Susan worked there too. She was also a former SDS member. Just one big happy family. Obama apparently also managed to show his appreciation to Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s causes with CAC largesse.

But Obama’s relationship with Ayers may go back much further than that. According to NationMaster.com encyclopedia:

The [Chicago School Reform] Collaborative was the operative on the ground body of the Challenge. It was made up of representatives of various constituencies in the Chicago school reform movement. That reform movement had begun in 1987 in the wake of an unpopular strike by Chicago teachers. Bill Ayers was active in that reform effort through a group called the Alliance for Better Chicago Schools, or ABCs. ABCs was an alliance of various activists and reform groups that included the Developing Communities Project which Barack Obama headed at the time as well as Chicago United, a business sector group, that was headed by Bill Ayers’ father, Thomas Ayers. (Emphases mine.)


Thomas Ayers was the liberal former CEO of the Consolidated Edison (ConEd) power utility and was very active in Chicago education issues.
ConEd was a client of Sidley & Austin, a prestigious Chicago law firm, and senior partner Howard Trienens was chief counsel to ConEd. Trienens also worked with Tom Ayers on the Board of Northwestern University. Bernardine Dohrn worked at Sidley until 1988, despite no law license or experience and was hired, according to Trienens, as a favor to “friends.” She subsequently got a teaching job at Northwestern. Another favor?

Obama left for Harvard in 1988 but returned the next summer to intern with Sidley. How did he get that job? Michelle Robinson (Obama) also worked for Sidley at the time and was Obama’s supervisor. They were married in 1992. Given the time they spent at the same firm, Michelle probably knew Bernardine as well.

Barack later became chairman of the board of the Woods Fund (1999-2002). In this position he funneled millions to ACORN and other radical groups. The Woods family ran the fund until 1990, when it was taken over by George Kelm, who moved it politically to the left. Frank Woods Jr., the Fund administrator until 1980 also headed an Illinois coal company, Sahara Coal, which supplied ConEd, so it is likely the Ayers family was already familiar with the Fund and its principals.

Obama also served on the Board of the Joyce Foundation from 1994-2001. This organization funds a large number of gun control groups and did so during Obama’s tenure. The Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law was also one of Joyce’s grant recipients. Obama worked for them too. During Obama’s time at Woods and Joyce, those funds gave another $900 thousand to Small Schools. They also funded Bill Ayers’ brother John’s organization, Leadership for Quality Education, to the tune of $761,000. Obama worked on that board too! One very happy family.

Despite receiving almost $2 million in funding, the Small Schools Workshop and all of the other CAC initiatives
were failures. Now, you could argue that Obama was only one Board member. But on the Woods board at least he was one of six. Bill Ayers was another. To suggest he didn’t know about Ayers ideology and aspirations for the grants he was making would be to accuse him of abandoning his fiduciary responsibility. Would you expect that kind of incompetence from a Presidential candidate?

The way many radicals stay in business is by insinuating themselves onto various philanthropic boards, then dispensing grant monies to friends and fellow travelers, who in turn show their gratitude later. The organizations become a revolving door for these people, who move back and forth between them, or create new ones that they run with grants from their friends. Most philanthropic organizations have been captured by radicals, often perverting the organization’s mission in a way that would horrify the founders if they knew.

In the case of Ayers, it appears he was dispensing a lot of philanthropy money, through Barack Obama, right back to himself in organizations he created and ran for the purpose – the perfect entrepreneurial parasite. Note that little has come from all his efforts, other than to “mainstream” his lunatic fringe, destructive vision.

This method is also a perfect vehicle to groom someone for public office. Friends use their influence to help the aspiring politician secure a position of influence in a wealthy philanthropy. Using philanthropy money, the aspirant dispenses grants and aid back to those friends and others who later use their influence and connections to smooth the skids for the official candidacy. Once in office, the successful candidate uses his newfound influence to turn around and help his friends again. This appears to be the model Obama used to develop his political career.

