Uber-Nomenklatura

(Click title above)

.

Without a progressive consumption tax, capitalism will continue to jump the shark:
Once international big money pirates gain a headlock on everyone else, why imagine they would release such head lock to allow any fair minded businessperson to compete? So long as international loopholes free big money pirates, why should they care whether anyone else is precluded by socialistic regulations from competing? Why expect international financial pirates can be reduced to a level playing field without imposing progressive consumption taxes against them?

.

UBER NOMENKLATURA:

Ultimate Play On Volatility (to consolidate rule of Uber-Nomenklatura):
See http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/10/bidens_generated_crisis.html.

Joys of rule by socialists, communist party, hacks, and nomenklatura --- see:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UO1c6hRGpYU;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JcVDzcP_pgg
Joys of recruiting socialist and uninformed voters --- see:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NyvqhdllXgU.

It’s the power, stupid!

witches cauldron
Originally uploaded by Pads_brat

(Click title above)

It’s the power, stupid!

One may suppose to read in the thoughts, if not the words, of James Carville, “It’s about the power, stupid!”

Presently, worldwide commerce, free of worldwide governance, facilitates worldwide shenanigans. So long as individual nations remain stymied and the United Nations remains divided, power will gravitate to international pirates of volatility.

Worldwide mores have not evolved to facilitate worldwide governance. So, each nation must look to its own preservation, perhaps allying among leaders. To survive, nations must learn how to hold international pirates and money masters at bay.

To preserve representative governance, a republic must become quick to defend borders and to burst bubbles of financial piracy. America must, simultaneously, gain control over both its physical and its financial borders.

Neither the proposals of Obama nor of McCain even begin to address what must be done. Both Obama and McCain will undermine America’s borders, both physical and financial. However, Obama’s undermining will be quicker, deeper, more destructive, and longer lasting.

Obama is wrong on borders, defense, terrorism, allies, Israel, civilizing family values, and constitutional rule of law.

Obama’s one policy that may be better than the stupid Republican policies we have endured for eight years relates to the economic gulf between haves and have nots. However, the best way to address such gulf is not with a progressive income tax, but with a progressive consumption tax.

So long as no political party is willing to promote an effective consumption tax, a more progressive income tax may be the next best alternative. For this, Republican blindness to the obvious need to address the widening gulf in income and economic power has made manifest astonishing stupidity.

Regardless, my main concern is to rally against the suicidal surrender of representative governance to the virulent spread of international pirates of financial volatility.

Taxing income, regardless of how progressive the tax rate, is no way to attack such virus. Simply put, international money masters have too many easy avenues for avoiding such faux medicine. Indeed, more effective taxing of the income of millionaires simply widens the gulf and increases the control and power of international billionaires.

So, why have so few proposed effective medicine? Well, the virus is hard to explain to the electorate, even as it has infected our institutions through and through. Indeed, much support that has been essential to both Obama and McCain has derived from billionaire bandits. So, it must fall to maverick academics to fashion ways to educate the electorate, before, it is hoped, it becomes too late.

Obama’s “spread the wealth” plan, based as it is on progressivism in income tax rates rather than in consumption tax rates, is flawed, for the following reasons:

--- His plan will fund and reward layabouts, thereby diminishing productive work (rewards sloth).

--- His plan fails utterly to regulate funds used by international money masters to buy and control politicians, media, academia, and opportunities for inciting and exploiting social and economic volatility (empowers rule of pirates).

--- His plan blinds masses to their loss of freedom and dignity, by laying before them illusions of security (institutionalizes mind control).

Obama’s plan, by not promoting movement towards a progressive consumption tax, fortifies power protection for his money masters, by making it much more difficult for mere millionaires to make the quantum leap to financial piracy status. Obama’s plan does nothing to treat the spreading virus that renders us susceptible to being preyed upon by war profiteers and other opportunists of financial volatility.

****

HOW COULD OR SHOULD A PROGRESSIVE CONSUMPTION TAX WORK?

Civilization has two main problems: To keep alive: (1) purposefulness (freedom and dignity) and (2) representative governance.

Conditioning people to believe government owes them purpose and a living is unhealthy to any society that hopes to endure.

Enabling people to leverage wealth to the point of buying up politicians, media, and academia is suicidal to democracy.

Squaring the Circle:

End redistributive income taxes. Instead, resort to progressive consumption taxes. Add up all individual, non-business related purchases; allow no deductions for charities or political contributions or overseas or internet purchases. Then, tax every citizen's consumption --- progressively. Allow no political contributions from investment foundations, businesses, or corporations.

Mere Spreading of Wealth is not Moral:

It is immoral to take from those who produce in order to "spread their wealth" and income around to work-a-phobics.

Allowing Rule-Leveraging for Money Masters is not Democratic:

It is immoral to fail to check against institutions calculated to advantage such disproportionate accumulations of wealth and power as to sink democracy under the rule of oligarchic aristocrats, who are inclined to solidify control by buying up politicians, media, and academia.

The way to check against both the immorality of (1) wealth-spreading and (2) money-ruling is not with taxes on income or with giveaways to non-workers. Rather, the way to check against such abuses is by taxing consumption, progressively.

Consumption tax revenues should be used to fund health care and to build, rebuild, and maintain the infrastructure that is used by all citizens.

Such use would create jobs. Such tax would not harm the poor. There would be little need to spread wealth to layabouts were wealth used to incentive work, fund health care, fund jobs, and build and maintain infrastructure. A progressive consumption tax would help check against the sort of oligarchic influence we suffer on account of those who now own and control our politicians, journalists, and professoriate.

****

TRANSACTION AND TRADE TAXES:

All trades and sales between separate legal entities should be subject to transaction (sales) tax.

Within a nation’s borders, rates should be based on the social, political desirability or undesirability of the particular product being transacted or sold.

A nation, across its borders, may generally prefer not to impose transaction taxes on its acts of export.

On its acts of import, a nation may wish to impose such transaction tax rates (tariffs) as may help protect local markets, industries, allies, or needy third world nations.

Non-monetary gifts between individuals need not be taxed, although estates and inheritances should be taxed.

Gift taxes should be imposed on gifts of all kinds to or from businesses.

In addition, gifts from businesses to individuals should be taxed to individuals, as part of their basis for consumption tax purposes.

Gifts from individuals to businesses should also be taxed to such individuals, as part of their basis for consumption tax purposes.

All gifts, transactions, and purchases by individual citizens with or from foreign entities, businesses, and individuals should then and there be added to each such citizen’s consumption basis.

Aside from export or import taxes, a local business’s purchase of raw materials from a foreign business should not be additionally taxed, provided the purchase price is paid directly to the selling business or by deposit in such business’s account.

Otherwise, transfer of funds from a local business or bank to a foreign bank should be subject to some sort of transaction hold and tax, to diminish incentives for evading high-end progressivity in local consumption tax rates.

Using techniques as listed above, America could still preserve its borders ---- physical, traditional, political, and financial.

****

.

POLITICAL INFLUENCE OF BUSINESSES:

A progressive consumption tax would not interfere with the accumulation of power or wealth, such as for business owners or managers to direct social choices about production. Rather, such tax would only be felt upon distribution for use and consumption by individuals.

Thus, political influence would be restored to reasonable parameters and limits. Businesses would be precluded altogether from making campaign contributions. Individuals making escalating political contributions would face escalating taxation.

Problem: How can legislators become educated about business’ legislative concerns, unless providing such information (business free speech, i.e., lobbying) can be engaged in as a business expense? And, if it can, and if such expense is not taxed to businesses, then would not businesses, in accumulating wealth for directing choices about production, also be accumulating (untaxed) wealth for unduly influencing politicians in the writing of favorable legislation, such as for regulating in aid of monopolies, etc.?

