CLOSET MUSLIM, SERVANT TO MUSLIM DICTATORS Barack HUSSEIN Obama’s back door, however, was unique to him. Before prosecutors send some of the dimmer Hollywood stars to the slammer for their dimness, they might want to ask just how much influence a Saudi billionaire peddled to get Obama into Harvard. JACK CASHILL
President Trump is getting some negative feedback for interfering with the private sector for his comments on General Motors. President Trump is essentially pressuring GM to keep plants open in the U.S. by pointing out to them that they have been bailed out by U.S. taxpayers and wondering why they are closing plants here while they don't seem to be closing plants in Mexico and China. He is absolutely not telling them what to produce.
I thought the best way to analyze this issue is by comparing and contrasting the way Trump treats the private sector to the way Obama and Democrats have treated the private sector. President Trump focuses continuously on bringing manufacturing jobs back to the U.S. and creating new ones.
President Obama and others said manufacturing jobs were gone for good. President Obama was willing to relegate U.S. trade policy to others through the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement. President Trump believes that the U.S should control trade itself and pulled out of TPP.
President Obama bragged that his policies would bankrupt coal companies and destroy jobs while hurting the poor and middle class with much higher utility rates. President Trump is focusing on keeping coal mines open and miners employed while holding down utility rates.
President Obama continually blocked drilling and fossil fuel projects, which certainly blocked job creation and enhanced the power of Iran, Russia, Saudi Arabia, and others. President Trump has opened up drilling projects, which creates jobs; helps keep prices lower; and reduces the power of Russia, Iran Saudi Arabia, and others. We are much more energy independent today under President Trump.
The Obama administration sought to destroy for-profit education companies while failing to hold not-for-profit and government higher education institutions to the same standards. President Obama pushed high taxes and massive regulations. President Trump likes the private sector to have more control of the money and more freedom, not the government.
During Obama's years, there were slush funds at the EPA, the Justice Department, and the CFPB that were used significantly to reward political supporters. The Obama administration pretended that the legal settlements, where these groups essentially blackmailed companies to settle, were used to help victims and consumers, but a large proportion of the money instead was kicked back to liberal interest groups. It is amazing the number of ways that Obama gathered money to spend as he pleased.
An educational "slush fund" used by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has come under the "strictest review" by acting director Mick Mulvaney amid concerns the Obama-era agency has been doling out cash only to Democratic cronies.
Attorney General Jeff Sessions is investigating up to $6 billion in legal settlement money that the Obama administration steered toward progressive causes and allies in left-wing advocacy groups.
President Obama and others intentionally violated bankruptcy law when they used billions of taxpayer dollars to protect political supporters (the unions) over more secure bond-holders and other unsecure creditors. This was one of the clearest indications that Obama cared little about settled law.
The Obama Administration, overriding the legal system, ordered the bankruptcy court to wipe out the bondholders and nonunion pension debt – an unconstitutional seizure of property. Union pension benefits were secured with equity in GM and Chrysler.
When the dust settled, union pensions and taxpayers owned both companies. This clearly violated U.S. bankruptcy law, and became the subject of ongoing litigation. It was wrong to use the "crisis" as an excuse to disregard the law and serve a political agenda.
Bureaucrats working with Obama helped determine which dealerships would close.
In 2009, the Auto Task Force under the US Treasury Department and its head, Steve Rattner, Obama's Car Czar, entered into negotiations with Chrysler and GM (auto manufacturers) to "save" the auto industry. Herein, the auto task force, without inside knowledge of the industry, pressured the manufacturers to reduce the number of dealerships and fast tracked the government-managed bankruptcy to do just that. This did not allow for due process in the bankruptcy court.
GM also got a huge income tax break. Maybe the company should remember how generous we were.
General Motors Co. will drive away from its U.S.-government-financed restructuring with a final gift in its trunk: a tax break that could be worth as much as $45 billion.
GM says it is closing factories that produce vehicles that are unprofitable, but it is throwing billions into loss-producing electric and self-driving vehicles.
After years of development and taxpayer gifts, hybrid and electric cars sold in October 2018 totaled 34,094, or a little over 2% of the total, and if you take out Tesla, the total is under 14,000, which is less than 1%. Think of how low it would be without the $7,500 credit – which I call a gift to the rich who like to buy electric toys to pretend they care. Very few poor or middle-class people buy these impractical vehicles.
How many people actually believe that impractical and expensive electric vehicles will ever be popular choices for the poor and middle class unless we are actually forced to buy them? Why do we give taxpayer subsidies to GM and other car makers for cars they make in other countries?
I feel so good that middle-class taxpayers subsidize rich families buying the Tesla Model X and Model S, who make between $267,000 and $503,000.
Model X owners showed a significant bump in household annual income versus Model S owners, ticking in at an average of $503,000 and $267,000 respectively.
We should all be thankful every day that we have a president who wants to increase the power and purse of the private sector versus Obama or Hillary, who, along with other Democrats, continually wanted to increase the power of the government and confiscate an ever greater share of the nation's wealth for them to use as they please.
Obamanomics: How Barack Obama Is Bankrupting You and Enriching His Wall Street Friends, Corporate Lobbyists, and Union Bosses
BY TIMOTHY P CARNEY
Editorial Reviews: Obama Is Making You Poorer—But Who’s Getting Rich?
