Socialist Speech Reveals Real Obama

Did you hear President Obama’s “Teddy Roosevelt” speech given in Kansas yesterday? He tried to gain credibility for his extreme, progressive policies by noting that a progressive Republican president’s policies were similar to his own. He disarmingly smirked as he admitted that Roosevelt was called a socialist for those policies! That was before political correctness had such a chilling affect on speaking truth.  But, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck…

He has the audacity to claim that he has Kansas values (deep roots in Kansas)! You think they are as deep as his roots in Kenya, or Indonesia, or perhaps Hawaii? He said he got his name from his dad and his values from his mom. Have you checked into what those values might be? His mother was a world traveling “free thinker” whose political and religious values were outside mainstream America. His values; therefore, are not the  Heartland USA values found in Kansas.

Obama,  following his mother’s lead, is a socialist. He believes the government should solve all problems. He believes the promise of “cradle to grave” security (even though it is unattainable) can seduce Americans into voting for him and forfeiting their basic freedoms.  He believes in using legislation to redistribute wealth, which allows the government to take the legitimate wealth of some citizens and to give to others (at home and abroad).

As a socialist, he believes in using class warfare to promote his causes.  Even though as a candidate he told us he would bring America together, he has been the most divisive president of my lifetime. For example, he encouraged racial tensions by allowing Black Panthers to intimidate white voters at the polls without prosecution. He encouraged racial tensions by falsely accusing the police of mishandling a case involving a black professor trying to break into his own home. He also encouraged resentment from and toward Hispanics when he accused the State of Arizona of racial profiling for attempting to enforce Federal Immigration Laws. He has recently been encouraging class warfare by blaming those wicked weathly people (capitalists!) for the 2008 economic downturn (which was actually caused by socialistic government interference with banks and mortgage companies) and repeatedly saying, “The rich should pay their fair share!” And, he has encouraged class warfare by supporting Occupy Wallstreet!

Obama’s progressive/socialist policies are destroying our economy and robbing us of our freedoms.  How many regulations can we bear and have any freedom left? The government is broke. Obama has helped take this nation to the brink of bankruptcy by creating new government agencies; hiring more government employees; and by pushing a new, uber-expensive socialism program known as Obama Care. (He can’t blame that one on Bush!)  The government’s bills are being paid with money borrowed in the name of taxpayers, and we know, “The borrower is servant to the lender.”

In the name of recovery, he has spent us into a bottomless pit of debt without bringing new jobs into our economy. He spent a lot of the so-called stimulus money in foreign countries! He used large amounts of money to pay off unions and others who helped elect him. And that includes the money he spent on financially unsustainable and environmentally dirty “green” projects like electric cars which only benefited a handful of people and will never help the overall economy.  Not to mention Solyndra!

He has used the EPA, executive orders, and “proposed” regulations like Cap and Trade to block countless American jobs and prosperity for our economy. By limiting drilling for oil, formulating regulations to halt investment in new, cleaner coal based utility companies, discouraging Nuclear Power plants, and also by blocking the Canadian pipeline; he has deliberately hurt our economy!

None of these “green” measures are based on true concern for the world’s environment because he supports drilling for oil in Brazil and continuing to buy oil from the Middle East which drills for it! He supports Nuclear Power in other nations. And, he supports exporting our coal to China where it is burned and affects the atmosphere as much as it would if we burned it here. His policies are not green, they are socialistic! And they are hurting our country.

On his fourth day in office he used an executive order to fund abortions around the world with US taxpayers money–which most Americans oppose. Combine this executive order with his Senate voting record of support for partial birth abortion, and his three votes to force medical workers to allow aborted babies accidentally born alive to die without medical care, and Obama Care, which forces taxpayers to pay for abortions; and he is the most pro-baby-killing president we’ve ever had.

He has sued Arizona and other states for trying to enforce Federal laws within their states that he refuses to enforce.

He released the 10 Russian spies arrested by the FBI in June of 2010 before they could even be debriefed to reveal their objectives and their contacts in our government. Why would he throw away the results of a successful ten year undercover investigation of Russian spies? Would they have revealed the anti-American activities of socialists and communists in his administration?

He undermined the USA and NATO security by agreeing to a treaty with Russia which cancelled our missile defense system and limited our potential for maintaining our arsenals. He has also spent us into so much debt we’ll have trouble maintaining our conventional defense over time.

He refuses to use the words terrorist, Islamic Radical, and War on Terror, even when Muslims try to blow up US targets and kill people within our borders or around the world.

He openly embraces Islam although Islam openly hates America! (They call us the Great Satan.) He bowed to the King of the Islamic nation of Saudi Arabia, a nation so exclusive and supremacist that no churches may be built within its borders, no Jews may visit the country, and non-Muslims are prohibited from visiting its sacred cities! Islam is a political/religious system seeking to dominate the world. Not something freedom lovers can embrace.

He also endangers America by wasting money having the TSA harass patriotic citizens in airports while allowing Muslims to serve in sensitive Homeland Security positions and welcoming unvetted Islamist refugees into our country! (No practicing Islamist should be in a USA security position! Duh.)

Americans cannot support Obama if they truly believe in our Constitutional Republic. I urge you to keep his past record before you. Please don’t allow yourself to be fooled by any centrist appearing policies he may pragmatically proffer as we head into the election. Remember, he has no problem making promises he won’t keep!