What, then, would incentive protecting the environment and preserving arms length competition in the market place? If political lobbying must become subsumed as part of the “marketplace,” what becomes of the democratic notion of “one person, one vote”?

Note: The higher the cost of lobbying, the greater the advantage to established businesses and incumbent politicians; the greater the profit to business, the greater the leverage for politicians to express or imply politically backed threats and promises.

Would free speech, governmental transparency, term limits, and line item vetoes provide adequate checks against such unbalancing?

RECOMMENDATION — SPECIAL CONSUMPTION TAX ON LOBBYING:
For all expenses relating to lobbying and informing lawmakers, businesses should be charged progressively increasing special consumption taxes, even though businesses should otherwise ordinarily not pay income or consumption taxes, but only transaction taxes.
While established businesses would have a money advantage in getting their message to lawmakers, pursuing such advantage would become progressively more expensive, thus tending to make the playing field less uneven. And, the taxes would not go to lawmakers, but to the general treasury.

.

See:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Id1IKJGVkvg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTwqYM2kNuE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XB3qVTsDBE8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ppQszYT3djE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBTtn0pns54
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qthiDQXpfxc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tcfb2aR7V_U
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=heWbwsq4YL0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P8PS6574R0E
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P8PS6574R0E (Coulter says Soros picked both Obama and McCain)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nnf62Uhl3ac (Regarding Soros, about the bubble of American supremacy; does it not seem that Soros and friends want to regulate markets, nations, maybe even cultures and religions; he wants to control the education of the “well informed electorate” of the “open society,” i.e., the Ministry of Truth)

*****

Obama:
See http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/obama_change/2008/10/21/142554.html?s=al&promo_code=6DC0-1

Obama Facts:
See http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/obama_smears_fact_check/2008/10/20/142379.html?s=al&promo_code=6DC0-1

Misinformed Voters:
See http://townhall.com/columnists/JohnStossel/2008/10/29/a_duty_not_to_vote.

Voter Fraud:
See http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/10/who_else_is_heading_for_swing.html.

Contribution Fraud:
See http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/28/AR2008102803413_pf.html

Media Fraud:
See http://townhall.com/columnists/MichelleMalkin/2008/10/29/notorious_obamedia_moments_of_2008.

Demise of America:
See http://townhall.com/columnists/DouglasMacKinnon/2008/10/29/does_the_united_states_of_america_still_exist:
There is no greater threat to our liberty and this Republic than a biased media that despises traditional values and only speaks and lies with one voice. Again, Thomas Jefferson may have said it best when he wrote, “He who permits himself to tell a lie once, finds it much easier to do it a second and third time, till at length it becomes habitual; he tells lies without attending to it, and truths without the world’s believing him. This falsehood of the tongue leads to that of the heart, and in time depraves all its good dispositions.”

****

--- Redistribution of wealth --- http://www.nypost.com/seven/10282008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/obamas_ideas_for_a_radical_court_135633.htm
--- Voter fraud --- http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-stewart27-2008oct27,0,4960239.story
--- Supreme Court appointments --- http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/10/obama_and_the_law.html
--- Muslim friends --- http://townhall.com/Columnists/MonaCharen/2008/10/28/does_obamas_friendship_with_khalidi_matter_to_jews

NEW ROLE FOR AMERICA

(Click title above)

.

N.W.O. DISEASE BEING SPREAD AND FED TO SAME VAGUELY CONSCIOUS BEAST:

FROM TINY BUBBLES (Don Ho, anyone?) DO GREAT POWERS GROW: Which bubble will be the next to be manipulated by big money? Well, it's about the power, stupid! For bang for the buck, the cheapest and best investment right now is not in stocks, bonds, business, or education, but in politicians. Get 'em while they're still hot and cheap!

The big money that is snapping up politicians (and media and academia) is not going to deliver us to redistributive utopia, but to power-played puppeteering. Competitive, arms-length markets are dead. The new age is about raw, monopolized power: choosing among oligarchs in pledging one's fealty (more like submitting to one's strings).

.

Whether intended or not, human freedom and dignity are perilously close to becoming flushed away under thumbs of an international cohort of money masters. Puppeteering of a dumbed-down electorate is real. See, for examples: Daily Kos, Acorn, Democracy Alliance, Media Matters, MoveOn.org, Factcheck.com.

.

NOW OR NEVER --- PROGRESSIVE TAX ON CONSUMPTION: If humanity is to preserve plains of individual freedom and dignity and representative democracy against Money Masters, it becomes vital to enact and enforce a progressive consumption tax. Consumptive abuses of wealth in order to subvert or dictate politics worldwide must be taxed --- progressively and prohibitively.

.

As things stand, does it really much matter whether Murdoch and Fox News support McCain versus whether Soros supports Obama? Either way, will not America’s borders continue to be undermined? Either way, will not international and interlocking corporations become ever more impervious to national control? Either way, will not cabals of billionaires, through hidden agents, continue to rule politicians, media, and academia? Either way, will not masters of volatility continue to tip worldwide and international upsets, in order to maximize opportunities for exploiting capital?

If, in effect, there is a significant difference in electing McCain as opposed to Obama, it may be this: It may be that Obama would be quicker to irreversibly consolidate or surrender to the rule of money masters, to foreclose any chance, ever: to enact and enforce a progressive consumption tax; to dislodge The Fed; to defend national identity; to defend fundamental family and civilizing values; or to corral Islamic fundamentalism. That is, McCain may represent a less virulent form of N.W.O. disease. The Beast is not an "invisible hand"; rather, its left hand is covered by a Democrat sock puppet and its right hand by a Republican sock puppet.

.

NEW ROLE FOR AMERICA, AS AMERICA:

DERIVATION OF PURPOSEFULNESS: Each human being derives much of his or her sense of worth and purpose in associative respect of home, country, and culture.

HEGEMONY: No one nation of people wishes, suddenly and arbitrarily, to become ruled by another.

MULTI-CULTURALISM: No healthy nation of people wishes for its culture to be suddenly ignored and undermined by inassimilable invaders from a multitude of alien nations, cultures, and religions.

PROBLEM: For every non-dysfunctional nation, a perennial problem is this: How to protect borders, language, and culture from inassimilable invaders, while not invading and stirring up trouble in other nations.

FACTORS: Exacerbating such problem are the following factors:

1) Some cross-border trade and invasion is unavoidable; and, given ever-accelerating modes of communication, transportation, and virtual projection, ever-increasing degrees of cross-invasion also become unavoidable.

2) The stability, functionality, and trustworthiness of many nations, cultures, and religions often remain questionable, sometimes leading unstable nations to incite and project internal and external abuse and terror.

3) To require consensus among nations before forcibly preempting cells of terror can easily lead to failure to commence treatment until after risk of international infection becomes terminal, worldwide.

4) Human greed and self interest often work against consensus building, leading to tactics for holding sanity hostage (not altogether unlike congressional strategies for forcing selfish earmarks).

5) Undermining leadership of America in order to assert control through an international cohort of wealthy money masters has not, historically, been shown to lead reliably to the fellow-empathy for, or better fulfillment of, humanity in general.

6) Relying on the present, dumbed-down electorate of America to “trickle-up-elect” good leadership for the world is, at best, chancy.

.****

PROBLEMS:

How can government promote expertise that is beneficial to society as a whole over expertise that is bent towards serving abusive dictatorships or media controlled cults of personality?

No single member of the electorate can be competent regarding details of all that needs to be voted on or done.

How can regulators find experts with experience who have not been corrupted by their experience?

How can experts who are not corrupt be financed and empowered to make their expertise available?

How can expertise that is incompetent or malicious be rehabilitated?

What is so bad about simply deferring to the natural result (or invisible hand) of competition among “experts”?
.