But there’s still more. When the CAC folded in 2001, they set up a follow-on organization called the Chicago Public Education Fund. Barack stayed on that board too, in an advisory role. One of the twelve board members was Penny Pritzker, currently the national finance chair of Obama’s presidential campaign. Penny is notorious as the former chairman of the failed Superior Bank. She led the bank into substantial subprime mortgage investments, then cooked its books so she and her family, already one of the wealthiest in the country, could take record profits while the bank slowly failed. Wait a minute. That sounds just like Frank Raines, Obama’s economics advisor, who did the same thing at Fannie Mae! Birds of a feather?

Pritzker was named in a class-action RICO lawsuit, and her family settled with the FDIC for a record $450 million in order to avoid another lawsuit. But the way it was structured, her family may yet come out ahead. Many depositors lost their life savings. These are the “champions of the middle class” Obama likes to work with.

As if all this weren’t enough, it now appears that Ayers may have ghostwritten or at least heavily edited Obama’s “Dreams From My Father.” Obama got an astounding $125,000 advance in 1990 from Simon & Schuster for this first book. They dropped him because he was taking too long. He got a second advance for $40,000 from Random House. The book was finally published in 1995, the same time Ayers got him on the CAC board and helped launch his political career. Passages in his and Ayers’ book use many similar unusual metaphors and phraseology, and the writing is of distinctly higher quality than Obama’s scant and sophomoric efforts of earlier days. Obama, meanwhile, wrote a glowing review of one of Ayers books, here.

The media could easily reveal that Obama is more than just casual friends with Bill Ayers and that he’s a radical to boot. The Los Angeles Times has a video tape of a farewell party given to departing University of Chicago professor Rashid Khalidi, a former advisor to PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat. (Yes, he’s a “professor too!”) This video shows Obama lavishing praise on the former terrorist. Next up is Obama’s “neighbor” Bill Ayers. Just a coincidence, I’m sure.

Just for perspective, watch and hear what a former FBI assistant director
has to say about Ayers. Or watch this hilarious video where Ayers calls the police to avoid an O’Reilly Factor reporter. As Bill O’Reilly observed, given that Ayers tried to bomb the police years ago, that is indeed ironic.

But the most chilling of all is the testimony given by FBI informant Larry Grathwohl. See it here in this clip from a 1982 documentary. The Weather Underground planned to build re-education camps in the American Southwest. Those who wouldn’t submit to the program would be murdered. The Underground estimated they would have to kill about 25 million Americans.

FEMA scarier all the time Supreme Court Justice Confirms American Internment Camps Will Happen Again: “It is the Reality”

Grathwohl was assigned to Bill Ayers. Following is a summary of his impressions:
Grathwohl found Ayers hard to love; he seemed self-important, a controller of subordinates, the type who loved to give orders. Ayers was a key leader. Grathwohl, a government informant, wrote that Ayers had helped direct a pair of attempted police building bombings in Detroit in February 1970. After doing his assigned job in reconnaissance, Grathwohl disagreed with Mr. Ayers over the placement of one bomb, which could easily kill black patrons who favored an adjacent restaurant, but that Ayers dismissed such sentimentality as unrevolutionary. The informant was glad to be dismissed from the operation by Ayers. Forty-four sticks of dynamite were then formed into two bombs and put into place, before Grathwohl’s information allowed police to dismantle both. Ayers’ memoir — which freely admits to incompleteness — says nothing of this episode, or Detroit, or the month of February 1970.

A big question about Obama’s early life is who paid for it? Who paid for his Columbia and Harvard educations? Who were his patrons? Newsmax has a good backgrounder, here.

NEW YORK – Ten years ago, the New York Times reported on a growing underground subculture in the black community known as Down Low, comprised largely of men who secretly engage in homosexual activity while living “straight” lives in public.