Goldman Sachs, GE, Pfizer, the United Auto Workers—the same “special interests” Barack Obama was supposed to chase from the temple—are profiting handsomely from Obama’s Big Government policies that crush taxpayers, small businesses, and consumers. In Obamanomics, investigative reporter Timothy P. Carney digs up the dirt the mainstream media ignores and the White House wishes you wouldn’t see. Rather than Hope and Change, Obama is delivering corporate socialism to America, all while claiming he’s battling corporate America. It’s corporate welfare and regulatory robbery—it’s Obamanomics.
Few events in history rival the gap between exuberant optimism and tumultuous reality, great dreams and vain illusions, as the spread of socialism. Its rise and fall constituted one of the most tragic episodes of the last century. It has created unparalleled violence, millions of innocent victims, modern slavery, and environmental disasters of biblical proportions. The movement has gone from spectacular triumphs to humiliating defeats – from victory in Russia in 1917 and the conquest of Eastern Europe and China in the 1930s and 1940s to what seemed an unstoppable march in Africa and Latin America in the 1960s and 1970s, and then to the spectacular implosion of the Soviet Union, the liberation of Eastern Europe, and the economic liberalization of China.
What is socialism? Who are American socialists, and what are they fighting for? Socialism is a political philosophy and economic system that promotes egalitarianism – a theory of economic equality. It is usually defined as "common ownership of the means of production," which is in the ballpark of the definition given by Karl Marx.
Lenin defined socialism as a society organized on the principle "from each according to his abilities and to each according to his work [contribution]."
But Barack Obama nailed it. In his speech in Berlin, Germany on July 24, 2008, he declared:
This is the moment when we must build on the wealth that open markets have created, and share its benefits more equitably.
Obama clearly was talking about not wealth creation, which would be capitalism, but wealth distribution, which is socialism.
It was an astonishingly ambitious vision for the future president of the United States. And it was not just a vision; he had a plan, and he had a strategy.
Obama, who adopted Marxism as a young man, grew gradually convinced (he had to) that the general theories of Marx, Engels, and Lenin outlined in Das Kapital, The Critique of the Gotha Program, What Is to Be Done, and other communist publications could not be directly applied to the contemporary United States of America. According to Marxist dogma, the transition to socialism and subsequent distribution of wealth must be accomplished by expropriation of the means of production with the imposition of a "dictatorship of the proletariat." Yet the proletariat – organized masses of working people, who, according to Marx, had "nothing to lose but their chains" – ceased to exist a century ago.
As an ardent Marxist, Obama had read more deeply in Marxism than most contemporary Marxists and came to the conclusion (correctly) that the main purpose for the expropriation of the means of production was not the distribution of wealth, but the subjugation of the population to the government control.
As Leon Trotsky put it, "in a country where the sole employer is the state, opposition means death by slow starvation. The old principle, who does not work does not eat, has been replaced with a new one: who does not obey does not eat."
The acquisition of this knowledge predisposed Obama to the recognition that society does not necessarily require government ownership of the means of production to implement the egalitarian dream. As long as the government controls the economy and is able to replace the free-market capitalist economy with political economy, and subsequently control profits, the objectives of socialism can be achieved. Obama also ascertained that in order to control the economy, the government needs to control only three major sectors – health care, finance, and energy.
An unemotional logician and imaginative tactician, Obama, while preserving the theoretical significance of Marxism, trashed those nineteenth-century Marxist orthodox theories and Lenin's principles that applied to an impoverished country and stood in the way of twenty-first-century American capitalism, and replaced them with his own pragmatic Marxism.
He substituted the dictatorship of proletariat with the dictatorship of government bureaucracy, and the expropriation of private property with statism – i.e., government control of the economy and supremacy of the values of the state that result in domination of the economic and political life of the citizenry. The driving force behind his adroit model was bondage: "The hand that feeds you controls you."
Alarmingly, Barack Obama had come within measurable distance of accomplishing the centerpiece of his strategy. However, not everything went as planned. Obama's reach exceeded his grasp – he and his democratic socialists had grossly underestimated U.S. economic vitality and regional demographics, so critical to securing the Democratic Party's electoral supremacy.
Although Dodd-Frank and Obamacare effectively took the financial and health care sectors under government control, draconian environmental regulations failed to subdue the energy industry. With the discovery of new domestic oil reserves and deployment of innovative technologies, energy production was thriving.
Moreover, not all of Mexico, Central, and South America crossed our open borders into Texas, Arizona, and California, and unlike some European cities, Chicago, Detroit, and New York were not yet annexed to the possession of Islam.
Even more importantly, socialism had not yet attained political meaning and the concept of economic equality still had little reverence in American society. Overall, the implementation of the strategy was taking longer than planned.
It was left to Hillary Clinton, whose ascendance to the presidency of the United States seemed assured, to complete that journey under the ideological guidance of Barack Obama.
However, as with many instances in the political process, what was perceived as obvious and certain at the time only exposed the limitations of human foresight. The election of Donald Trump, perhaps without him being aware of his historic role, redeemed this country and left the socialists in a post-orgasmic swoon. But the ideas of Marx and Lenin did not die. The egalitarian disease is not well, but it is alive and keeps on growing.
Alexander Markovsky is a scholar of Marxism and Leninism and a senior fellow at the London Center for Policy Research. He is an author of Anatomy of a Bolshevik and Liberal Bolshevism: America Did Not Defeat Communism, She Adopted It.
BARACK OBAMA’S CONSPIRACY FOR A THIRD TERM FOR LIFE
HE PARTNERS WITH ZUCKERBERG, SOROS AND LOUIS FARRAKHAN
“Obama would declare himself president for life with Soros really running the show, as he did for the entire Obama presidency.”