SUGGESTIONS FOR TAMING BEAST:

1) Seek to restore America to a rational, spiritual-based philosophy, amenable of actually prescribing some moral “shoulds,” in respect of which each of us may seek our purposes, in relative freedom and dignity.

2) Refine the American electorate.

3) REFINE CHECKS AND BALANCES, to check against:

a) The widening of consumption-based wealth, so that representative democracy is not fatally undermined. (In this regard, corporations should be prohibited from making political contributions. And contributions by individuals to specific political candidates or parties should not be tax deductible. Rather, such contributions should be considered as a form of “consumption,” and should make the contributor subject to a PROGRESSIVE CONSUMPTION TAX.)

b) Greed based puppeteering of the electorate.

c) Arbitrary projection of American power.

d) National identity and borders being overwhelmed by inassimilable multiculturalism.
.

MAIN INQUIRY:

Were we to submit to trends for becoming ruled as automatons, without respect for the freedom and dignity of each person’s expression of Will, would we then have squandered our inheritance?

BODY ANALOGY:

Earth, in holding various nations, may be likened to a human body, holding various organs.
Of earth as a body, one may analogize “God” as Source of Will or Mind, and various nations as analogous to organs for (a) nervous system, (b) heart and circulatory system, (c) breathing system, (d) food consumption and storeage system, (e) food filtering system, and (f) energy conversion and waste disposal system.

For example, one may consider a nervous system in respect of North America, blood circulation system in respect of Europe, air circulation system in respect of Russia, food consumption system in respect of Asia, food filtering system in respect of South America, and energy conversion system in respect of Africa.

Of such a body, one would not ask that its nervous system should “multi-acculturate” to perform functions of the stomach, nor that its blood circulation system should perform functions of the digestive system, nor that its lung system should perform functions of the food filtering system. One would not expect a body to perform better by having it step into a blender, in order to multi-acculturate its assimilation.

Should ANYONE NOT WISHING TO REDUCE AND UNDERMINE AMERICA, AS AMERICA, expect that Americans should suddenly put their borders, language and culture into a multi-acculturating blender?

TO TAKE AMERICA BACK

(Click title above)

TO TAKE AMERICA BACK:

.
ELITIST TOADIES: The Ivy League has been reduced to training ground for America’s version of party-hack nomenklatura, for being sponsored by various forms of thugocracy. The Ivy League’s “elitism” consists less in instilling fellow-empathy than in facilitating pack-preying. As much as anything, the Ivy League has “whored-out” to enhance skills for fear-mongering (overplaying: Dishonest Science, Global Warming, Bush Derangement Syndrome, Class Warfare), while holding sanity hostage (underplaying: Secretive Societies, Islamic Terrorism, Socialistic Mind Control, Costs of Notions of Entitlement, Pyramiding Debt to Finance Addictive Pleasures, Threats to Family Based Civilizing Decency, Voting Rights Delivered to Incompetents). The Ivy League has become training ground for delivering us into moral shallowness and shamelessness.
.

MUGGING THUGOCRACY: The N.W.O. thugocracy now sponsoring Ivy League hirelings consists of a New World Mind Control Set (NWMCS), which now, through-and-through, infests America’s lobbyists, regulators, politicians, political parties, governors, judges, Orwellian speech codes, educational systems, academia, media, Hollywood, rap worlds, game worlds, science propaganda, spirituality shrinking, and secularly progressive theologies. Rot on a Shakespearean scale has stretched its connecting and choking roots far beyond Denmark.
.

SAME BEAST: The NWMCS Beast is humming along, substituting its power for that of America’s. The main political parties have become mere sock puppets, one covering the left hand of the Beast, the other covering the right hand. But it is the same Beast.
.

BEAST PHILOSOPHY: Is there a reigning philosophy for this Beast, and, if so, how can it be re-caged? Do Beasties really believe humanity would be better off, morally, under their rule of “trickle down goodness,” rather than under the rule of representative democracy (“trickle up goodness”)? Or, do Beasties believe the "reality of is" trumps the "morality of ought," by dictating that only the most ruthless and powerful are worthy of surviving and flourishing, to pull the strings that tumble the rest of us about?

How should Beasties rationalize that their rule would be better, morally, than the hegemony of an America where the electorate has devolved to be overbalanced by a multitude of derelicts? Or, have Beasties themselves brought about such devolution, to use it as “justification” for imposing their rule?

What may history suggest, regarding secretive rule by deceitful money-masters? Which is more likely: that the fellow-empathies of power-hungry Beasties will be aroused, or that the destiny-purposefulness of the American electorate will be revived and refined?
.

CHOICES: Make choices we must. Yet, even among blends of notions of capitalism, humanism, socialism, communism, dialectical materialism, and scientism, no single choice can replace the enlightened empathy to be received in common, spiritual, humility before “God.” What is most important to our humane, enlightened empathy is that we appreciate our spiritual interconnection, which devolves from a myriad of ambiguous possibilities of Will (aka, “God”). In single-minded prodigal-zeal, divorced from God-empathy, there lurks the blind evil that ever-challenges our forgiveness.

.
TO TAKE AMERICA BACK --- each person should:
1) Seek to be true to higher purpose;
2) Help sound alarms against THUG-BEASTS, i.e.: Thug-Effrontery (Soros), Thug-Socialism (Obama), Thug-Capitalism (Bush), and Thug-Big-Government (Paulson, Pelosi, Reid, Frank, Murtha);
3) Defend lines of free communication;
4) Educate responsible persons;
5) Redirect followers of the Beast;
6) Help make remote consequences of Beast-o-cracy more immediately felt, as by shutting down jobs in anticipation of ruinous wealth-redistribution taxes;
7) Decline to ruin profits for producers, but, instead, redistribute the personal wealth of billionaires (do this not by taxing or redistributing wealth in corporate stocks or businesses, but by taxing in respect of particular transactions and CONSUMPTION; that is, end income taxes on corporations and individuals; instead, impose sales taxes on most transactions, and impose a progressive consumption tax on individuals, and impose property taxes on all owners);
8) Undermine the power not of ordinary producers, but of Beast-Billionaires acting in their individual, democracy-undermining capacities, as fronted by Soros, Obama, and Bush;
9) Re-inspire hope for humanity;
10) Refine the electorate; and
11) Work to improve checks and balances to defend individual freedom and dignity from puppeteering strings of Beast Thugs.

.

Plumbing Philosophy ("Joe the Plumber"):

"The society which scorns excellence in plumbing as a humble activity and tolerates shoddiness in philosophy because it is an exalted activity will have neither good plumbing nor good philosophy: neither its pipes nor its theories will hold water."
John W. Gardner, Secretary of Health Education and Welfare under JFK and author of "Excellence."
.

Orwellian Lunchtime Manipulation of News and Information:

Snippets from http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/10/hedge_funds_politics_and_the_m.html:
October 21, 2008
Hedge Funds, Politics, and the Market Crash
By Ed Lasky

....

The collapse in the American stock markets was a calamity for the campaign of John McCain. In September, McCain was running strongly against Barack Obama. Some polls had him leading Barack Obama by 3 percent before the market broke. By October 7th, Obama had taken the lead across America. What changed in one month? The trigger was the market crash. Who pulled the trigger and why? Who benefitted?

....

Who else may have benefited? Indeed, who may have helped precipitate the crisis by taking actions that would weaken the ABX Index? We don't know, but there are some obvious suspects.

George Soros for one.

....

Soros's hedge fund -- like most hedge funds -- is based overseas and escapes much scrutiny and regulation (more on this later). Word of Paulson's early success got "around in the world of hedge funds" and Soros invited Paulson for lunch, "asking for details of how he laid his bets, with instruments that didn't exist a few years ago"

Paulson made billions betting against the ABX Index. When you bet against the value of an index it exerts pressure on it -- hastening a decline and thus a decline in the value of the products that are priced using this index.