In the Kansas speech he once again pitched the idea that he and those “compassionate” Democrats just want us all to work together (collectivism) to equalize (lower) everyone’s standard of living; whereas those hard-hearted Republicans think everyone should be left to make it (prosper) on their own (individualism) and play by their own rules (have freedom under the rule of law).  He believes capitalism (the way of freedom and individualism) has been tried and failed! So, what’s left? Socialism!

If progressivism/socialism is so great, and capitalism is such a failure, how did America become such a wealthy nation with such a huge middle class?

America, as we know it, cannot survive another four year term under the progressive/socialist agenda of President Obama. I hope you will be a part of those who vote for a change in 2012 to restore the USA!

About Cherel

I love to read. I also enjoy journaling, writing poetry, sharing faith and encouragement with others, and blogging! Hope you are blessed by my site.
This entry was posted in Current Events, Politics and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

15 Responses to Socialist Speech Reveals Real Obama

  1. danielfee says:

    If progressivism/socialism is so great, and capitalism is such a failure, how did America become such a wealthy nation with such a huge middle class?
    If you like to read you should read a little more history. First, nobody is claiming that capitalism is a failure. This is a typical right-wing straw man. It is corruption of the capitalist system that people are upset with and attacking, not capitalism itself. The failure is with the regulatory agencies not enforcing their regulations that are still on the books and of elected official that repealed the laws (i.e. Glass-Steigell) that kept the corruption in the finance sector in check for more than 50 years.
    How did we build such a huge middle class? With all those socialist/progressive programs that FDR put in place during the depression that the Republicans are decrying. Social Security lifted seniors out of poverty and allowed them to retire with some dignity. The CCC, FDIC, SEC, FCIC, FHA and TVA put people back to work and regulated the abuses of 1920’s that caused the stock market crash and depression. These were huge government expenditures and regulatory expansion. Laws supporting labor unions were also strengthened and the unions bargained for high wages, health care and other benifits that lifted the middle. The government spent large sums of money on improving education and the GI Bill. This resulted in a big increase in the number of engineers and scientist as well as other professionals. I could go on, but I am sure you will just dismiss these programs as having no benifit in building the middle class because it doesn’t fit your narrative. But contrary to the claims that the Republicans would like us to believe today, it was these progressive/socialist programs that led the the largest economic expansion and growth of a middle class in history over the next 3 decades. It is really sad that we have reached a point where a large percentage of the population accepts propaganda as if it is factual. T.R.’s words are as true today as they were 101 years ago. Obama is confronting the exact same Republican party attitudes today that T.R. faced in the early 1900’s. What the right-wing is trying to do today in defending the Wall Street bankers and hedge fund manager is the same as those Republicans who were defending the Robber Barrons in T.R.’s day. Please explain how you can defend the actions of a hedge fund manager, such as John Paulson, who worked with Goldman Sachs in selecting the faulty sub-prime mortgages that were put into a CDO and then Mr Paulson took a short position against it (meaning he bet it would default). Guess what he was right and personally made $4 billion dollars that year. This is not capitalism and he was not the only one doing this.
    Here is something that you should spend some time thinking about. If the total estimated value of the toxic sub-prime mortgages was approximately $1.7 trillion dollars, why in addition to the $780 billion TARP fund that Congress approved (before Obama was elected) did the Federal Reserve have to provide an additional $7.7 trillion dollars in 0.01% interest loans (free money) to the Wall Street banks? It is because of a corrupt capitalist system based on the philosopy of privatizing the profits and socializing the losses.

  2. Cherel says:

    I happen to love history. How about you? To understand the depression era, Don’t just read The Defining Moment by Jonathan Alter, try New Deal or Raw Deal by Burton W. Folsom Jr. That would be eye-opening for a liberal like yourself. Or how about Capitalism and Freedom by Milton Friedman? And, The Road to Serfdom by F.A.Hayek. And Democracy in America by Alexis de Tocqueville who discusses “the real conservatism of free government.” I could go on.

    I see from your response that you are all about government solutions to all of life’s problems. You apparently can’t see that all those Great Society (massively expensive) government programs have been used to enslave (buy the votes–while keeping impoverished) the lower class and have gotten us into the debt situation we face today. They were wealth redistributing, unsustainable, ponzi schemes from the very beginning designed to make politicians powerful and keep voters dependent! And, the thuggish unions are showing their true colors clearly today!

    Our founding fathers valued freedom more than they valued a free meal. They were wary of big government programs because “corruptable men” end up running those programs and inevitably are corrupted by them. The very politicians who “most loudly” champion the programs for the poor grow the richest while “in service” for their country! And are the stingiest when it comes to sharing their personal resources with those in need. Yes, that would be those Pelosi-type Democrats.

    The original recipients of Social Security benefits drew out what they had never paid in. And now, because of the government’s corrupt handling of the funds (spending for other gov’t programs, supporting illegal aliens and refugess, etc.) many people won’t even get back what they paid in.

    The government’s intervention in the mortgage industry through Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac destroyed the housing market! Rather than helping the poor get into homes, it literally stoled the homes from honest, hard working Americans who had done everything right but got caught in a government created housing bubble.