“Hillary was always small potatoes, a placeholder as it were. Her health was always suspect. And do you think the plotters would have let a doofus like Tim Kaine take office in the event that Hillary became disabled?”
“Obama has the totalitarian impulse. After all, he went around saying he didn't have Constitutional authority to legalize the illegals, and then he tried anyway. The courts stopped him.”
“The bottom line 2 is this: Barack Obama is a Communist. This was all an Obama operation. Why is anyone surprised that a communist (Obama) tried to subvert an election. That is what Communists do. It is Barack Obama and his people like Brennan and Clapper behaving to type. That's what Maduro does in Venezuela. That's what the Castro brothers did. That's what every communist and socialist nation does. THEY FIX ELECTIONS!!”
“Hillary kept a secret server overflowing with national security info which, more than likely, was hacked. June 28, 2016, on a Phoenix tarmac, Bill Clinton met with Attorney General Loretta Lynch to seal a deal insuring Hillary would not be prosecuted.”
“Obama, of course, covered up his own role, depicting his presidency as eight years of heroic efforts to repair the damage caused by the 2008 financial crash. At the end of those eight years, however, Wall Street and the financial oligarchy were fully recovered, enjoying record wealth, while working people were poorer than before, a widening social chasm that made possible the election of the billionaire con man and Demagogue in November 2016.”
David Bernstein & The Heritage Foundation - “Lawless: The Obama Administration’s Unprecedented Assault on the Constitution and the Rule of Law.”
“The Lawlessness of the Obama Administration: A never-ending story.” Michael Barone – American Historian – Washington Examiner
President Barack Obama: During his presidential campaign, President Obama promised to run an ethical and transparent administration. However, in his first year in office, the President has delivered corruption and secrecy, bringing Chicago-style political corruption to the White House. JUDICIAL WATCH
“They knew Obama was an unqualified crook; yet they promoted him. They knew Obama was a train wreck waiting to happen; yet they made him president, to the great injury of America and the world. They understood he was only a figurehead, an egomaniac, and a liar; yet they made him king, doing great harm to our republic perhaps irreparable.)” ALLAN ERICKSON
"We know that Obama and his inner circle have set up a war room in his D.C. home to plan and execute resistance to the Trump administration and his legislative agenda. None of these people care about the American people, or the fact thatTrump won the election because millions of people voted for him." Patricia McCarthy / AMERICAN THINKER.com
BARACK OBAMA’S NOT SO SECRET PRO-MU$LIM, ANTI-SEMITIC MOVE FOR A THIRD TERM FOR LIFE.
"When former president Barack Obama, former president Bill Clinton and Eric Holder, a top DOJ official in both administrations, have been caught hanging around with Farrakhan, there’s a racism problem." DANIEL GREENFIELD
"Then we suffered the rattling election of Barack Obama, whose active membership in a white-, Jewish-, and America-hating church was well known to the electorate. His close personal relationship with the likes of his adored Rev. Jeremiah Wright and Louis Farrakhan was no secret. Obama was open about his goals. He told us he was out to "fundamentally transform America" and the world." ALAN BERGSTEIN
Attorney General Eric Holder: Tim Geithner can be sure he won't be hounded about his tax-dodging by his colleague Eric Holder, US Attorney General. Judicial Watch strongly opposed Holder because of his terrible ethics record, which includes: obstructing an FBI investigation of the theft of nuclear secrets from Los Alamos Nuclear Laboratory; rejecting multiple requests for an independent counsel to investigate alleged fundraising abuses by then-Vice President Al Gore in the Clinton White House; undermining the criminal investigation of President Clinton by Kenneth Starr in the midst of the Lewinsky investigation; and planning the violent raid to seize then-six-year-old Elian Gonzalez at gunpoint in order to return him to Castro's Cuba. JUDICIAL WATCH
THE RISE of BARACK OBAMA, sociopath huckster from Chicago, and the FALL of AMERICA
“My guess is that the students and employees at the U of I who listened to Obama's self-righteous speech believe that Obama is ethical because most of the media intentionally hid the mass corruption, or if they reported on it, they downplayed it. The corruption and unethical behavior started as soon as Obama took office.” JACK HELLNER / AMERICAN THINKER.com
“They knew Obama was an unqualified crook; yet they promoted him. They knew Obama was a train wreck waiting to happen; yet they made him president, to the great injury of America and the world. They understood he was only a figurehead, an egomaniac, and a liar; yet they made him king, doing great harm to our republic (perhaps irreparable.)” ALLAN ERICKSON
JUDICIAL WATCH TEN MOST CORRUPT
President Barack Obama: During his presidential campaign, President Obama promised to run an ethical and transparent administration. However, in his first year in office, the President has delivered corruption and secrecy, bringing Chicago-style political corruption to the White House. JUDICIAL WATCH
GLOBALIST FOR BANKSTERS, THE SUPER RICH and OPEN BORDERS
ADVOCATES TO FINISH OFF THE AMERICAN MIDDLE-CLASS.
There’s a reason why Soros, Bezos, Zuckerberg, Bloomberg, Gates and the Koch Brothers love the Obomb!
Bruce Thornton is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center.
This year’s midterm election offers the starkest contrast between the two parties in recent memory, making the choice of which to vote for obvious. We have reached a critical point in the long-developing transformation of our country from a democratic republic to the concentrated power and “soft despotism” of a technocratic elite. This year’s vote will determine whether Donald Trump’s pushback against that transformation will continue, or whether it will stall.