....

Robert Morgenthau, the legendary district attorney for Manhattan, penned an op-ed for the Wall Street Journal recently highlighting the dangers of overseas hedge funds (Too Much Money is Beyond Legal Reach):

A major factor in the current financial crisis is the lack of transparency in the activities of the principal players in the financial markets. This opaqueness is compounded by vast sums of money that lie outside the jurisdiction of U.S. regulators and other supervisory authorities.

The $700 billion in Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson's current proposed rescue plan pales in comparison to the volume of dollars that now escape the watchful eye, not only of U.S. regulators, but from the media and the general public as well.

There is $1.9 trillion, almost all of it run out of the New York metropolitan area, that sits in the Cayman Islands, a secrecy jurisdiction. Another $1.5 trillion is lodged in four other secrecy jurisdictions.

....

Hedge funds are a major source of donations for Democrats. The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, which Schumer heads, received $779,100 from employees of private-equity head funds in June 2007 (as the tax battle was heating up in the Senate), far exceeding the $60,000 received by the Republican Senate Committee.

....

... sources have mentioned that "financial terrorism" may be at work.

....

It seems that Obama was just lucky that a market slide seems to have decisively swung the campaign in his favor. That Obama was again lucky that the meltdown occurred just as John McCain was overtaking him in the polls. And that Obama simply lucked out that one of his most influential supporters, one of the world's most adept fund managers (as the Bank of England learned the hard way) also benefited from the meltdown in the markets.

This financial tsunami, and its timing, like the election-eve sex-scandal exposés of his opponents during his Illinois races, might just be one in a long chain of Barack Obama's "lucky" breaks.

If so, Barack Obama must be the luckiest politician, ever.

....

Market manipulations to achieve geopolitical ends. Is it beyond the realm of possibility?

....

And here's a final, unpleasant thought: Pakistan. This is a country with 25 percent inflation and a currency in free fall; a country with a jihadist insurgency on its border with Afghanistan, permanent hostility on its border with India, nuclear weapons and a tradition of street demonstrations in response to suspect newspaper articles. Dozens of people, with all kinds of agendas, have an interest in using financial markets to destabilize Pakistan, and Afghanistan along with it. Eventually, one of them will.


BTW — HOW TO TELL IF YOU’RE AN ELITIST — SEE: http://townhall.com/Columnists/BenShapiro/2008/10/21/you_know_youre_an_elitist_if.

Fourth Reich

(Click title above)
.
TAKE BACK AMERICA:

If America is to remain a force for defending and propagating “government of the people, by the people, and for the people,” then America must revitalize the intelligence and character of its electorate.

The fate of America and the world it leads must not be left to the easily manipulated whims of a dumbed down or easily corrupted electorate. To enfranchise the young, naïve, ignorant, illegal, alien, corrupt, or criminal is to foredoom us to the machinations of secret cabals of well connected and corrupt profiteers.

With no apologies, the franchise must no longer be availed to: those under 18 years of age, those without loyalty, attachment, or residence, and those without innocence of crimes of moral turpitude. Means must be established to verify the authenticity of votes and voters.

The alternative is not universal suffrage. The alternative is rule by machinations of corrupt cabals and their cynical owners of obviously monopolized media.
.
Mentally handicapped person forced to vote Democratic: See http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2008/10/mentally-handicapped-man-forced-to-vote.html.
.

WORLD HEGEMONY VS. NEW PARADIGM:
Apart from a country like the U.S., constrained as it is by a system of checks and balances and having a history and culture conditioned for respecting human freedom and dignity, what other country or system would be better, to project power in order to promote peace and stability worldwide?

No doubt, the American electorate often seems stupid and easily duped, and capitalistic corporations often seek profits that opportune in wars. So, has history, logic, or empiricism suggested any alternative country, federation, or system that would be better?

Well, apart from the U.S., what other country presents itself? Does not experience with the United Nations seem unpromising? So, what about an integrated power system that is guided and controlled at the top by a cohort of successful financial overlords, acting through their loyal, conditioned agents, presidents, generals, and minions? Well, not much in human experience, philosophy, or spiritual insight makes much of a good case for such a system.

Such a N.W.O system, of socialism directed by secret loyal cabals or well connected billionaires, may sometimes be called: community organizing, participatory democracy, progressive corporatism, corporate directed socialism, national socialism (Nazism), nomenklatura directed communism (USSR), or spiritually entranced mass mind diversion (Sharia law).

Regardless of what one may call a N.W.O. system, which is more likely: (1) that America will learn and improve as a world leader, or (2) that secret loyal international cabals will continue to respect the freedom and dignity of ordinary people?

But for America, what would have been the result from WWII, or the Cold War, or various regional slaughters and famines ever since?

But, does the question not become moot, if we allow America to fall under the N.W.O. control of a secret loyal international cabal (i.e., Beast)?


FOURTH REICH:

SAME OLD NATIONAL SOCIALISM:

SEDITION: See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sedition:
Sedition is a term of law which refers to covert conduct, such as speech and organization, that is deemed by the legal authority as tending toward insurrection against the established order. Sedition often includes subversion of a constitution and incitement of discontent (or resistance) to lawful authority. Sedition may include any commotion, though not aimed at direct and open violence against the laws. Seditious words in writing are seditious libel.

****

INTERNATIONAL SOCIALISM:

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Society_Institute:
One of the aims of the OSI is the development of civil society organisations (e.g., charities, community groups and trade unions) to encouraging participation in democracy and society.”

PERSONAL COMMENT: This sounds a lot like Obama's Community Organizing [!], to bring about “democratic socialism” (where have we seen national socialism before?), aka “participatory democracy.” The “lie” inherent and hidden in such “O – society” notions is that they implicate power organized to the highest levels, for top-tier puppeteers to pull strings of all lower level community organizers (who may as well be called Nomenklatura of a communist-like party).

****

GEORGE SOROS AND THE “O-SOCIETY”:

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_soros:
In 2006, George Soros bought two million shares of Halliburton.

“Currently, Soros is chairman of Soros Fund Management and the Open Society Institute and is also a former member of the Board of Directors of the Council on Foreign Relations.”
“In the United States, he is known for having donated large sums of money in a failed effort to defeat President George W. Bush's bid for re-election in 2004. On BookTV, November 12, 2007, he said that he supports Barack Obama for the Democratic candidate in the 2008 election.”
“Former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker wrote in 2003 in the foreword of Soros' book The Alchemy of Finance:
George Soros has made his mark as an enormously successful speculator, wise enough to largely withdraw when still way ahead of the game.”
“In 1997, during the Asian financial crisis, then Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir bin Mohamad accused Soros of using the wealth under his control to punish ASEAN for welcoming Myanmar as a member. Later, he called Soros a moron. Thai nationals have called Soros "an economic war rcriminal" who "sucks the blood from the people".”
“Soros' 2008 book, The New Paradigm for Financial Markets, describes a "superbubble" that has built up over the past 25 years and is now ready to collapse. This is the third in a series of books he's written that have predicted disaster. As he states:
I have a record of crying wolf…. I did it first in The Alchemy of Finance (in 1987), then in The Crisis of Global Capitalism (in 1998) and now in this book. So it's three books predicting disaster. (After) the boy cried wolf three times . . . the wolf really came.”
“According to National Review the Open Society Institute gave $20,000 in September 2002 to the Defense Committee of Lynne Stewart, the lawyer who has defended alleged terrorists in court and was sentenced to 2⅓ years in prison for "providing material support for a terrorist conspiracy" via a press conference for a client. An OSI spokeswoman said "it appeared to us at that time that there was a right-to-counsel issue worthy of our support."”

“… Dick Cheney accidentally referred to FactCheck.org as "factcheck.com" in the Vice Presidential debate, causing the owner of that domain to redirect all traffic to Soros's site.”