It’s within that subtext that opposition researchers for Hillary Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign began investigating rumors that Rev. Jeremiah Wright was running a “matchmaking service” for members of his Trinity United Church of Christ known as the Down Low Club, which included Barack Obama. WND investigators have interviewed a number of members of the church who claim the president benefited from Wright’s efforts to help black men who engage in homosexual activity appear respectable in black society

images3EOI8N4A

Obama’s Radical Support Network

Obama has been groomed and supported by such a large number of radical groups it is difficult to chart it all. But the following list represents the best known and significant groups that have provided the intellectual grounding for his ideology and the material support for his political campaig

Democratic Socialists of America – The DSA describes itself as “the largest socialist organization in the U.S. and principle U.S. affiliate of the socialist international” which traces its roots to Marx’s first organization. DSA has endorsed Obama and provided an army of on-the-ground campaign workers. Their members are even boasting credit for the success of his ground game. This organization is probably the largest base of Obama’s support. The DSA endorsed Obama as far back as 1996, when he first launched his political career.

Here is what the DSA has to say in their endorsement of Obama for President:
While recognizing the critical limitations of the Obama candidacy and the American political system, DSA believes that the possible election of Senator Obama to the presidency in November represents a potential opening for social and labor movements to generate the political momentum necessary to implement a progressive political agenda. (Emphasis added.)

WorldNetDaily did an expose on the DSA in 1999, revealing their direct link with the Congressional Progressive Caucus, of which Nancy Pelosi was a prominent member. Following this revelation, DSA edited its website, removing the links between the two organizations and some other damaging information. As WND relates:


Prior to the cleanup of its website in 1999, the DSA included a song list featuring “The Internationale,” the worldwide anthem of communism and socialism. Another song on the site was “Red Revolution” sung to the tune of “Red Robin.” The lyrics went: “When the Red Revolution brings its solution along, along, there’ll be no more lootin’ when we start shootin’ that Wall Street throng. …” Another song removed after WorldNetDaily’s expose was “Are You Sleeping, Bourgeoisie?” The lyrics went: “Are you sleeping? Are you sleeping? Bourgeoisie, Bourgeoisie. And when the revolution comes, We’ll kill you all with knives and guns, Bourgeoisie, Bourgeoisie.” (Emph. mine.)

News flash to you “middle class” families Obama trying to woo with tax cut promises, you are the bourgeoisie!The real money is in the middle class. If we’re not going to cut our escalating spending, then taxes on the middle class will have to soar like an eagle fired out of a cannon.

Gas and energy prices will be dramatically higher: Obama once said, “Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.” His Energy Secretary Steven Chu added, “Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe.”

 On every single collage student so much in debt that you will gladly listen to them and when they say we have a new world order for you we have a new currency for you just give up your constitution. and all will be fine.

Communist Party USA (CPUSA) – Started in Chicago in 1919, the American Communist Party was under the control of the Soviet KGB until 1989, and may still be under the guidance of KGB successor SVR. While the CPUSA provides fertile recruiting ground for espionage agents in government and business The Communist Party supports a political platform virtually identical to Obama’s in many aspects.. There is, of course, no doubt about who they support, and their endorsement largely parrots what DSA has to say.

smiley-sign0085

 

Hillary more of the sameI am a Progressive

Advertisements

Obama’s State of the Union in Five Words: I’ll Give You Free Stuff

me lie.bmp I just changed the promise.bmp smaller

By Veronique de Rugy January 16, 2015

President Obama’s State of the Union address next Tuesday will be a little different this year from years past, because he isn’t expected to announce any new major proposals during the speech itself. But he will lay out big plans — we just know what they are already. From Politico:

But as for the State of the Union tradition of unveiling big announcements for a year-ahead agenda, Obama’s done with that. The country’s been done with that for a while, aides say, and the White House has finally caught up.

They believe they’ve now redefined the State of the Union model, not just for this year and next but for the next couple of presidents at least.