    In 1913, the Congress created the Federal Reserve Bank. It’s not federal. It’s simply a group of bankers out to make (or take) a lot of money from the population at large. It’s not a reserve. It just keeps printing paper money backed by nothing but the taxpayers obligation to repay it. It is a nationalized banking system run by non-government men who are not accountable to the nation. Jefferson opposed a national bank because he foresaw the results we have today. Government in collusion with bankers would leave Americans, homeless and impoverished in the land of their ancestors.

    It’s the government intervention into the market that causes the problems that government then claims to have the answers for. FDR, Johnson, and Obama are a part of the problem! And, big government solutions are “Too good to be true!” Count on it.

    God gave us life. liberty and the ability to pursue happiness. And that’s what our founding fathers hoped to ensure for us. They sought to “provide for the common defense” and “promote the general (not individual) welfare”. They never considered “cradle to grave” governmental programs. They feared and despised the very idea. Far better to trust God and help your famliy, friends and “neighbors” in their times of need. That leads to an honest prosperity that can’t be stolen.

    P.S. I’m not defending greed but if the government mostly stayed out of it, the market would mostly correct itself. And, by the way, many of those employees of the “Robber Barons” were glad to have a job. That’s another topic.

    Thanks for your comment.

    • danielfee says:

      Wow, between your original post and your response comment it appears that you have squeezed in every right-wing talking point. It shows how well propaganda works.
      Yes, I do like history but I have not read either Alter’s or Folsom’s books on the depression era. But I have read “The Road to Serfdom” the “Constitution of Liberty” by Hayek, “Free to Choose” and “Capitalism and Freedom” by Friedman, “Omnipotent Government” by Von Mises, “Radicals for Capitalism” by Doherty and every book written by Ayn Rand. Plus many hundreds of other books written by conservative, libertarian and liberal writers.
      Your first mistake, which is the one that many conservatives make today, is assuming that liberals, including myself, believe that we “are all about government solutions to all of life’s problems.” This statement shows how deeply the right-wing propaganda has penetrated your thought process. First, you have been taught to demonize liberals, or anyone who doesn’t accept the right-wing propaganda, which is the initial step necessary in placing all of the blame for every ill on those “other” people who are not part of the group you belong to. It is their fault, they are trying to take something away from us. It is a black and white view of the world, which never exists in reality. There are very few people in America who do not believe in the capitalist system. A hundred years ago there was a much large percentage of American that thought communism might be solution to the wealth disparity that existed in the late 1800’s and early 1900’s. Today there may be a few hundred or a thousand, but it is a very small percentage of the population. Most liberal I know and that I have read firmly believe in a capitalist system. But they believe the role of government in that system is to set the ground rules and the act as the referee to enforce those rules. During the economic boom period from the late 1940’s to the 1970’s both Republicans and Democrats had this general opinion of the role government, even if they differed on what those rules should be. This began to change in the 1980’s with Reagan. His quote that “government is not the solution to our problems, government is the problem” was the most damaging part of his legacy. For a more in depth discussion on Reagan’s legacy read my post “ The Real Legacy of Ronald Reagan” at http://www.politonomicsandtravel.wordpress.com .
      What I find amazing and confusing are conservatives who profess to love the constitution and the founding fathers who have come to despise the government that they established. The founders believed that “we the people” could do a much better job of governing ourselves, than a corrupt king who was providing special favors to the commercial corporations of that day. Go back and read the first grievance listed in the Declaration of Independence, “He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.” You should also review the history of the Boston Tea Party, which was an act of civil disobedience against the special privileges that the king provided to the East India Company. In effect the Tea Act gave them a tax cut, by providing them a full refund on the duty for importing tea into Britain. It also permitted them for the first time to export tea to the colonies on its own account. This allowed them to reduce costs by eliminating the middlemen who bought the tea at wholesale auctions in London. Instead of selling to middlemen, they appointed colonial merchants who would sell the tea for a commission. Because the Tea Act made legally imported tea cheaper, it threatened to put smugglers of Dutch tea out of business. Also, legitimate tea importers who had not been named as consignees by the East India Company were also threatened with financial ruin. Another major concern for merchants was that the Tea Act gave the East India Company a monopoly on the tea trade, and it was feared that this government-created monopoly might be extended in the future to include other goods. So, it was a rebellion against giving tax breaks and special privilages to a large multi-nationl corporation to the detriment of the colonial merchants and small business owners. Today, we do have a problem with government because it has been captured by special interest. In Ayn Rand’s language we have bunch of second handers that are achieving their success by who they know in government and how they can can get regulations or deregulations passed for their benifit.
      But thanks to Reagan’s mantra and the constant propaganda from right-wing media, conservatives today argue that government should not implement laws (read regulations) for the public good and the are actually advocating for tax breaks and special privilages for big multi-national corporations to the detriment of small business and the middle class. Since Reagan there has been a thirty year effort to turn corporations into people, with all of the constitutional protections provided to “we the people” culminating in the Citizens United decision. In this same time span we have seen the middle class wages stagnate and share of the national wealth decline.
      There was virtually no middle class in this country until after WW II. The huge middle class was created when the working and labor class began to receive a larger percentage of the nation’s wealth that was being generated by the industrial revolution. This provided them with discretionary income and turned them into a massive consumer base that drove economic expansion for decades. But some how conservatives seem to think that the creation of the middle class just spontaneously rose up on its own without any change in governmental policies. The first thing that everyone, conservative of liberal, need to recognize is that government policy will result in the redistribution of wealth in one direction or the other. It has from the beginning of the country. Be it was a transfer from the agrarian south to the merchant classes in the north, or the assumption of the state debts to the Federal government which benefited some states and tax payers to the detriment of others. Government regulations will always result in somebody winning and somebody losing. It is funny that conservatives only call it “class warfare” when the middle and working classes are demanding their fair share, but not when the top 1% and corporations are lobbying to have the regulations changed to transfer wealth upwards to themselves.
      You blame government intervention for the sub-prime mortgage bubble that destroyed the housing market, but you have it completely backwards. It was deregulation of the financial markets and the total lack of regulation in the derivatives market that caused the economic melt down. Then these deregulated financial institutions, who were permitted to set their own leverage ratios and risk levels, created all of these exotic and toxic mortgage backed derivatives. After they failed, they ran to the government (that they had bought and paid for) with their hand out saying, if you don’t bail us out of the bad decision we have made then the whole economy will crash. The propaganda that the right-wing media is spreading is that Fannie and Freddie caused the sub-prime mortgage crisis. This is easily disproved with just a little research. Fannie and Freddie have never been loan originator. I challenge you to find just one loan, prime or sub-prime that was written by either Fannie or Freddie. They guaranteed loans and would buy mortgages from the banks that met specific lending criteria. Until the Republican controlled Congress changed the regulations governing Fannie and Freddie the were precluded from buying the mortgage derivative products. Once the laws were changed the banks off loaded the toxic assets onto Fannie and Freddie that caused their collapse.
      You do have it right with respect to the Federal Reserve. You should read my post “Not Enough “Real Money” about the Fed and fractional reserve banking. Ron Paul has it partially right. The Fed should be abolished, but his idea of leaving the creation monetary supply to the “free markets” is a recipe for fraud and disaster. We essentially had this type of system after Jackson abolished the Second Bank of the United States when banks could create their own script. Money is a medium of exchange that needs to be created by the government, as per the Constitution.
      Actually, you are defending greed. I assume that you mean we should have no or very limited government regulations when you say that “if government mostly stayed out of it, the market would mostly correct itself.” There is no historical evidence of this ever occurring, so why would you make this assumption. Sure many of those employees of the “Robber Barons” were glad to have a job, so that they didn’t starve to death. But they were wage slaves, working 80 hours a week, children were working in factories and working conditions were unsafe resulting in thousands of deaths per year. Is that what you want to return to? Probably not, but that is what you are advocating for.