“After Bush's reelection in 2004, Soros and other wealthy liberal political donors backed a new political fundraising group called Democracy Alliance which aims to support the goals of the U.S. Democratic Party.”
“According to Neil Clark (writing in the New Statesman):
(t)he conventional view, shared by many on the left, is that socialism collapsed in eastern Europe because of its systemic weaknesses and the political elite's failure to build popular support.
That may be partly true, but Soros's role was crucial. From 1979, he distributed $3m a year to dissidents including Poland's Solidarity movement, Charter 77 in Czechoslovakia and Andrei Sakharov in the Soviet Union. In 1984, he founded his first Open Society Institute in Hungary and pumped millions of dollars into opposition movements and independent media.”
“His Open Society Institute is named after Popper's two volume work, The Open Society and Its Enemies, and Soros's ongoing philosophical commitment to the principle of fallibilism (that anything he believes may in fact be wrong, and is therefore to be questioned and improved) stems from Popper's philosophy.”

“Soros' writings focus heavily on the concept of reflexivity, where the biases of individuals enter into market transactions, potentially changing the fundamentals of the economy. Soros argues that such transitions in the fundamentals of the economy are typically marked by disequilibrium rather than equilibrium, and that the conventional economic theory of the market (the 'efficient market hypothesis') does not apply in these situations. Soros has popularized the concepts of dynamic disequilibrium, static disequilibrium, and near-equilibrium conditions.”

PERSONAL COMMENT --- LEARING HOW TO CREATE AND PREY ON BUBBLES AND VOLATILITY: Soros concept of reflexivity seems to relate to strategies for bringing about, and preying upon, bubbles and volatilty, both in economics and in politics.

“Soros blames many of the world's problems on the failures inherent in what he characterizes as market fundamentalism. His opposition to many aspects of globalization has made him a controversial figure.”

“In an interview regarding the economic crisis of 2008, Soros referred to it as the most serious crisis since the 1930s. According to Soros, market fundamentalism with its assumption that markets will correct themselves with no need for government intervention in financial affairs has been “some kind of an ideological excess”.”

****

SEDITION:

See http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200312/soros:
December 2003 ATLANTIC
A prominent financier argues that the heedless assertion of American power in the world resembles a financial bubble—and the moment of truth may be here.
by George Soros The Bubble of American Supremacy
.
COMMENT: SOROS WANTS AMERICAN HEGEMONY TO BE REPLACED BY THE HEGEMONY OF HIMSELF AND HIS COHORTS!

But, would not this be to replace a system of rule and responsibility based on representative election of American leaders, in a society with a history and culture for protecting representative governance, with an undemocratic and unrepresentative system for international rule by financial overlords and their cohorts?

For the masses, would this not be to trade freedom and dignity for cheap security and regimentation?
.
For gratifying profit lust, does not The Beast have both a left hand (socialistic dictatorship) and a right hand (war profiteering corporate capitalism)? How best should The Beast be checked and balanced?
.
****

SAME N.W.O. BEAST:

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanley_Druckenmiller:
“Stanley Druckenmiller formerly managed money for George Soros, and now dedicates himself to work full time at Duquesne Capital which he founded in 1981. He is married to Dreyfus Corporation (a Mellon Financial Corporation subsidiary) manager Fiona Biggs, niece of former Morgan Stanley global investment strategist Barton Biggs.”

****

SAME N.W.O. BEAST:

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlyle_Group: Among members or advisers of the global private equity investment fund, the largest in the world, Carlyle Group, dealing in defense, energy, media, and U.S. mortgage backed securities, have been George Soros, George H.W. Bush, James A. Baker III, Donald Rumsfeld, Government of Abu Dhabi, and relatives among the bin Laden family.

****

COMMENT --- ONE AND THE SAME BEAST:

We have been ruled by the political fringes, and they are each an arm of the same beast, just camouflaged behind different sock puppets worn on each hand. The left puppet of the beast claims, in pretense, to want international socialism, while the right puppet abhors it. But both puppets are camouflaging a beast that is farming the rest of us.

Our farmed-leftists must learn that socialism is based primarily on a lie.
Our farmed-rightists must learn that allowing too great a gulf between haves and have nots undermines democracy.

Independents, able and willing to advocate "the truth," have a heavy rock to push. Yet, "one must imagine Sisyphus happy.”

COMMENT --- INTERNATIONAL FOURTH REICH:

Has George Soros come full circle, having survived the Nazis, now to impose their same concept upon the world, only under a different name, under financial overlords (Soros' cohorts) for pulling strings of militaries under many, rather than just one, Reich? It seems doubtful that Soros is a racist, but does he not seem intent upon maneuvering most of us to surrender our freedom and dignity in order to submit to the peace of his rule, aka, “Pax Soros”? Does this not seem eerily similar to Islamic and Nazi submission-based-fascism?
.
****
.
EUROPEAN STYLE FREE TAX MONEY:
Comment by BobF from http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/10/hey_plumber_joe_been_there_don.html:
"One thing the liberal socialists(Democrats) ignore in their headlong rush to be "like Europe" is that the reason socialist Europe looks so good is that America has propped Europe and the rest of the world up for 60 + years. It was necessary after WWII to have the Marshall plan and to provide for Europe's defense to stop the Soviet Union from swallowing western Europe. However, our continued policy of providing for their defense ever since has made European nations into very weak, socialist countries with a veneer of prosperity; that makes liberals think that socialism works. Socialism works as long as there is OPM ( Other People's Money) available, because socialism produces nothing but consumes everything."

THE FATHER AND THE SON

(Click title above)

THE FATHER AND THE SON
(FALSE PROPHETS)

****

Why are George Soros and Warren Buffet united in supporting Obama?

.

Is it only out of the humane goodness of his heart that George Soros is:

- downplaying Islamofascism;

- working with cronies to buy up media;

- undermining the dollar;

- trying to burst the bubble of American hegemony;

- trying to discredit capitalism;

- promoting a new world order based on organization directed by and among globalist power brokers;

- and fronting Obama?

Why are the media, academia, and major billionaires all so comfortable with Obama?

Why does Olbermann do so much pimping for Obama?

Why has Obama been so comfortable with designing or using presidential like seals on podiums and airplanes?

How and why was ACORN established, and why is Obama lying about it?

Just how radically left will Soros expect Obama, with Pelosi and Reid, to push?

How far is the fix already in?

****

Who stands to gain when volatility, wars, and recessions are started?

How much do well connected bildenbergers and billionaires stand to gain by uniting in concerted action to use volatility to bring about a common currency (Amero) for a North American Union and eventual New World Order?

Is anyone in Congress other than Ron Paul fighting this?

****
About “The N.W.O.”:

SOCIALISM (TRICKLE DOWN GOODNESS) — ELITE (IVY LEAGUE) POWER FOR DIRECTING AND ORGANIZING THE PERSONAL AND FINANCIAL SECURITY OF ALL UNDERLINGS: Should we just assume, once a global power structure were organized and suffused in place, any old power structure, to be ruled at topmost tiers by those chosen within a select band of elites, loyal among themselves, that general security and mutual-regard would just naturally follow, so that general goodness would trickle down to everyone?

REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY (TRICKLE UP GOODNESS) — INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM AND POWER: Or, should we prefer as much freedom and power as possible, to be retained even among lower-tier individuals, even to replace rulers at topmost tiers of power?

GOOD “BORG”?

****

EVIL:

COMMENTS:

Can George Soros be trusted, as he fronts Obama to espouse the wish for “the United States to lead a cooperative effort to improve the world by engaging in preventive actions of a constructive character”?

Does Soros really expect that power players will cooperate: (a) in respect of the good of humanity, or (b) in respect of the good of themselves?

What is Soros’ history for showing trustworthiness, character, honor, lack of deceit, or lack of criminality?