Most of what’s in the speech they’ll have already announced as part of Obama’s two-week lead-up tour. White House aides say that may be it — they’re not interested in making big legislative asks for the GOP to reflexively shoot down, nothing on par with last month’s surprise restoration of diplomatic relations with Cuba.

It doesn’t matter much either way. Whether he announces proposals during the speech or in the two weeks preceding the speech, the bulk of what the president wants to do is give stuff away for “free”:

Two “free” years of community college for Americans who are “willing to work for it.” This is obviously not free because taxpayers would be footing the bill. It’s also a bad idea since it wouldn’t even accomplish its intended goal.

Free” paid sick days and paid family leave. It won’t be free for the employers who would have to shoulder the cost, or the employees who would suffer from the unintended consequences of a policy that would make hiring more expensive, cuts workers’ wages, and make employment contracts more rigid.

If Congress doesn’t pass the president’s paid sick days and paid family leave plan, hell encourage state and local governments to act. That too would be “free” . . . except for taxpayers who get stuck paying for a proposed $2.2 billion plan to help states study paid leave.

Universal access to broadband and high-speed Internet. That will come “free” by having the FCC trample on state laws that restrict municipalities from building their own networks. The language he’s using to sell this plan (“clear away the red tape” and “help communities succeed in our digital economy”) makes it sound free, right? It won’t be. My colleague Brent Skorup notes that the government has “spent billions on broadband.” As Skorup explains in a piece that I highly recommend, federally funded public broadband networks aren’t just costly – they’re also unwise and unhelpful in terms of getting people access to fast Internet.

,( Americans would face a host of new state and local taxes and fees that apply to public utilities. These new levies, according to the Progressive Policy Institute (PPI), would total $15 billion annually. On average, consumers would pay an additional $67 for landline broadband, and $72 for mobile broadband each year,)

Obama’s State Of The Union “Give Stuff Away Free” taxpayers who get stuck paying for a proposed $2.2 billion plan to help states study paid leave.

me lie.bmp I just changed the promise.bmp smaller

By Veronique de Rugy January 16, 2015

President Obama’s State of the Union address next Tuesday will be a little different this year from years past, because he isn’t expected to announce any new major proposals during the speech itself. But he will lay out big plans — we just know what they are already. From Politico:

But as for the State of the Union tradition of unveiling big announcements for a year-ahead agenda, Obama’s done with that. The country’s been done with that for a while, aides say, and the White House has finally caught up.

They believe they’ve now redefined the State of the Union model, not just for this year and next but for the next couple of presidents at least.

Most of what’s in the speech they’ll have already announced as part of Obama’s two-week lead-up tour. White House aides say that may be it — they’re not interested in making big legislative asks for the GOP to reflexively shoot down, nothing on par with last month’s surprise restoration of diplomatic relations with Cuba.

It doesn’t matter much either way. Whether he announces proposals during the speech or in the two weeks preceding the speech, the bulk of what the president wants to do is give stuff away for “free”:

Two “free” years of community college for Americans who are “willing to work for it.” This is obviously not free because taxpayers would be footing the bill. It’s also a bad idea since it wouldn’t even accomplish its intended goal.

Free” paid sick days and paid family leave. It won’t be free for the employers who would have to shoulder the cost, or the employees who would suffer from the unintended consequences of a policy that would make hiring more expensive, cuts workers’ wages, and make employment contracts more rigid.

If Congress doesn’t pass the president’s paid sick days and paid family leave plan, hell encourage state and local governments to act. That too would be “free” . . . except for taxpayers who get stuck paying for a proposed $2.2 billion plan to help states study paid leave.

Universal access to broadband and high-speed Internet. That will come “free” by having the FCC trample on state laws that restrict municipalities from building their own networks. The language he’s using to sell this plan (“clear away the red tape” and “help communities succeed in our digital economy”) makes it sound free, right? It won’t be. My colleague Brent Skorup notes that the government has “spent billions on broadband.” As Skorup explains in a piece that I highly recommend, federally funded public broadband networks aren’t just costly – they’re also unwise and unhelpful in terms of getting people access to fast Internet.