  3. Cherel says:

    Daniel,

    I visited your site. The travel pictures are great. You are blessed to have the opportunity to see so much of the world and it’s nice that yoiu are sharing those experiences with your followers.

    I also read some of your articles. It’s easy to see you are very intelligent and informed from a liberal perspective. We just simply do not agree about economic policy or the role of government. I’d rather have more freedom and less government interference. All those “benefits” come at a great cost to individuals and to our nation– and I think we are beginning to see the hidden price tag now.

    I found your statements about my conservatism interesting. You mentioned my use of “right wing talking points” and said “the right-wing propaganda has penetrated your thought process.”

    It sounds like you think conservatives are mere parrots. And, I have to wonder where you think all the right-wing propaganda originates. I can tell you it wasn’t in college. My government teacher said capitalism was doomed to failure and we’d have to go socialist or fascist at some point to survive. My husband’s economics teacher for his MBA program was an avowed Marxist. I have to disagree with you concerning the small number of people in this country who have turned against capitalism. Many college educated (propagandized) people have taken that route nowadays. I see Occupy Wallstreet as a clear indication of the liberal propaganda at work in our colleges.

    My husband and I grew up reading the Bible. It molded our thought processees. It is the source of our conservative values. As do most conservatives, we believe in a Creator God to whom we are accountable. And we believe The Bible has very clear teachings about justice, mercy, greed, generosity, helping the widows, the orphans, and the poor, etc. It teaches us to value life and freedom. It teaches us to live responsibly and to trust in God in all areas of life. It teaches us not to rely on men or their strength and resources. Men are weak and fallible and mortal. There is no ultimate security there.

    Our founding fathers were men of the Bible. They understood that power corrupts and designed a limited federal government because they feared too much power in the hands of a few. The government we have today is not the government they had in mind. As you and I have both noted, the Congress has given control of our finances to the Federal Reserve which has been disastrous for our economy. Also, the Supreme Court has been undermining the constitution for many years now which has been highly detrimental to the moral fiber of our nation. And presidents have been grabbing power by using executive orders to bypass accountability to the Congress and, thus, the people, which may prove to be the death of our freedom.

    At the moment we still live in a free country so we both have a right to express our opinions about how things are going. I have expressed mine in my article and follow up and you have expressed yours. Having been through this type of debate before, I don’t believe either of us is going to change our mind at this point so I’m not going to attempt a detailed response to all your points. However, I will say I like President Reagan.

    Thank you for your comments. I wish you well in life’s journey.

