Four more years? – Tea Party Nation

 

Four more years? – Tea Party Nation.

Posted by Judson Phillips

This November, America will make a decision.  It will either throw Obama out of office and give us a man who hopefully will lead this nation away from the fiscal cliff or we will have four more years of a President who wants to destroy his own country.

 What will happen if Obama gets four more years?

 Stanley Kurtz has some ideas.  Obama’s next four years really would be a socialist nightmare.

 From Forbes:

 President Obama’s plans for a second-term include an initiative to systematically redistribute the wealth of America’s suburbs to the cities.  It’s a transformative idea, and deserves to be fully aired before the election.  But like a lot of his major progressive policy innovations, Obama has advanced this one stealthily–mostly through rule-making, appointment, and vague directives.  Obama has worked on this project in collaboration with Mike Kruglik, one of his original community organizing mentors.  Kruglik’s new group, Building One America, advocates “regional tax-base sharing,” a practice by which suburban tax money is directly redistributed to nearby cities and less-well-off “inner-ring” suburbs.  Kruglik’s group also favors a raft of policies designed to coerce people out of their cars and force suburbanites (with their tax money) back into densely packed cities.

Obama has lent the full weight of his White House to Kruglik’s efforts.  A federal program called the Sustainable Communities Initiative, for example, has salted planning commissions across the country with “regional equity” and “smart growth” as goals.  These are, of course, code words.  “Regional equity” means that, by their mere existence, suburbs cheat the people who live in cities.  It means, “Let’s spread the suburbs’ wealth around” – i.e., take from the suburbanites to give to the urban poor. “Smart growth” means, “Quit building sub-divisions and malls, and move back to where mass transit can shuttle you between your 800 square foot apartment in an urban tower and your downtown job.” In all likelihood, these planning commissions will issue “recommendations” which Obama would quickly turn into requirements for further federal aid.  In fact, his administration has already used these tactics to impose federal education requirements on reluctant states.  Indeed, part of Obama’s assault on the suburbs is his effort to undercut the autonomy of suburban school districts.

 There is a reason why people are fleeing the cities and going to suburbs.  Because the management of big cities sucks!  There is no other way to describe it.

 In some ways, we are already seeing the subsidization of cities by the suburbs.  The Federal Government collects tax dollars and then doles out large grants to cities.  The dark secret is that if it were not for the federal subsidizes to big cities, they would go under.  Even with ongoing federal bailouts, cities run by liberal politicians are going under.  Which California city is going to declare bankruptcy this week?

What about Detroit?   Even federal bailouts cannot save that city.

 Liberalism has failed America.  It is time we let some of these cities fail and hold the liberal politicians accountable for what they have done.

 

Obama just caught in big lie? – WND.com

Obama just caught in big lie? – WND.com.

by Aaron Klein

Has Barack Obama been caught in a lie that could become a major issue in the upcoming election?

During the 2008 presidential election campaign, Obama’s camp categorically denied he was ever a member of the New Party, which sought to elect members to public office with the aim of moving the Democratic Party far leftward to ultimately form a new political party with a socialist agenda.

The  denial came amid reports of Obama’s participation with the party, including several articles by WND.

WND previously reported on newspaper evidence showing Obama was listed as a member of the New Party in the group’s own literature.

WND also conducted an exclusive interview with Marxist activist Carl Davidson, a founder of the New Party, who recounted Obama’s participation.

In 2010, John Nichols, Washington correspondent for The Nation magazine, recalled speaking with Obama at New Party events in the 1990s.

Aaron Klein’s “Red Army: The Radical Network That Must Be Defeated to Save America” exposes Obama’s presidential agenda

“When we spoke together at New Party events in those days, he was blunt about his desire to move the Democratic Party off the cautious center where Bill Clinton had wedged it,” wrote Nichols in a January 2009 piece published at Progressive.org.

Now, researcher and author Stanley Kurtz, writing at National Review Online today, reports on documentation from the updated records of Illinois ACORN at the Wisconsin Historical Society that “definitively establishes” that Obama was a member of the New Party.

Kurtz reported Obama also signed a “contract” promising to publicly support and associate himself with the New Party while in office.

In 2008, Obama’s Fight the Smears campaign website quoted Carol Harwell, who managed Obama’s 1996 campaign for the Illinois Senate, as stating: “Barack did not solicit or seek the New Party endorsement for state senator in 1995.”

Fight the Smears conceded the New Party did support Obama in 1996 but denied that Obama had ever joined.

According to documents from the Democratic Socialists of America, the New Party worked with ACORN to promote its candidates. ACORN, convicted in massive, nationwide voter fraud cases, was a point of controversy for Obama during his 2008 campaign for president.

Becoming a New Party member requires some effort on behalf of the politician. Candidates must be approved by the party’s political committee and, once approved, must sign a contract mandating they will have a “visible and active relationship” with the party.

If Obama indeed signed the contract, not only would his campaign be caught in a lie but it could prove highly embarrassing for him at a time when he is fighting claims, including from Mitt Romney’s camp, that his policies are socialist.

Also, Obama’s 2012 campaign slogan of “Forward” has been criticized for its use of a historic socialist slogan.

Socialist goals

The socialist-oriented goals of the New Party were enumerated on its old website.

Among the New Party’s stated objectives were “full employment, a shorter work week and a guaranteed minimum income for all adults; a universal ‘social wage’ to include such basic benefits as health care, child care, vacation time and lifelong access to education and training; a systematic phase-in of comparable worth; and like programs to ensure gender equity.”

The New Party stated it also sought “the democratization of our banking and financial system – including popular election of those charged with public stewardship of our banking system, worker-owner control over their pension assets [and] community-controlled alternative financial institutions.”

Many of the New Party’s founding members were Democratic Socialists of America leaders and members of Committees of Correspondence, a breakaway of the Communist Party USA.

Last month, WND reported on a 1996 print advertisement in a local Chicago newspaper that shows Obama was the speaker at an event sponsored and presented by the Democratic Socialists of America, the DSA.

WND first reported on the event in 2008.

Obama listed as New Party member

While Obama’s campaign in 2008 denied the then–presidential candidate was ever an actual member of the New Party, print copies of the New Party News, the party’s official newspaper, show Obama posing with New Party leaders, listing him as a New Party member and printing quotes from him as a member.

The party’s spring 1996 newspaper boasted: “New Party members won three other primaries this Spring in Chicago: Barack Obama (State Senate), Michael Chandler (Democratic Party Committee) and Patricia Martin (Cook County Judiciary).”

The paper quoted Obama saying, “These victories prove that small ‘d’ democracy can work.”

The newspaper lists other politicians it endorsed who were not members but specifies Obama as a New Party member.

New Ground, the newsletter of Chicago’s Democratic Socialists of America, reported in its July/August 1996 edition that Obama attended a New Party membership meeting April 11, 1996, in which he expressed his gratitude for the group’s support and “encouraged NPers (New Party members) to join in his task forces on voter education and voter registration.”

The New Party, established in 1992, took advantage of what was known as electoral “fusion,” which enabled candidates to run on two tickets simultaneously, attracting voters from both parties. But the New Party disbanded in 1998, one year after fusion was halted by the Supreme Court.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 3,855 other followers