Has Soros, under personal pain or hardship, displayed concern or loyalty to any cause higher than blind faith in Will to Power?

Why should we trust one who believes so much in his ends and his power as to rationalize all means?

If Soros’ ends are so self-evidently beneficent and rational, then why should he and his understudies need to be so willing to resort to Alinsky tactics, rather than to free, honest, and open debate?

Should we just blindly trust that Soros is a good-hearted benefactor, as adept in philosophy, spirituality, history, psychology, sociology, and humanities as he is in manipulating market bubbles?

In Soros’ eyes, what is “good” for humanity? For example, does Soros consider it “good” that humanity should be allowed its security only upon the surrendering by each of us of individual autonomy and freedom, with all of us to come willingly under his thumb, singing his hosannas?

Is Islamic radicalism, rather than being an existential threat, really nothing more than an overstated grudge, to be easily assuaged and reformed, merely upon appreciating how jihadism is rooted only in feelings of being disrespected and wronged, market-wise?

Will Islamic grudges peacefully subside as soon as we usher in an age of international socialism, under the stern but beneficent rule of Soros, “the father,” as fronted by “his son,” Obama?

In each American’s eyes, what does hard but sure experience teach about what is “good”?

Is now really an opportune time for America to unilaterally disarm, to turn its swords into plowshares?

Is "the main reason why anti-American feelings are so strong in the world today ... that we are not providing it (leadership) in the present," as Soros says, or is it because N.W.O. forces aligned with Soros are benefiting financially from holding sanity hostage in order to entertain the continuing volatility?

****

Selfish Evil Will to Power vs. Empathetic Good Will to Math:

"Hope is a good breakfast, but a bad dinner." Sir Francis Bacon

Snippets from http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/10/obamas_radical_revolutionits_a.html:
October 15, 2008
Obama's Radical Revolution:Its Alinsky Root and Global Vision
By Kyle-Anne Shiver

....

When Barack Obama made his world tour this summer, he introduced himself in Berlin as a "fellow citizen of the world." Americans should make no mistake; he wasn't kidding. As Pope Benedict (writing then as Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger) also warned in his 2003 book, Truth and Tolerance, the international Marxist dream did not die with the fall of the USSR:

"The collapse of realist socialism in the East European states has not quite laid aside all such hopes, and here and there they still subsist, silently awaiting some new form."


Even though the Soviet system fell and its Marxist "utopia" was clearly revealed as the antithesis of the promise to bring liberation and light to the world, the hope lives on and thrives within the heart of Obama and his followers, and the plan is a global one.

....

In his 2004 book, Unholy Alliance, former 60s radical David Horowitz defines the reasons underlying the left's rationale in dealing with the radical Islamic terrorists and their national sponsors. Leftists in the Western world, explains Horowitz, are not bothered by the religious dimension of the Islamic fundamentalists. Secular leftists rationalize this religious pathology, "believing that religion itself is merely an expression of real-world misery, for which capitalist property is ultimately responsible."

According to Horowitz, leftists maintain an unwavering faith in universal rationality that tells them "even people who blow themselves and little children up in the expectation of a place in heaven, and seventy-two virgins besides, must ultimately be inspired by real-world grievances."

....

Obama's one piece of signature legislation in the Senate is the Global Poverty Act [http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/02/the_global_candidate_proposes.html], aimed at curing what socialists deem as the root cause of all violence and war -- poverty.

In this belief, Obama has high-powered company. He is joined by a cabal of international socialists, especially his biggest-moneyed backer, George Soros [http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/02/george_soros_and_the_alchemy_o.html]. Soros himself backs a global tax on wealthy countries, especially the United States. And Soros, like Obama, believes that the Global War on Terror is ill-intentioned and based on the desire of conservatives to build lasting American hegemony.

The current economic meltdown, coupled with the well-laid foundation of socialist radicals throughout this Country, now threaten to bring America closer than we've ever been to joining the international collective. And Barack Obama has demonstrated that he will do anything -- anything -- it takes to be The One to close their long-envisioned revolutionary deal.

*****

Snippets from http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/02/george_soros_and_the_alchemy_o.html:

February 27, 2008
George Soros and the Alchemy of 'Regime Change'
By Kyle-Anne Shiver

....

When George Soros failed to obtain the election of his candidate, John Kerry, in 2004, he brooded for a while, even said he might get out of politics altogether, but he just couldn't stop himself. He has stated publicly that he wishes to burst the "bubble of American supremacy," [http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200312/soros] because he says our preeminence in the world is a detriment to global "equilibrium." So far, he has failed, but he keeps on trying.


....

And Mr. Soros has made no secret either of the fact that he sees the shortest way to effect political shake-ups, what he terms "regime changes," is through very difficult economic conditions.

America has not yet felt the full force of Soros style economic shock treatment. But others have.

Soros made his first billion in 1992 by shorting the British pound with leveraged billions in financial bets, and became known as the man who broke the Bank of England. He broke it on the backs of hard-working British citizens who immediately saw their homes severely devalued and their life savings cut drastically in comparative worth almost overnight.

When the Asian Financial Crisis of 1997 threatened to spread globally, George Soros was right in the thick of it. Soros was accused by the Malaysian Prime Minister of causing the collapse with his monetary machinations, and he was branded in Thailand as an "economic war criminal" who "sucks the blood from the people." Right in the middle of this crisis, Soros dashed off his book, The Crisis of Global Capitalism, which demanded a "third way" toward economic stability.

Coincidentally, or not, during the height of the fears of worldwide recession, then President Clinton told the New York Times that he was proposing a "third way" between capitalism and socialism. Unfortunately for Soros, U.S. markets rebounded quickly, his predicted catastrophe was forestalled, and his brave new global economic plans receded for a bit.

This may have been to Soros' own good, though, because he was by 1998 up to his neck in the collapse of the Russian ruble, and buying up valuable East European resources at fire-sale prices.

....

... When asked about his sphere of influence in the Soviets' demise for a New Republic interview in 1994, Mr. Soros humbly replied that the author ought to report that "the former Soviet Empire is now called the Soros Empire."

When our House Banking Committee investigated the Russia-gate scandal in 1999, trying to determine just how $100 billion had been diverted out of Russia, forcing the collapse of its currency and the default of its enormous loans from the International Monetary Fund, Soros was even called to testify. He denied involvement of course, but finally admitted that he had used insider access in a deal that was barred to foreign investors to acquire a huge chunk of Sidanko Oil.

The Russia scandal was labeled by Rep. Jim Leach, then head of the House Banking Committee to be "one of the greatest social robberies in human history." (Shadow Party; David Horowitz and Richard Poe; p. 96)

Of course, Russia-gate was quickly hushed up and pushed aside in the public's lurid, and quite insatiable, interest in Monica-gate.

Then, George Soros did some more shady economic fooling around in France. And he actually got caught and charged with illegal insider trading in his attempt to takeover the Societe Generale bank. He was convicted and the conviction was upheld in 2 separate appeals, the last in June of 2006. They let him off, however, with a piddling $2.9 million fine.

....

Just after he failed in 2004 to bring about Bush's demise, he went right on trying to force a conclusion to his self-fulfilling prophecy of doom for the U.S. [COMMENT: WHY IS THIS NOT PROSECUTED AS SEDITION?] And this year, it appears as though he may have finally hit pay dirt in the sub-prime meltdown which threatens to actually bring on that long hoped-for recession.

In Davos this year, at the World Economic Forum, Soros even went so far as to say that the current housing "bust" would signal the end of the dollar as the world's default currency.

"The current crisis is not only the bust that follows the housing boom," Soros said. "It's basically the end of a 60-year period of continuing credit expansion based on the dollar as the reserve currency."