    • danielfee says:

      Cherel,
      Thanks, my wife and I love traveling and it is a great way to share some of our travel photos.
      Yes, I do think that many conservatives, both blogs and conservatives I speak with directly, are parroting the talking points. I would say that Fox News and right-wing talk radio are the biggest propaganda originators. I will give you one example from your original post, but I could go through each point you made.
      You said in your original post that Obama encouraged racial tension by allowing Black Panthers to intimidate white voters at the polls without prosecution. The incident you are referring to is the two guys who were members of the New Black Panthers standing outside a polling place in Philadelphia. One of the two was a credentialed poll watcher, while the other was standing there with a nightstick baton. An operative hired by the local Republican Party filmed a discussion he had with them and then put it on Utube. That video did not show them intimidating anyone. A Rebublican poll watcher stated that voters had been complaining about intimidation, but the District Attorney’s office stated that they had not been contacted by any voters. The guy with nightstick was eventualy escorted away by the police. They were outside of a predominatly black voting precinct and their stated purpose was to make sure that black voters were not prevented from voting. But reguardless of their stated purpose for being there, on January 7, 2009, the Department of Justice filed a civil suit against the New Black Panther Party and three of its members alleging violations of the Voting Rights Act. The suit sought an injunction preventing further violations of the Voting Rights Act. After the defendants did not appear for a court hearing, a default judgment was entered. On May 29, 2009, the Department of Justice requested and received an injunction against the member who had carried the nightstick. The Bush DOJ started the civil suit and the Obama DOJ completed it and got the injunction issued. So how can anyone claim that there was no prosecution? It so easy to disprove this claim, but you still hear it brought up on Fox News and right-wing radio shows and then bloggers like yourself will repeat it. You should ask yourself this question, “why would Obama want to encourage racial tensions?” He is of mixed race and was raised by his white mother and grandparents. Are we suppose to believe that he has some deep seated anti-white bias? Really, does that even make sense? Could it be because blacks make up such a large percentage of the voting population and it will help his re-election? I don’t think so. That makes no sense either. Ask yourself who really benifits the most from increased racial tensions? This has been going on since the 1970’s. Nixon called it the southern stratigy and it is still alive and well today. This is what I call pure propaganda when they push stories knowing that they are not based on facts and easily disproved, but it is done to push an agenda. They know most of their audience will not bother to check the facts.
      I am not sure when you and your husband were in college but I would say that the majority of economic schools today, and for the past 30 years, have been teaching supply side theory. It was a minority opinion back in the 1960’s originating at the Chicago School. But since the 1980’s it has become the majority view that is being taught in economics programs all over the country. Your government teacher who said capitalism was doomed to failure and we’d have to go socialist or fascist at some point to survive may have been right. I would say that we have gone a long way down the fascist road (in the original definition of the term). The question we confront is, will our government adopt policies that are in favor of the people (called socialist today) or the corporations (called fascist today)? I would say the corporate special interests have been winning this argument for years. But I will avoid going into a long discussion on this issue or your points about religion and the Founding Fathers.
      I have also had these debates before and don’t expect that I will change your mind. But there are some blog posts that catch my attention and I just feel compeled to post a comment. The most I could hope for is that you or your readers fact check the sources that are being used and not just repeat the propaganda.
      Dan

  4. Cherel says:

    Dan,

    You said, “May 29, 2009, the Department of Justice requested and received an injunction against the member who had carried the nightstick. The Bush DOJ started the civil suit and the Obama DOJ completed it and got the injunction issued. So how can anyone claim that there was no prosecution?”

    Here are excerpts from three news reports from June, July and September of 2010, more than a year after the date you mentioned, stating the case was dropped. I have done research on the story and wasn’t just parroting Fox News Channel. Possibly you didn’t follow up on the original story? There are plenty of news sources that covered it.

    The Civil Rights Commission is investigating claims that the Justice Department inappropriately dropped an investigation into alleged voter intimidation by the New Black Panther Party.
    By Patrik Jonsson, Staff writer / September 24, 2010

    “On Friday, Mr. Coates testified before the US Civil Rights Commission, a bipartisan oversight group, alleging that under President Obama, the dismissive attitude of that civil rights staff attorney toward white claims of disenfranchisement at the hands of blacks has essentially become Justice Department policy. He said he had seen evidence that Obama appointees in the Department of Justice had created a “hostile atmosphere” toward attorneys pushing to prosecute blacks for voting-rights violations – a charge the Justice Department denies.

    The current Civil Rights Commission investigation is specifically focusing on why Justice Department attorneys dropped charges against two New Black Panther Party members who brandished a nightstick at a Philadelphia polling place in 2008.

    For some conservative critics of the Obama administration, the case is seen as a smoking gun – damning proof that the nation’s first black president doesn’t take black racism seriously. The PowerLine blog called Coates’s testimony a “bombshell.” Defenders of the civil rights division say Coates is bitter because he was unable to turn the organization toward policies that they say would ultimately hurt black voters.”

    “in his testimony Friday, Coates argued that elements of the Justice Department have become predisposed to overlook any alleged incidents of whites being disenfranchised by minorities.”

    http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2010/0924/New-Black-Panther-Party-voter-intimidation-case-Bombshell-for-Obama
    *************************************************************************************************************
    Inside The Black Panther Case Anger and Ignorance June 25th, 2010
    “On the day President Obama was elected, armed men wearing the black berets and jackboots of the New Black Panther Party were stationed at the entrance to a polling place in Philadelphia. They brandished a weapon and intimidated voters and poll watchers. After the election, the Justice Department brought a voter-intimidation case against the New Black Panther Party and those armed thugs. I and other Justice attorneys diligently pursued the case and obtained an entry of default after the defendants ignored the charges. Before a final judgment could be entered in May 2009, our superiors ordered us to dismiss the case.”