,( Americans would face a host of new state and local taxes and fees that apply to public utilities. These new levies, according to the Progressive Policy Institute (PPI), would total $15 billion annually. On average, consumers would pay an additional $67 for landline broadband, and $72 for mobile broadband each year,)

ob finger 4      Stop me if you can.

The GOP House Just Made It Harder for Politicians to Steal From Social Security Retirement Fund

large group we wont take it any more

New GOP House rule would protect the retirement trust fund from being used as a piggy bank to shore up the disability trust fund.

This Tuesday, House Republicans nearly unanimously adopted new rules for the 114th Congress (H. Res. 5) which set the stage for long overdue Social Security reforms to protect disabled Americans and seniors from indiscriminate benefit cuts.

The new rule strengthens the integrity of Social Security’s separate trust funds (disability and retirement) by putting a procedural barrier in place to prevent lawmakers from raiding retirement funds to shore up the bleeding disability trust fund. Page 32 of H. Res. 5 adds a point of order against weakening either trust fund, unless the changes result in an overall improvement to Social Security’s combined trust funds.

This change sets the stage for comprehensive Social Security reform in the 114th Congress.

With the Social Security disability trust fund projected to run out of funds in 2016, President Obama’s Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew had suggested that Congress reallocate funds from the Social Security retirement trust fund to the disability one.

The problem is that such a reallocation would not only kick the can down the road on much needed reforms to a fraud-ridden program that has expanded far beyond its original mission (it now encourages permanent dependence among the marginally disabled), but it would also raid the retirement program—which faces an even deeper fiscal hole—of funds. As Rachel Greszler, senior analyst at the Heritage Foundation, wrote:

The [Social Security disability] program is crucial to millions of disabled individuals who cannot work and would face severe hardship or destitution without [disability] benefits. These beneficiaries’ well-being is threatened by inefficiencies and unintended growth in the [disability] program that are unnecessarily depleting its finances. The [disability] program must be reformed so that it can continue to provide for individuals who are truly unable to work, without subsidizing early retirement and long-term unemployment.

If lawmakers allowed the Social Security disability trust fund to run out of funds without reforms, disability beneficiaries would face an indiscriminate 19 percent cut which would lower the average benefit to below the federal poverty level.

Congress should act responsibly by adopting reforms that protect benefits for disabled Americans who need them, while attacking fraud and mismanagement. Congress should also adopt reforms that encourage a return to self-sufficiency among the marginally and temporarily disabled with a prospective period of disability, for example. Moreover, employer incentives to provide private disability insurance would help to provide benefits faster for those who become in need of them while emphasizing work accommodations over dependence.

The new House rule would protect the retirement trust fund from being used as a piggy bank to shore up the disability trust fund. By this action, the House sets the stage for comprehensive Social Security reform that protects disabled Americans and seniors from indiscriminate benefit cuts and recognizes a responsibility for stewardship of taxpayer dollars.

The U.S. has a drug shortage — and people are dying

obama_rationed_health_care-01

The U.S. has a drug shortage — and people are dying

Medicinal drugs in the U.S. are in short supply. Some are so scarce — medicines for heart problems, arthritis, diabetes, cancer, Lyme disease, and tuberculosis as well as antibiotics and crucial saline solutions for patients too sick to eat or drink — that patients are dying because they can’t get access to them.

In 2007, the Food and Drug Administration listed 154 drugs that were in short supply or no longer available. That figure exploded to 456 in 2012. Today there are more than 300 drugs listed in short supply by the FDA.

The Washington Times Reported:
The White House promised to let drug companies continue to set their own drug prices.
Obama administration cut backroom deals with the nation’s top drug companies to win support for President Obama’s health care overhaul, threatening them with steeper taxes if they resisted and promising a better financial deal for the industry if they acquiesced.
Obama agreed to drop his long-standing support for letting Americans buy cheaper foreign prescription drugs something the pharmaceutical industry vehemently opposed — and the drugmakers promised to mount a public campaign to sell the public on the health care legislation.