Democrats, of course, have been the main engine of that transformation. For over a century their politics and policies have relentlessly shifted further and further toward the progressive left. They have embraced and institutionalized the doctrines of technocracy based on a rejection of the Constitutional order and its philosophical assumptions that common sense, practical experience, virtue, and traditional wisdom are sufficient to make people capable of self-rule.
Democrats also rejected the Founders’ deep-seated fear of concentrated and centralized power, a lesson taught on every page of political history for 2500 years: No amount of technical training or knowledge can change a flawed human nature and its permanent vulnerability to the lust for power that always ends in tyranny. Hence the Founders’ separation and dispersal of power among the sovereign states and the three branches of the federal government. Protected by divided powers, the liberty of self-reliant and self-governing citizens became the bulwark against the self-aggrandizement of power by elites, and the tyranny that follows.
The more the Democrat Party moved toward progressive technocracy, the more it abandoned ordered liberty as the most important reason for government to exist in the first place. Instead it endorsed the grand narrative of modernity: The inevitable progress and improvement of people and society, based on “human sciences” presumably as successful as physics and mathematics at effecting improving changes, would create the brave new world that avoided the miseries and sufferings of the benighted past. Technological progress became the model for this dream, its success in the material world now to be achieved in the human, social, and political realm. Of course, such a regime required “experts” to be installed in the centralized bureaus and agencies of the federal government, and to be given the power over policy once the purview of the representatives elected by the sovereign people and accountable to them at the ballot box. Now divided and balanced power was scorned as an 18th century anachronism and systematically degraded.
Accelerating under Franklin D. Roosevelt, this ideological program relentlessly moved forward, bringing along many Republicans who accepted the inevitability of the technocratic, redistributive state, and found that the centralization of power and privilege served their own interests as well. They embraced the Democrats’ underlying technocratic assumptions, and ceded their legislative authority to the cadres of unelected, unaccountable federal workers, and to the federal courts, especially the Supreme Court, which now essentially legislate laws, enforce them, and determine their legitimacy.
Eventually, this bipartisan progressive paradigm provided the foundations of the “ruling center” in which Democrats set the bounds of acceptable policy and political discourse, and Republicans practice the “preemptive cringe” in the face of Democrat overreach. This dynamic is lauded as “bipartisanship,” the preferred method of progressive rule by political technicians, who see citizens as their wards and clients, and dismiss the Constitution’s separation and balancing of power and factions as inefficient “partisanship” that keep us from “solving problems.”
What accelerated this long-developing transformation of the political order and brought us to this momentous choice was Barack Obama. Exploiting our dysfunctional racial narrative of indelible white racism and guilt, Obama was twice elected on the hope of racial redemption on the cheap, and the promise of technocratic expertise and “science-based” government. All voters had to do was ignore his public record of leftist progressivism, and whites would be forgiven. Then the races could start coexisting like human beings in a world with “no white Americans, no black Americans,” rather than remain trapped in an eternal racial melodrama in which whites always have to pay.
But the Democrats’ true intensions soon became clear. Racial reconciliation was a pipe-dream, as Obama and his Attorney General interfered in racial conflicts and stoked the fires. Policies like Obamacare well beyond the progressive-lite center began to emerge. Crackpot ideas of the cultural left escaped from the universities and began an all-out assault on the Bill of Rights in service to an illiberal identity politics. Political correctness, imposed on the country and enforced by the technocratic federal overlords, grew ever more intrusive and totalitarian. Citizens who resisted their patronizing tutelage were insulted as “bitter clingers to guns and religion,” “deplorables,” or “wacko-birds,” as the Dems’ favorite conservative John McCain called them. Protesting the admission of nearly two million poorly vetted immigrants a year was decried as “xenophobia” and “racism.” Patriotism and national pride were demonized, and American sovereignty subordinated to the global technocratic elite and its “rules-based order” alleged to be superior to a toxic American exceptionalism.
But typical of all tyrants, the Democrats overreached. Obamacare, growth-killing regulations, and higher taxes at home; and a foreign policy of retreat, “leading from behind,” and apology for America’s sins abroad marked the progressives’ hubristic certainty that they could ride roughshod over the bipartisan consensus that at least had checked some of the left’s ambitions by reminding them––in 1968 1972, and 1980–– that the US remained a center-right country most of whose citizens self-identified as conservatives or moderates. The political success of “New Democrat” Bill Clinton followed his recognition of this truth, which he brilliantly exploited as a “Third Way” and more cynically, as “triangulation.”
The Dems’ arrogance at ignoring Clinton’s strategy during the Obama years was punished with the loss of the House and then the Senate, along with most of the state governments. A sluggish recovery and foreign policy debacles like Benghazi, the rise of ISIS, and the catastrophic Iran deal showed starkly the failure of the technocratic elite when its utopian delusions and ideological pretensions met the stern taskmaster of a world of hard, cruel men who respected only brutal force. The wages of progressive statism––more intrusive federal power, illiberal policies backed by executive fiat and the courts, the corruption of federal agencies by partisan interests, and a worsening of race relations–– had earlier fueled the Tea Party, which galvanized the discontent and helped the Republicans take the House in 2010.
Then came Donald Trump.