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/jun/25/inside-the-black-panther-case-anger-ignorance-and-/
    **************************************************************************************************************
    The New Black Panther Party Evidence on Voter Intimidation
    Hans von Spakovsky July 21, 2010

    “Keep in mind that Bull and Hill were only at the polling place for about an hour, and in that short amount of time they saw several people turn around and leave rather than run the thug gauntlet set up at the front door to the polling place. And there is no question that the poll watchers stationed inside the precinct were terrified because of the threats that had been made against them by the New Black Panthers.”

    http://blog.heritage.org/2010/07/21/the-new-black-panther-party-evidence-on-voter-intimidation
    ***********************************************************************************************************

    As for Obama’s motives, it’s just part of his plan to bring down America. If you have read his books you may have noticed he that is conflicted. He was confused about his feelings for his white grandparents and disturbed about his role as a brown person (designated black) in a white world. At around 12 years of age he quit telling people he had a white mother. He expressed an underlying rage because he felt no matter what he did, his accomplishments would always be measured by the whites who made the rules and owned the court. By his own description, He was rootless and faithless and utterly alone. He couldn’t enjoy visiting Europe because it wasn’t his– he didn’t really belong there. He went to check out his African roots but wasn’t really at home there either. He had trouble getting waited on in a restaurant because even the Kenyans favor white tourists. He is glad to live off the benefits of Western society but he’s ashamed of them as well. The West must be guilty of something really bad or we wouldn’t have so much! He doesn’t understand American exceptionalism. He doesn’t relate to being blessed by God. He wasn’t raised in America and doesn’t relate to American values. He spent his evenings during his college years wearing his leather jacket, smoking cigarettes and discussing topics like neocolonialism and Eurocentrism with his “alienated” buddies. (Since no one from college remembers him, I wonder who those friends were.)

    Anyway, maybe you can see where I’m coming from. He’s not your All-American kinda guy.
    And stirring up racial tensions to meet his goals is merely a pragmatic policy on his part.

    We live in the South and I honestly don’t know what Southern strategy you are talking about.
    Conservatives respect blacks enough to want to help free them from welfare and housing projects.

    The college courses mentioned were in the 80s and 90s.

    Socialism does not favor the people. it favors the elite and enslaves the people. Corporations are not our enemy until they are taken over by the government! The free enterprise system works the best for the greatest number of people. I know you disagree,

    Fact checking is important on all sides of the issues.

    Thanks for your comments.

    • danielfee says:

      Cherel,
      Your rebuttal to my comment about the New Black Panther case shows how well propaganda can work. The sources you are citing are right-wing media outlets or think tanks. One of them will initiate a story based on an underlying agenda they wish to push. In this case it is Obama is a reverse racist. It then echos around other right-wing media outlets and soon or later a few main stream media outlets will pick it up and report on the controversy. You should read “The Republican Noise Machine” by David Brock. He is a guy who was part of that right-wing media machine and wrote some of the hit pieces on Anita Hill and Hillary Clinton back in the 1990’s as well as the original “troopergate” story on Bill Clinton. He had a crisis of conscious, quit what he was doing and wrote the book exposing how the vast right-wing conspericy worked. Of course he has been trashed by everyone on the right, because you are not supposed to leave the family and talk.
      If you look a little closer at these stories about the Justice Department dropping the investigation you will notice they were about criminal violations of the Voting Rights Act. There was not enough evidence, contrary to Mr. Coates assertion, of anyone being intimidated or prevented from voting in order to proceed with a criminal prosecution. They only had an allegation from a Republican operative at the polling place, but no actual voter complaints to the DA’s office. Don’t you think that if the guy the Republican party hired to shoot the video had actual evidence on video it would have been all over Utube. On the civil side they did prosecute and get an injunction to prevent the one guy (it was only one who had a nightstick) from appearing at a polling place again. If he violates this injunction then he could be criminally charged. But this is how propaganda works. There is a grain of truth in the story, but relavent facts are left out. It is repeated by like minded media outlets, each becoming a little more careless about the facts, but all pushing the same underlying agenda. In this case they want you to belive that Obama is a reverse racist. This is the crap that Rush Limbaugh has been pushing for years, “it is white middle aged men are being discriminated against. We are the real victims.” As a white middle aged male I can attest that this is pure BS. But this reverse racism charge works well in the south, and if you live in the south I am sure you are emersed in this knid of talk. It is actually a form of projection, where someone claims “I am not a racist because I am the one being discriminated against”. Once someone buys into this underlying propaganda then you can get them to believe the craziest things like, “it’s just part of his plan to bring down America” or “He doesn’t understand American exceptionalism”. Or you can get people to believe he is a socialist, a Muslim who was born in Kenya. But he sat in the pew listining to a crazy radical Christian pastor for all those years. Which is it? Is he a radical Muslim or radical Christian? He may not be your All-American kinda guy. But I suspect you have a limited view of what qualifies as “All-American”
      PS: The Southern strategy was developed by the Nixon campaign to turn white southern Democrats (Dixiecrats) into Nixon suppoters by using the Civil Rights legislation that Johnson signed against the Democratic Party. They intentionally inflamed racial tensions for political advantage. If you have lived in the south your entire life and were educated in the south, I guess it shouldn’t come as a surprise that you haven’t heard about the Southern strategy. Growing up in the midwest this was covered in our civic classes. But I guess in the south that was considered liberal propaganda and omitted.