The situation is pressuring U.S. hospitals to pay at least $230 million more a year than they ordinarily would to find alternative treatments, according to Michael Alkire, COO of Premier, an alliance of hospitals and health care providers.

“Hospitals have been scrambling to continue to provide outstanding patient care while there are short supplies,” he said.

More importantly, the shortage may have caused the deaths of 15 people in 2011 when substitute drugs were used instead of first-line treatment medicines that were in short supply, according to one news report.

And a 2012 study discovered that when drug shortages forced doctors to switch medications in a clinical trial for Hodgkin lymphoma, the number of patients who were cancer-free after two years fell from 88 percent to 75 percent..

doctor-using-a-digital-tablet-100120940

“I think we’re at a point that some hospitals and doctors may not have what they need to treat a patient,” said Erin Fox, a professor in pharmacotherapy at the University of Utah and a leading expert on drug shortages.

What’s the cause?

One reason for the drug shortages is spikes in demand for treatments when disease breaks out.????????????????

But according to the Government Accountability Office (GAO) which did a study in 2013 on the drug shortage, other reasons include a lack of materials to make the drugs, as well as delays in getting government approval for new and experimental drugs. ???????????????????

Add to that the simple fact that fewer pharmaceutical companies are making drugs these days.

According to the GAO report, 71 percent of all generic injectable cancer drugs sold in 2008 were produced by just three manufacturers, while 91 percent of the market share of injectable nutrients and supplements was held by just three pharmaceutical firms.

This may seem contradictory, as the U.S. biopharmaceutical industry is the world’s leader in drug research and has a total economic impact of $790 billion a year on the U.S. economy.

But producing new drugs isn’t necessarily easy. That’s because pharmaceutical companies go through the process of creating a treatment from beginning to end without any guarantee a drug will be effective and produce revenue.

Dr. David Vaughn, head of pharmaceutical giant GlaxoSmithKline’s GSK external research and development, North America, said that the average cost and time — nearly a decade — to get a new drug on the market “has pushed the bigger pharmaceutical firms away from making them.”

Add to that the difficulty in drug production, said Dwight Kloth, director of pharmacy at Fox Chase Cancer Center, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. “It’s a lot more complicated to make these types of treatments than making aspirin or cholesterol tablets,” Kloth said.

He said a contamination slip-up somewhere in the process can cause drug makers to shut down production and delay getting medicines on the market.

Costs of the shortage

Whatever the reasons, the shortage is pushing the cost of existing drugs ever higher, said Premier’s Alkire. “Some manufactures have capitalized on this problem by spiking their prices by 400 percent or more,” Alkire said.

But the pharmaceutical industry contends that much of the pricing issue is out of its hands.

“The manufacturer of a drug has no influence or control over the prices charged by a secondary wholesaler to a hospital or pharmacy,” reads part of a statement on the PhRMA web site, the industry’s trade association group.

The higher costs have led to rationing of dwindling supplies of the less expensive generic drugs to avoid purchasing the more expensive name brand treatments.

That was true for the cancer treatment drugs Doxil and Leucovorin which ran short of supplies in 2011 and 2012. Doctors were forced to choose which patients received the smaller supply of Leucovorin and which would be given a less effective but more costly treatment.

“The shortage over many oncology drugs at that time was due to large manufacturers having quality problems and having to shut down,” said Valerie Jensen, associated director of the drug shortage staff at the FDA. “The situation with the number of cancer drugs on the market has improved since then,” Jensen said.

Diagnosis for crisis

To help circumvent the shortage, the FDA enacted new provisions in 2012 that require drug makers to give the agency earlier notice about potential shortages in order to alert patients and doctors so they can seek alternative treatments.  what 2

This followed President Obama’s executive order in 2011 that, among other actions, speeds up the government’s review and approval of potential drugs.