Being that Mr. Soros' stated goal for more than a decade has been to burst the "bubble of American supremacy," it stands to reason that the financial gloom he is predicting for us would be precisely his own little cup of tea.

And if the economic picture is bleak in this election year, who stands to benefit? Why, the Democrats, of course, the beneficiaries of Soros' 527 largesse.

In April 2005, Soros' Open Society Institute was the primary sponsor of a conference at Yale Law School, called, "The Constitution in 2020." The conference's task was to produce "a progressive vision of what the Constitution ought to be." (Emphasis mine.) When one sees references in progressive speak about the "evolutionary character of constitutional law," they are talking about changing the Constitution to formally enshrine their policy preferences so they can avoid the messy necessity of having to win elections. (Shadow Party; Horowitz and Poe; p. 71)

It would seem, then, that progressives stand at the threshold of fulfilling their wildest dreams right here on American shores. With a Republican Party in disarray, the economy seemingly poised on the brink of recession, one candidate with the charisma of a snake charmer and another master schemer as backup, and a new Constitution already being planned, what will stand in their way?

These folks have designs not only on a reinvention of America, but on the whole world. Both Democrat candidates for the presidency have plans for an American cure for global poverty that make our current, quite generous, foreign aid look like a tiny Band-Aid.

Hillary's utopian plan is of a global village, where the role of America is that of supreme benefactor, with herself as our beneficent queen. Hillary's plans for the redistribution of American wealth extend benefits not just to other Americans, but to every other country in need.

Obama, too, sees global poverty as the root cause of all evil in the world, including crime, war and terrorism. His single piece of signature legislation in the Senate is a bill that would authorize an additional $845 billion from American tax payers to eradicate global poverty, and legislate a demand on future presidents to bring America in line with UN mandates on percentage of national GDP given to fight global poverty.

These plans are in perfect sync with Soros' own support for the Tobin Tax, a global tax on currency transactions. This taxation would be forced on sovereign nations by an international body, coercing capitalist economies into sharing their wealth with poor nations for the eradication of poverty and the myriad problems associated with it.

So, that which we and our ancestors have sacrificed to build and maintain will be stolen from us and our offspring and given away by the new Robin Hoods, George Soros and the Democratic Party, who seem to envision global perfection at last, with every single soul living happily ever after in absolute peace and harmony, together singing kumbaya in the same language...the language of love.

*****

Snippets from http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/Articles/bobamasunlikelypoliticaledu.html:
The Agitator
by Ryan Lizza
Post date: 03.09.07

....

The first and most fundamental lesson Obama learned was to reassess his understanding of power. Horwitt says that, when Alinsky would ask new students why they wanted to organize, they would invariably respond with selfless bromides about wanting to help others. Alinsky would then scream back at them that there was a one-word answer: "You want to organize for power!"

Galluzzo shared with me the manual he uses to train new organizers, which is little different from the version he used to train Obama in the '80s. It is filled with workshops and chapter headings on understanding power: "power analysis," "elements of a power organization," "the path to power." Galluzzo told me that many new trainees have an aversion to Alinsky's gritty approach because they come to organizing as idealists rather than realists. But Galluzzo's manual instructs them to get over these hang-ups. "We are not virtuous by not wanting power," it says. "We are really cowards for not wanting power," because "power is good" and "powerlessness is evil."

The other fundamental lesson Obama was taught is Alinsky's maxim that self-interest is the only principle around which to organize people. (Galluzzo's manual goes so far as to advise trainees in block letters: "get rid of do-gooders in your church and your organization.") Obama was a fan of Alinsky's realistic streak. "The key to creating successful organizations was making sure people's self-interest was met," he told me, "and not just basing it on pie-in-the-sky idealism. So there were some basic principles that remained powerful then, and in fact I still believe in."

....

From Wright and others, Obama learned that part of his problem as an organizer was that he was trying to build a confederation of churches but wasn't showing up in the pews on Sunday. When pastors asked him the inevitable questions about his own spiritual life, Obama would duck them uncomfortably. A Reverend Philips put the problem to him squarely when he learned that Obama didn't attend services. "It might help your mission if you had a church home," he told Obama. "It doesn't matter where, really. What you're asking from pastors requires us to set aside some of our more priestly concerns in favor of prophesy. That requires a good deal of faith on our part. It makes us want to know just where you're getting yours from."

After many lectures like this, Obama decided to take a second look at Wright's church. Older pastors warned him that Trinity was for "Buppies"--black urban professionals--and didn't have enough street cred. But Wright was a former Muslim and black nationalist who had studied at Howard and Chicago, and Trinity's guiding principles--what the church calls the "Black Value System"--included a "Disavowal of the Pursuit of Middleclassness.'"

....

As a result, over the years, Wright became not only Obama's pastor, but his mentor. The title of Obama's recent book, The Audacity of Hope, is based on a sermon by Wright. (It's worth noting, however, that, while Obama's book is a coolheaded appeal for common ground in an age of political polarization, Wright's sermon, "The Audacity to Hope," is a fiery jeremiad about persevering in a world of nuclear arms and racial inequality.) Wright is one of the first people Obama thanked after his Senate victory in 2004, and he recently name-checked Wright in his speech to civil rights leaders in Selma, Alabama.

....

Even at Harvard, Obama kept a foot in the world of organizing. He spent eight days in Los Angeles taking a national training course taught by the IAF, a station of the cross for Alinsky acolytes. And, after he returned to Chicago in 1991, he served on the boards of both the Woods Fund and the Joyce Foundation, which also gives grants to Alinsky-style groups, and continued to teach organizing workshops.

....

Obama initially planned to inherit the seat of a much-admired incumbent named Alice Palmer, a fixture in South Side activist circles since the '60s. Palmer had opted to run for Congress, clearing the way for Obama to replace her, but, when she lost the primary, she decided she wanted to keep her old Senate seat, after all.

Obama was faced with a decision: step aside and wait his turn or do everything he could to take down a popular incumbent. In one meeting, an old guard of black political leaders tried to force Obama to abandon the race, but he wouldn't budge. Instead of deferring to Palmer's seniority, Obama challenged the very legitimacy of her petitions to get on the ballot, dispatching aides to the Chicago Board of Elections to scour Palmer's filing papers, and, while they were at it, every other candidate's, signature by signature. Many were fake. Obama won the challenge and cleared not just Palmer but all his potential rivals from the field.

[COMMENT: Why is it racist to challenge Acorn voter registrations, but ok for Obama to have gotten his first political job by challenging opponents’ petitions to get on the ballot?]

....

Speaking of what he learned as an organizer, Obama himself told me, "I think that oftentimes ordinary citizens are taught that decisions are made based on the public interest or grand principles, when, in fact, what really moves things is money and votes and power."

....

"One of the things that community organizing teaches you is to do something called power analysis. You have to understand how to have a relationship with people in power, to be a peer with them, not to go on your knees begging but understand yourself as a co-equal and find a way that someone who has power will understand your power. That's the whole point of organizing: What is it that people in power need to accommodate your needs?"

******

Snippets from http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200312/soros:
December 2003
by George Soros
The Bubble of American Supremacy

... September 11 could not have changed the course of history to the extent that it has if President Bush had not responded to it the way he did. He declared war on terrorism, and under that guise implemented a radical foreign-policy agenda whose underlying principles predated the tragedy. Those principles can be summed up as follows: International relations are relations of power, not law; power prevails and law legitimizes what prevails. The United States is unquestionably the dominant power in the post-Cold War world; it is therefore in a position to impose its views, interests, and values. The world would benefit from adopting those values, because the American model has demonstrated its superiority. The Clinton and first Bush Administrations failed to use the full potential of American power. This must be corrected; the United States must find a way to assert its supremacy in the world.

....