Trump launched an all-fronts assault on the bipartisan consensus. The establishment Republicans, who used the Tea Party for electoral gain but didn’t address the larger discontents it gave voice to, revealed with some exceptions their fealty to the social and cultural shibboleths that marked the elite apart from the middling classes and non-college educated working class of flyover country. In contrast, Trump spoke in the direct, earthy, and at times vulgar idiom that has been part of American folkways since the Republic’s beginning. His disdain both for totalitarian censorship by politically correct commissars, and for the illiberal neo-tribalism of identity politics, captured the citizens’ anger at the double-standards and hypocrisy of the holier-than-thou nomenklatura virtue-signaling as it grubbed for more privilege and power. The progressives helped stoke the anger even more with their eternal media savaging of the president that culminated in the still festering Russia collusion show-trial and the shameful slandering of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh.
Equally important, on issues such as hyper-regulation of the economy, the relentlessly metastasizing federal bureaucracy, the addiction to high taxes, the excesses of activist federal courts, and the dysfunctions of our immigration policies, Trump expressed the common sense that many ordinary people used to understand just how much our government has failed the people.
And, so far, his policies have worked. Trump is reshaping the courts, appointing 84 federal judges, including two Supreme Court Justices, who promise to rein in for decades the judicial activism the progressives have relied on to implement their policy preference without having to face the voting citizens. On the economic front, wages and salaries have the highest year-to-year gain, 3.1%, in a decade. Economic growth has reached 3.5% this quarter, a rise that progressive economic savants had announced impossible. Unemployment is the lowest in decades, and more new jobs have been created than people available to fill them. Consumer confidence is at an 18-year high. Tax reform has put more money in people’s pockets. Repatriated corporate taxes have fueled investment in the domestic economy rather than abroad.
Finally, Trump has returned common sense to our foreign policy. He has backed out of multinational treaties like the Paris Climate Accords, and the disastrous agreement to bribe Iran into delaying for less than a decade its development of nuclear weapons. Both were manifestations of the long failure of the decrepit “rules-based international order” that served mainly the transnational global elites at the expense of national sovereignty and the people. He has moved our country closer to the traditional mission of foreign policy, which is to serve the interests and security of American citizens and put them first, not the interests of some fantasy “global community” or the “cosmopolitan” functionaries of transnational institutions. This credo of putting America first, and his full-throated expression of this sentiment has revived and celebrated the patriotism and national pride that progressives and Davos Man have long scorned and slandered as the nursery of fascism rather than of democratic freedom for distinct and diverse national identities.
On Tuesday we will face the choice: continue to push back against the progressive agenda to “fundamentally transform America,” or continue to feed the progressive Leviathan at the cost of our freedom, autonomy, sovereignty, and national identity of a people who have never been perfect, but have advanced and inspired prosperity and freedom more than any other country in history.
Common sense tells us the choice is obvious. Vote for freedom, and vote for America.
2018 MIDTERMS: ALL ABOUT OBAMA
The Narcissist-in-Chief’s miserable legacy of failure and deceit.
Former President Selfie Stick is back in action, firing up Democrats before the midterms with his signature rallying cries:
I, I, I, I! Me, me, me! My, my, my!
According to a tally by The American Mirror's Kyle Olson, Barack Obama's campaign speech Monday for Nevada Senate Democratic candidate Jacky Rosen referred to himself 92 times in 38 minutes — or an average self-allusion every 24.7 seconds.
When he wasn't "I"-ing, the former narcissist-in-chief was lying.
"Unlike some, I actually try to state facts," Obama snarked passive-aggressively in a swipe at President Donald Trump. "I don't believe in just making stuff up. I think you should actually say to people what's true."
Sit down, Mister "If you like your plan, you can keep your plan."
Thanks to you, my husband, children and I lost not one, not two, not three but four private individual market health plans killed directly by Obamacare. Reminder: When the health insurance cancellation notice tsunami hit in 2013, liberal Mother Jones magazine sneered that the phenomenon was "phony." But after 4 million American families received cancellation letters at the end of 2013, Obama's health care prevarication was finally deemed the "Lie of the Year" by left-leaning PolitiFact.
And five years after promising Americans they could "keep their doctor" along with their health plan "no matter what," Obama belatedly 'fessed up that "the average person" would be forced "to have to make some choices, and they might end up having to switch doctors."
Facts, schmacts.
Moving on, Obama tried to galvanize voters this week by trashing Trump's jobs boom: "When you hear all this talk about economic miracles right now, remember who started it."
Hold up, Mister "Jobs are not coming back." I remember you taunting Trump for needing a "magic wand" to achieve what you claimed was an unachievable manufacturing industry renaissance — for which you are now claiming unadulterated credit!
I remember you, Mister Multitrillion-Dollar-Stimulus, promising the sun, moon and stars with the "most sweeping economic recovery package in our history" that was supposed to lift two million people out of poverty.
I recall sky-high unemployment rates for black Americans, nearly double the national rate, and 90 million-plus able-bodied citizens of all colors simply giving up looking for work while wasted billions went to fund crony green energy boondoggles, bridges to nowhere, renovations to Joe Biden's favorite Amtrak train station in Delaware, General Services Administrations junkets in Las Vegas and Hawaii, ghost congressional districts and stimulus propaganda road signs planted nationwide and stamped with the shovel-ready logo.
Speaking of which, I won't forget you smirking while you admitted at one of your phony Jobs and Competitiveness Council meetings that "Shovel-ready was not as, uh, shovel-ready as we expected." Yukkity-yuk-yuk.
Nor will it go down the memory hole how the Obama administration's wreckovery lies were enabled by slavering "journalists" like New York Times columnist David Brooks. He giggled on Jim Lehrer's PBS show that Obama had told him off the record that the shovel-ready promise was a crock, yet he sat on the truth until his Times' colleague Peter Baker reported the admission more than a year later.