  5. Cherel says:

    Daniel,
    Here we go round and round as we knew we would.

    There were all kinds of articles covering the Black Panther story because it was real news, not propaganda. But, it seems that no matter what evidence a conservative submits, for liberals it all boils down to what the meaning of “is” is.

    As it has been in my other converstaions with liberals, I take the time to offer documentation and you just come back with undocumented allegations. We’ll just have to let other readers do their own follow-up research if they still have questions on the Black Panthers. I stand by my research.

    As for your assertion about reverse racism beng a hot topic in the South, I don’t know where you came up with that notion. I have lived in the South for going on 30 years now but I grew up in the Midwest (Illinois) and I was confronted with more prejudice during those years in Illinois than I have been during my years living in the South.

    My husband and I have always opposed racism on any level. He grew up in one of the only multi-ethnic churches in Oklahoma City in the 60s. His mother’s funeral was preached by a black minister who was a lifelong friend. We were married by a black judge (Billy Jones) in East St, Louis, Illinois. We had wonderful black friends in the military in Illinois and Germany. We have pastored mix congregation churches including Blacks and Hispanics. We have mixed color family members. When I fill out a form asking about race, I write in human because there is only one race. And our conservative friends and acquaintances mostly think the way we do.

    ************************************************************************************************************
    As for the Southern Strategy, I graduated in 1972 and those Civics classes you mentioned hadn’t been taught yet. So, I looked it up and found it all depends on who is interpreting the events. You probably had a liberal Civics teacher.

    The fact is the Democratic Party has always been the racist party. They favored slavery and supported segregation for 100 years after the Civil War. More Republicans than Democrats have always supported Civil Rights.

    I’ve included some quotes from a Wikipedia article on the Southern Strategy. It mentions your take on the subject but also gives says other analysts feel that Democrats switched parties for economic rather than racial reasons.

    “A higher percentage of the Republican Party supported the Civil Rights Act of 1964 than did the Democratic Party, as they had on all previous Civil Rights legislation.”

    “With the aid of Harry Dent and South Carolina Senator Strom Thurmond, who had switched parties in 1964, Richard Nixon ran his 1968 campaign on states’ rights and “law and order.”

    “Many liberals accused Nixon of pandering to Southern whites, especially with regard to his “states’ rights” and “law and order” stands.”

    “In the 1972 election…Nixon won every state in the Union except Massachusetts, winning more than 70 percent of the popular vote in most of the Deep South (Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, Florida, and South Carolina) and 61% of the national vote. He won over 65 percent of the votes in the other states of the former Confederacy. Nixon won 36% of the black vote nationwide.”

    “In later decades, some analysts made the argument that Southern whites’ move to the Republican Party had more to do with whites’ voting for their economic interests than racism. Clay Risen wrote… This very busy… class, not surprisingly, began to vote for the party, it perceived, best represented its economic interests: the Republican Party.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy
    *********************************************************************************************************
    You kinda got a little carried away there talking about Obama. He is a radical Socialist but I never claimed he was a radical Muslim or a radical Christian or mentioned his birthplace– which is still unkown. According to his testimony in Dreams From My Father he had no faith. He only started attending Rev Wright’s Liberation Theology Church because he was trying to influence pastors to work with him during his Community Organizing years and an elderly pastor told him he’d get more cooperation from pastors if he had a church home. And, being the pragmatist that he claims to be, he was aware that politicians need support from Christians to get into office.

    My “limited” view of All-American is someone who loves our country enough to defend and enforce our Constitution and the Bill of rights.Someone who loves freedom based on the rule of law. Someone who can say the entire pledge of alleigance (One Nation Under God) with their hand on their heart and mean what they say. And maybe they even enjoy apple pie! :-) I don’t think that’s asking too much.

    Grace to you.

    P,S. Correction. My husband finished his MBA in the late 80s– not in the 90s.

    • danielfee says:

      Cherel,
      We go round and round because it seems to be in the conservative DNA to never admit a mistake. In your original post you made a definitive statement that “he encouraged racial tensions by allowing Black Panthers to intimidate white voters at the polls without prosecution”. You seem to be incapable of acknowledging that there was a civil prosecution that end with an injunction being issued. You ignore this fact and focus only on the fact that DOJ did not proceed with a criminal prosecution. With respect to a criminal prosecution it becomes much more of a subjective debate. You said that “it seems that no matter what evidence a conservative submits, for liberals it all boils down to what the meaning of “is” is.” Can you please tell me what evidence you have provided that supports a criminal violation. I acknowledge that you have cited many articles, which have included many accusations all coming from people affiliated with the Republican Party in some way. Where is the actual evidence of voter intimidation? Where is the complaint filed by and aggrieved person? You cannot prosecute a criminal case without actual evidence. The DOJ, which spanned both administrations, did prosecute a civil case based on what evidence was available. But you seem to be incapable of admitting that a prosecution did occur because it would undercut the basis for your giant leap which is to demonstrate that Obama has “encouraged racial tensions.” Are we really supposed to believe that the President who was in the midst of dealing with the biggest financial crisis since the Great Depression had the time to micro manage the DOJ’s case against two guys in Philadelphia? Really? I see this for what it is, the typical mud slinging that occurs between the parties and it is intended to promote a racial divide.
      The fact is (was) the Democratic Party has always been (was) the racist party. They (did) favored slavery and supported segregation for 100 years after the Civil War. More Republicans than Democrats have always (had) supported Civil Rights. With my minor corrections, this statement is true. Back then the strengthen of the Democratic Party was is the south and there was a very strong racist element to that support. But we are not in the 1960’s anymore. When LBJ signed the civil rights legislation he made the statement that “we (meaning the Democrats) will lose the south for a generation.” He knew how strong the racist feelings were in his party and knew it would result in a dramatic shift in the party’s alignment. He was right. Richard Nixon did run his 1968 campaign on “states’ rights” and “law and order.” These were the code words that where intended to send the message that the Federal government should not be imposing the civil rights legislation on southern state. Each state (via state rights) should be permitted to determine what rights various citizens in their states will receive. In other words they wanted to keep separate but equal in place without Federal interference. The “law and order” implied that the sheriffs in the south should be permitted to enforce their local laws without interference from the Federal government. It is not surprising that in decades later some people would try to find other reasons to justify the switch. A racist never believes he is a racist, therefore it must have been for some other reason.
      I know that you didn’t specifically claim “he was a radical Muslim or a radical Christian or mentioned his birthplace– which is still unknown.” My comment was intended to be a more generic statement that applied to the Republican Party in general where large percentages of the party base have made such claims. But apparently you are a “birther” based on your statement “his birthplace– which is still unknown.” If this is the case then it is the clearest example yet that facts will not penetrate or alter your opinion. After months of demanding the long form birth certificate it was released proving once and for all that Obama was born in Hawaii. If you cannot acknowledge this fact then you are living in an alternate reality and it appears your real purpose is to echo the propaganda, not to have real discussion of issues. But I already suspected that was the case.
      Dan

  6. Cherel says:

    Dan,
    Intimidating voters is a criminal act even if you don’t actually stop them from voting. The Black Panther activity in Philedelphia actually kept people away from the polls. The investigation led to testimony that people drove up and asked what was going on and drove away without voting when they were informed about the Black Panther actions. No one knows how many votes were lost because of the interference at the polls. As you know, Eric Holder downplayed the importance of the situation and Obama’s administration dropped the case without following through with criminal prosecution. That’s what I said they did, I’m not sure where I went wrong in my observation.

    In my original article I mentioned several ways Obama has attempted to stir up class warfare which wre obvious and accurate. He even continues do so at the present time with his Occupy Wall Street people and his union cohorts.

    I knew it would be disturbing when I mentioned his birthplace is still unkown, but it’s true so I mentioned it. No one spends $2,000,000.00 on lawyers fees to avoid producing a legitimate document if they have it. The longform he finally submitted was clearly altered. The hospital where he was supposed to have been born will not confirm that he was born there. Something is not right about his documents so it’s fair to say that his birthplace is still unkown.

    Why did he take so long to release the questionable longform of his birth certificate if it was available all along? Why are his student loan and grant applications kept a secret? (Did he apply for aid as an Indonesian or a Kenyan?) Why doesn’t anyone remember him from college? Why has he refused to allow transcripts of his college grades to be released? Why are all his college papers kept secret? Why are all his passports unavailable for public scrutiny? (Is he hiding the name he used, where he traveled to and what country he claimed to be a citizen of?) Other presidential candidates have been required to release their records. Why wasn’t he required to do so? Why was he given a free pass for the vetting process? These are legitimate questions. I would love to see some “facts” that could alter my opinion of his qualifications to be our president. Let me know if you have some.

    Thanks for your comments.

    I sincerely hope you have a Merry Christmas and a Happy Holy Day Season!

    • danielfee says:

      It is clear that there are no facts that will ever alter your opinion. You obviously live in the little conspiracy world created by the far right-wing media and your goal is to echo the propaganda. Even Glenn Beck finally gave up on the birther conspiracy. I hope one day that you will check into Republican rehab becuase you definitely suffer from ODS (Obama Derangement Syndrome.)

  7. Cherel says:

    Dan,
    I gave you an opportunity to share some facts and your reply showcases the problem. All the questions I asked (and many more) are still without answers because facts are not available from this “most transparent administration” president.

    Again, I hope you have a Merry Christmas with your family.

  8. Pingback: Pushing Back the Socialist Agenda in Education | Letting Freedom Ring

  9. Cherel says:

    Reblogged this on Justice Musings and commented:

    After hearing First Lady Michelle Obama and former president, Bill Clinton, sing the high praises of President Obama, I’ve decided to reblog this post to remind us all of Obama’s real record.
    Add to all the facts I’ve listed in the blog, his message to Putin that he will have more “flexibility” to cooperate with Russia after the election because we will have no power to hold him accountable, and you should be able to see how truly dangerous he is.
    Jewish voters should open their eyes! Obama not only fails to properly support Israel, he openly supports Israel’s enemies! Wake up! Jerusalem is the capitol of Israel and the party who wants that open to question does not support Israel! Also, “God” is not just a word that can be added or deleted in a whimsical fashion from either party’s platform. We are either a nation under God or we are a nation quickly heading for tyranny!
    We have a clear choice in November. Vote Romney/Ryan!

  10. Judi says:

    Keep sounding the alarm bells Cherel! May those who have ears to hear, hear. May those who have eyes to see, see.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s