The order also calls on the FDA to pass on to the Justice Department any drug shortages that let market participants “stockpile the affected drugs or sell them at exorbitant prices.”

But industry experts argue there won’t be a simple cure-all.

“It’s hard to know what incentives will work for the pharmaceutical companies to increase drug production,” said the University of Utah’s Fox. “But we need more production lines that’s for sure.”

Premier’s Alkire said the FDA needs to approve and reduce the backlog of drug applications that are stuck in the pipeline.

Fox Chase Cancer Center’s Kloth said if there was a way that drug companies could be assured their investment would be recouped, that would help ease the shortage. “But the fact that we have to spend as much time on it as we do is a bad sign and significant concern,” Kloth said. “This shortage won’t end soon.”

obamacare now you know whats in it small The Washington Times Reported:
The White House promised to let drug companies continue to set their own drug prices.
Obama administration cut backroom deals with the nation’s top drug companies to win support for President Obama’s health care overhaul, threatening them with steeper taxes if they resisted and promising a better financial deal for the industry if they acquiesced.
Obama agreed to drop his long-standing support for letting Americans buy cheaper foreign prescription drugs — something the pharmaceutical industry vehemently opposed — and the drugmakers promised to mount a public campaign to sell the public on the health care legislation.

. A new round of cuts to Medicare is slated for 2015. What further hardship will we face? Will the story be told then?

Hillary more of the same

An African virus has been spreading inside the USA and into Florida and the region of the USA around the Gulf of Mexico via Central America and the Caribbean

 

mosquito-AP

An African virus has been spreading inside the USA via Central America and the Caribbean, and according to authorities it appears that this invader isn’t going away any time soon.

The chikungunya virus (pronounced “chicken-goon-ya”) causes severe joint and muscle pains that is so bad sufferers can’t even stand up after contracting the sickness.

The mosquito-borne virus was once relegated only to Asia and Africa, but since last year it made its way to to several islands in the Caribbean, then westward into South and Central America and into Florida and the region of the USA around the Gulf of Mexico.

The Florida Department of Health:

Chikungunya virus is spread by two mosquito species: Aedes aegypti (primarily) and Aedes albopictus, both found in Florida. While the virus is not currently found in the state, introductions are possible if a CHIKV infected visitor or returning traveler is bitten by Florida mosquitoes in the early stages (the first week) of their illness. Infected mosquitoes can then spread the virus to other people they bite.

Signs and Symptoms

An infected person will typically become ill three to seven days after the mosquito bite, but symptoms can begin anywhere from two to 12 days post-bite. These symptoms can last 3-10 days. Up to 28% of people who are infected will not have any symptoms (asymptomatic), although they can still be infectious to mosquitoes for a short time if bitten. Persons at greatest risk for severe illness include newborn infants, those over 65 years of age, and those who have other health conditions. Treatment is symptomatic or supportive.

Symptoms may include:

  • Sudden high fever (usually >102º F) which may be continuous or intermittent
  • Severe joint pain that commonly involves the hands and feet
  • Joint swelling
  • Back pain
  • Rash usually 2-5 days after fever starts
  • Other symptoms may include headache, body ache, nausea, vomiting, and redness around the eyes. In unusual cases, infection can involve the brain, eyes, heart, kidney and other organs.
  • Fatal infections are rare, however many patients have chronic joint pain, arthritis, loss of energy and depression lasting weeks to years.

comments from the net:

Put the blame where it belongs. The useless communist in the White House hasn’t enforced immigration law in six years,

This kind of thing can be expected when you have open borders.

Brought to America compliments of your president and his open border Our health authorities had to give way to political correctness and allow the new diseases and a new hosting population in America.  

Authorities who work within our government that is allowing this disease (and others) to be imported into our country unabated?

Pestilence, disease and death… the inevitable wages of liberalism