Wait, we're not done yet. Astonishingly, Obama is now on the campaign trail comparing the Trump White House to a "tin-pot dictatorship" and calling for a return to "decency" and "lawfulness."
Yes, this is the same man who sicced the IRS on tea party conservatives, evangelicals and pro-life citizens, amnestied millions of illegal immigrants through executive fiat, appointed dozens of unaccountable and unvetted policy czars, used his Justice Department to spy on journalists, deceived the country over the Benghazi massacre and the Iran deal, demonized his political opponents, and mastered the very social justice agitation techniques now wielded by left-wing mobs targeting Republicans in every corner of the public square.
Thanks, Obama, for reminding America of your miserable legacy of deceit, division, persecution and redistribution as voters head to the polls. You wanna make the 2018 midterms all about you? It's on.
GENERAL MOTORS DUMPS
THOUSANDS OF WORKERS AND CLOSES PLANTS-Stockholders celebrate!
"It identifies socialism with proposals
for mild social reform such as “Medicare for all,” raised and increasingly
abandoned by a section of the Democratic Party. It cites Milton Friedman
and Margaret Thatcher to promote the virtues of “economic freedom,” i.e.,
the unrestrained operation of the capitalist market, and to denounce all
social reforms, business regulations, tax increases or anything else that
impinges on the oligarchy’s self-enrichment."
“The yearly income of a typical US household
dropped by a massive 12 percent, or $6,400, in the six years between 2007
and 2013. This is just one of the findings of the 2013 Federal
Reserve Survey of Consumer Finances released Thursday, which documentsa
sharp decline in working class living standards and a
further concentration of wealth in the hands of the rich and the
super-rich.”
"The American phenomenon of
record stock values fueling an ever greater concentration of wealth at the
very top of society, while the economy is starved of productive
investment, the social infrastructure crumbles, and working class
living standards are driven down by entrenched
unemployment, wage-cutting and government austerity policies, is part of
a broader global process."
"A defining expression of this crisis is
the dominance of financial speculation and parasitism, to the point where a
narrow international financial aristocracy plunders society’s resources in
order to further enrich itself."
BEL AIR MAXINE WATERS AND HER CRACK ALLEY
CONSTITUENTS
WALL STREET BANKSTERS AND THEIR BOUGHT
DEMOCRAT POLS PREPARE FOR THE NEXT WAVE OF BOTTOMLESS NO-STRING BANKSTER
BAILOUTS…
Will this one finish off the American economy?
*
Considering her record and documented
history of poor ethical and moral fitness, it’s outrageous that Maxine Waters
is up for chair of the ultra-powerful House Financial Services Committee, which
has jurisdiction over the country’s banking system, economy, housing, and
insurance.
"Wall Street billionaires
are pushing a new plan to swipe the profits of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac from
U.S. taxpayers–and in the process revive the system of privatized-profits and
public-risk that contributed to the severity of the Great Financial
Crisis."
*
The Moelis plan stands out as
a strikingly bold grab for control of the companies and their profits. It calls
for the dividend payments to the Treasury to cease so that the companies can
rebuild capital. Shockingly, it also calls for the cancellation of the senior
preferred stock altogether–with no
compensation for the past risk and future profits currently
due to taxpayers. It is as if a company proposed to do a stock buyback by
proposing to cancel its shares rather than purchasing them for cash.
*
So
will Maxine Waters be the crusading financial protector of our 401k plans and
save America from the next financial bubble? Well, there will certainly be lots
of harassment and shakedowns. But don't count on her steering us clear of Wall
Street excesses. If history is any guide, Mad Maxine will be way too busy
raising money from the people she is now in charge of regulating. Stephen Moore is a senior fellow at The
Heritage Foundation
*
Waters,
who represents some of Los Angeles’ poorest inner-city neighborhoods, has also
helped family members make more than $1 million through business ventures with companies and causes
that she has helped, according to her hometown newspaper. While she and her
relatives get richer (she lives in a $4.5 million Los Angeles mansion), her constituents get poorer.
JUDICIAL WATCH
VIVA LA RAZA
SUPREMACY, WIDER OPEN BORDERS, CHAIN MIGRATION, NO LEGAL NEED APPLY and
BILLIONS IN WELFARE TO KEEP THEM CRAWLING OVER OUR BORDERS???
DEMOCRAT PARTY
CORRUPTION
"This is how they
will destroy America from within. The leftist billionaires who
orchestrate these plans are wealthy. Those tasked with representing us in Congress
will never be exposed to the cost of the invasion of millions of
migrants. They have nothing but contempt for those of us who must
endure the consequences of our communities being intruded upon by gang members,
drug dealers and human traffickers. These people have no intention
of becoming Americans; like the Democrats who welcome them, they have contempt
for us." PATRICIA McCARTHY
Congressional
Democrats are apparently fine with catch-and-release policies because they see
the likely electoral benefits. According to Customs and Border Protection
(CPB), of the 94,285 Central American family units apprehended last year, 99
percent of them remain in the country today. CPB also reports that 98 percent
of the 31,754 unaccompanied minors from the Northern Triangle of Central
America remain in the country. CAL THOMAS
Former President Barack Obama derided the American nationalism of President Donald Trump’s supporters as rooted in a “hatred” of foreigners, offering his remarks on Tuesday at Rice University in Houston, Texas. He joined former Secretary of State James Baker and presidential biographer Jon Meacham.
Obama said:
We did not adapt quickly enough to the fact that there were people being left behind [by globalization] and that frustrations were going to flare up and that all these changes were happening really quickly, and you had to address them and speak to them. In those environments, you then start getting a different kind of politics. You start getting politics that’s based on, “That person’s not like me, and it must be their fault,” and you start getting a politics based on a nationalism that’s not pride in country, but hatred for somebody on the other side of the border, and you start getting the kind of politics that does not allow for compromise because it’s based on passions and emotions and identities.
When I hear people say they don’t like identity politics, I think it’s important to remember that identity politics doesn’t just apply when it’s black people or gay people or women. The folks who really originated identity politics were the folks who sad three-fifths clause and all that stuff. That was identity politics. That’s still out there. Jim Crow was identity politics. That’s where it started.
WATCH:
Obama lamented the news media diversification following the rise of the Internet. He said a “common set of facts” — previously delivered b consensus via the Associated Press, Washington Post, New York Times, ABC, CBS, and NBC — was lost following the arrival of Rush Limbaugh and Fox News on the news media landscape.
He said:
There are a range of reasons why [“the overlapping ideological spectrum in each party”] changed. Some of it had to do with, frankly, the shift in the media because in 1981, your news cycle was still governed by the stories that were going to be filed by AP, the Washington Post, maybe the New York Times, and the three broadcast stations. Whether it was Cronkite or Brinkley, or what have you, there was a common set of facts, a baseline around which both parties had to adapt and respond to, and by the time I take office, what you increasingly have is a media environment in which if you are a Fox News viewer, you have an entirely different reality than if you are a New York Times reader. It means the basis of each respective party [has] become more ideological.
WATCH:
Obama also said Trump lacks “reverence” for the Oval Office:
When I walked into the Oval Office, there’s a reverence there for that office that is independent of you, and if you don’t feel that, then you shouldn’t be there because a lot of fights, a lot of sacrifices, a lot of bloodshed is represented in that office — not just soldiers in Iwo Jima. It’s maids in Selma, workers in a coal mine. It’s farmers in the Dust Bowl. You’re carrying that vessel, and I never lost that reverence for that office, and every day I would come, and I would say, “I’m going to make mistakes. There are going to be decisions that are compromises.”
…
Through all those ups and downs, you had to have a part of you — and the Bushes had that, and Ronald Reagan had that, and Bill Clinton had that — that sense of, “This is sacred. This is important.” And there’s a civic religion and a set of ideals and principles that we won’t get perfect, but we should strive to perfect, and that is something I never lost throughout the time I was there.
Both Meacham and Obama refused to say Trump’s name, despite both referring to him implicitly. “He’s Voldemort. I’m not going to say his name,” Meacham said of Trump while asking Obama a question about Trump’s presidency.
Neither Baker nor Meacham challenged Obama’s comments.
"Back during he the financial crisis of 2008 to 2009, which wiped out trillions of dollars of the wealth and retirement savings of middle-class families, we put the two major arsonists in charge of putting out the fire. Former Democratic Sen. Chris Dodd of Connecticut and former Democratic Rep. Barney Frank of Massachusetts were the co-sponsors of the infamous Dodd-Frank regulations. Readers will recall that good old Barney resisted every attempt to reign in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and said he wanted to "roll the dice" on the housing market. That worked out well"
*
"Wall Street billionaires are pushing a new plan to swipe the profits of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac from U.S. taxpayers–and in the process revive the system of privatized-profits and public-risk that contributed to the severity of the Great Financial Crisis."
Housing Policy Experts Warn Against Hedge Fund Plot to Seize Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
A plan to release Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac from government control would recreate the system that delivered private gains to shareholders while putting taxpayers on the line for losses, a group of leading housing policy experts warned Tuesday.
Hedge funds have been shopping a scheme on Capitol Hill that would end the conservatorships of Fannie and Freddie and have them stop handing their profits over to the Treasury. The plan would deliver a huge windfall to investors who own stakes in the two mortgage giants.
While some of inside of the Trump administration are sympathetic to the Wall Street billionaires who would be the biggest beneficiaries of releasing Fannie and Freddie, the plan has run into opposition from housing policy experts on the left and the right who see it as a huge giveaway to the investors.
Breitbart described the plan, developed by the investment bank Moelis & Co, in November:
The Moelis plan stands out as a strikingly bold grab for control of the companies and their profits. It calls for the dividend payments to the Treasury to cease so that the companies can rebuild capital. Shockingly, it also calls for the cancellation of the senior preferred stock altogether–with no compensation for the past risk and future profits currently due to taxpayers. It is as if a company proposed to do a stock buyback by proposing to cancel its shares rather than purchasing them for cash.
This would be an unprecedented giveaway, more akin to government-authorized looting than a “housing finance reform” plan. Even calling it “corporate welfare” would be too generous because the beneficiaries wouldn’t be the companies, which have been prospering under the current arrangement. The beneficiaries would be the owners of the shares of the company, which would receive a massive promotion in the capital structure in exchange for nothing. This is something new–hedge fund welfare.
Taxpayers would surrender an asset–the senior preferred stock–that is expected to return hundreds of billions of dollars, reducing deficits and tax-burdens, over the next decade. And in return they would get nothing except perhaps the gratitude of billionaires.
On Tuesday, some of the most prominent housing policy experts in the U.S. came out against the plan in an op-ed published in the Hill.
Taking advantage of this congressional impasse, several of Fannie and Freddie’s largest investors have banded together to advocate a path out of this state of limbo. Remarkably, however, the path does not lead to a new system as policymakers had intended, but back to the very system we had before the crisis. Yes, the one that nearly took down the economy.
To their credit, the investors recommend retaining some of the reforms that have taken place in conservatorship, such as limits on what Fannie and Freddie can invest in, and higher capital levels. But they would leave untouched the fundamental structural flaw that was the system’s ultimate undoing: the dominance of a duopoly that is too big and too important for the nation ever to let fail.
This makes sense from the investors’ point of view, as Fannie and Freddie’s market power will bring them more profits. But it is absurd from the nation’s point of view.
By once again standing behind the solvency of these two institutions, which taxpayers would have to do for the very reasons we could not let them fail the last time around, we would again give Fannie and Freddie the incentive to take outsized risks.
The op-ed was written by six housing policy experts representing a broad range of political views. They are the former head of Fannie and Freddie’s regulator, Ed DeMarco, the former chief of the Mortgage Banker’s Association, Dave Stevens, Moody’s chief economist Mark Zandi, former McCain campaign economic adviser Doug Holtz-Eakin, Obama administration housing policy adviser Jim Parrott, and Lew Ranieri, the man who is often described as the father of the modern mortgage market.
President Donald Trump is reportedly planning to nominate Mark Calabria to head up the Federal Housing Finance Agency. Calabria, who is currently Vice President Mike Pence’s chief economist, has been sharply critical of the government’s large role in housing finance and the dominance of Fannie and Freddie in the mortgage market. His position on the Moelis plan is not currently known but it is likely to become a focus of his nomination hearing if he gets tapped to be the agency’s head.
THE BANKSTERS’ RENT BOYS & GIRLS IN CONGRESS GATHER ROUND TO UNLEASH THE WHOLESALE LOOTING OF THEIR BANKSTER PAYMASTERS EVEN MORE….
After eight years of the Dodd-Frank bank “reform,” the American financial oligarchy exercises its dictatorship over society and the government more firmly than ever. This unaccountable elite will not tolerate even the most minimal limits on its ability to plunder the economy for its own personal gain.
“Democrats Move Towards ‘Oligarchical Socialism,’ Says Forecaster Joel Kotkin.”
NO POL IN HISTORY SUCKED IN MORE BRIBES FROM BANKSTERS THAN BARACK OBAMA, AND HE DID IT BEFORE HIS FIRST DAY IN OFFICE.
What did the Wall Street banksters know that took us so long to find out???
"One of the premier institutions of big business, JP Morgan Chase, issued an internal report on the eve of the 10th anniversary of the 2008 crash, which warned that another “great liquidity crisis” was possible, and that a government bailout on the scale of that effected by Bush and Obama will produce social unrest, “in light of the potential impact of central bank actions in driving inequality between asset owners and labor."
Obama, of course, covered up his own role, depicting his presidency as eight years of heroic efforts to repair the damage caused by the 2008 financial crash. At the end of those eight years, however, Wall Street and the financial oligarchy were fully recovered, enjoying record wealth, while working people were poorer than before, a widening social chasm that made possible the election of the billionaire con man and Demagogue in November 2016.
“The response of the administration was to rush to the defense of the banks. Even before coming to power, Obama expressed his unconditional support for the bailouts, which he subsequently expanded. He assembled an administration dominated by the interests of finance capital, symbolized by economic adviser Lawrence Summers and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner.”
BEL AIR MAXINE WATERS AND HER CRACK ALLEY CONSTITUENTS
WALL STREET BANKSTERS AND THEIR BOUGHT DEMOCRAT POLS PREPARE FOR THE NEXT WAVE OF BOTTOMLESS NO-STRING BANKSTER BAILOUTS…
Will this one finish off the American economy?
*
Considering her record and documented history of poor ethical and moral fitness, it’s outrageous that Maxine Waters is up for chair of the ultra-powerful House Financial Services Committee, which has jurisdiction over the country’s banking system, economy, housing, and insurance.
"Wall Street billionaires are pushing a new plan to swipe the profits of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac from U.S. taxpayers–and in the process revive the system of privatized-profits and public-risk that contributed to the severity of the Great Financial Crisis."
*
The Moelis plan stands out as a strikingly bold grab for control of the companies and their profits. It calls for the dividend payments to the Treasury to cease so that the companies can rebuild capital. Shockingly, it also calls for the cancellation of the senior preferred stock altogether–with no compensation for the past risk and future profits currently due to taxpayers. It is as if a company proposed to do a stock buyback by proposing to cancel its shares rather than purchasing them for cash.
*
So will Maxine Waters be the crusading financial protector of our 401k plans and save America from the next financial bubble? Well, there will certainly be lots of harassment and shakedowns. But don't count on her steering us clear of Wall Street excesses. If history is any guide, Mad Maxine will be way too busy raising money from the people she is now in charge of regulating. Stephen Moore is a senior fellow at The Heritage Foundation
*
Waters, who represents some of Los Angeles’ poorest inner-city neighborhoods, has also helped family members make more than $1 million through business ventures with companies and causes that she has helped, according to her hometown newspaper. While she and her relatives get richer (she lives in a $4.5 million Los Angeles mansion), her constituents get poorer. JUDICIAL WATCH
It was an astonishingly ambitious vision for the future president of the United States. And it was not just a vision; he had a plan, and he had a strategy. 
#/media/File:Chevrolet_Volt_badge_WAS_2017_1521.jpg){kind=link}