The Bush doctrine, first enunciated in a presidential speech at West Point in June of 2002, and incorporated into the National Security Strategy three months later, is built on two pillars: the United States will do everything in its power to maintain its unquestioned military supremacy; and the United States arrogates the right to pre-emptive action. In effect, the doctrine establishes two classes of sovereignty: the sovereignty of the United States, which takes precedence over international treaties and obligations; and the sovereignty of all other states, which is subject to the will of the United States. This is reminiscent of George Orwell's Animal Farm: all animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.

....

It is ironic that the government of the most successful open society in the world should have fallen into the hands of people who ignore the first principles of open society. At home Attorney General John Ashcroft has used the war on terrorism to curtail civil liberties. Abroad the United States is trying to impose its views and interests through the use of military force. The invasion of Iraq was the first practical application of the Bush doctrine, and it has turned out to be counterproductive. A chasm has opened between America and the rest of the world.

....

To explain the significance of the transition, I should like to draw on my experience in the financial markets. Stock markets often give rise to a boom-bust process, or bubble. Bubbles do not grow out of thin air. They have a basis in reality—but reality as distorted by a misconception. Under normal conditions misconceptions are self-correcting, and the markets tend toward some kind of equilibrium. Occasionally, a misconception is reinforced by a trend prevailing in reality, and that is when a boom-bust process gets under way. Eventually the gap between reality and its false interpretation becomes unsustainable, and the bubble bursts.

Exactly when the boom-bust process enters far-from-equilibrium territory can be established only in retrospect. During the self-reinforcing phase participants are under the spell of the prevailing bias. Events seem to confirm their beliefs, strengthening their misconceptions. This widens the gap and sets the stage for a moment of truth and an eventual reversal. When that reversal comes, it is liable to have devastating consequences. This course of events seems to have an inexorable quality, but a boom-bust process can be aborted at any stage, and the adverse effects can be reduced or avoided altogether. Few bubbles reach the extremes of the information-technology boom that ended in 2000. The sooner the process is aborted, the better.

The quest for American supremacy qualifies as a bubble. The dominant position the United States occupies in the world is the element of reality that is being distorted. The proposition that the United States will be better off if it uses its position to impose its values and interests everywhere is the misconception. It is exactly by not abusing its power that America attained its current position.

Where are we in this boom-bust process? The deteriorating situation in Iraq is either the moment of truth or a test that, if it is successfully overcome, will only reinforce the trend.

This foreign policy is part of a comprehensive ideology customarily referred to as neoconservatism, though I prefer to describe it as a crude form of social Darwinism. I call it crude because it ignores the role of cooperation in the survival of the fittest, and puts all the emphasis on competition.

....

The war on terrorism as pursued by the Bush Administration cannot be won. On the contrary, it may bring about a permanent state of war. Terrorists will never disappear. They will continue to provide a pretext for the pursuit of American supremacy. That pursuit, in turn, will continue to generate resistance. Further, by turning the hunt for terrorists into a war, we are bound to create innocent victims. The more innocent victims there are, the greater the resentment and the better the chances that some victims will turn into perpetrators.

The terrorist threat must be seen in proper perspective. Terrorism is not new. It was an important factor in nineteenth-century Russia, and it had a great influence on the character of the czarist regime, enhancing the importance of secret police and justifying authoritarianism. More recently several European countries—Italy, Germany, Great Britain—had to contend with terrorist gangs, and it took those countries a decade or more to root them out. But those countries did not live under the spell of terrorism during all that time. Granted, using hijacked planes for suicide attacks is something new, and so is the prospect of terrorists with weapons of mass destruction. To come to terms with these threats will take some adjustment; but the threats cannot be allowed to dominate our existence. Exaggerating them will only make them worse. The most powerful country on earth cannot afford to be consumed by fear. To make the war on terrorism the centerpiece of our national strategy is an abdication of our responsibility as the leading nation in the world. Moreover, by allowing terrorism to become our principal preoccupation, we are playing into the terrorists' hands. They are setting our priorities.

A recent Council on Foreign Relations publication sketches out three alternative national-security strategies. The first calls for the pursuit of American supremacy through the Bush doctrine of pre-emptive military action. It is advocated by neoconservatives. The second seeks the continuation of our earlier policy of deterrence and containment. It is advocated by Colin Powell and other moderates, who may be associated with either political party. The third would have the United States lead a cooperative effort to improve the world by engaging in preventive actions of a constructive character. It is not advocated by any group of significance, although President Bush pays lip service to it. That is the policy I stand for.

The evidence shows the first option to be extremely dangerous, and I believe that the second is no longer practical. The Bush Administration has done too much damage to our standing in the world to permit a return to the status quo. Moreover, the policies pursued before September 11 were clearly inadequate for dealing with the problems of globalization. Those problems require collective action. The United States is uniquely positioned to lead the effort. We cannot just do anything we want, as the Iraqi situation demonstrates, but nothing much can be done in the way of international cooperation without the leadership—or at least the participation—of the United States.

Globalization has rendered the world increasingly interdependent, but international politics is still based on the sovereignty of states. What goes on within individual states can be of vital interest to the rest of the world, but the principle of sovereignty militates against interfering in their internal affairs. How to deal with failed states and oppressive, corrupt, and inept regimes? How to get rid of the likes of Saddam? There are too many such regimes to wage war against every one. This is the great unresolved problem confronting us today.

I propose replacing the Bush doctrine of pre-emptive military action with preventive action of a constructive and affirmative nature. Increased foreign aid or better and fairer trade rules, for example, would not violate the sovereignty of the recipients. Military action should remain a last resort. The United States is currently preoccupied with issues of security, and rightly so. But the framework within which to think about security is collective security. Neither nuclear proliferation nor international terrorism can be successfully addressed without international cooperation. The world is looking to us for leadership. We have provided it in the past; the main reason why anti-American feelings are so strong in the world today is that we are not providing it in the present.

******************

COMMENT: Have blue-blood Republicans, in effect, become servants of the same cabal of international socialists as George Soros, bent on reducing most of us to service as debt slaves?

RED ASS MODERATES NEED TO NOT BE HOODWINKED!

****

Soros endorses Obama: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BK5Dm7tbm9g
Buffet: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ladJCfaDpr4; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ejIWp5E8_Fo
Vultures in wait: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AvXv9GhfH4k
Amero and Bildenbergs: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fMS8ojFlSxE
Amero: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hiPrsc9g98
North America Security and Prosperity: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T74VA3xU0EA
Gordon Brown: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uv5cqh26CC0
Ron Paul --- N.W.O.: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z8DpKKSmaa8
Rothschild: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZftD3gfW3g
Soros attacking capitalism and Reagan: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uv5cqh26CC0
Obama lying about ACORN: http://sweetness-light.com/archive/obama-continues-to-lie-about-acorn
Olbermann Pimping: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k7_P-U-V_J0
Why Obama would govern from the far left: See http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives2/2008/10/021758.php.

****

FALSE PROPHETS AND Faux Religion:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/10/obamas_religious_ruse_the_cult_1.html.
.

Orwellian Lunchtime Manipulation of News and Information:

Snippets from http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/10/hedge_funds_politics_and_the_m.html:
October 21, 2008
Hedge Funds, Politics, and the Market Crash
By Ed Lasky

....

The collapse in the American stock markets was a calamity for the campaign of John McCain. In September, McCain was running strongly against Barack Obama. Some polls had him leading Barack Obama by 3 percent before the market broke. By October 7th, Obama had taken the lead across America. What changed in one month? The trigger was the market crash. Who pulled the trigger and why? Who benefitted?

....

Who else may have benefited? Indeed, who may have helped precipitate the crisis by taking actions that would weaken the ABX Index? We don't know, but there are some obvious suspects.

George Soros for one.

....

Soros's hedge fund -- like most hedge funds -- is based overseas and escapes much scrutiny and regulation (more on this later). Word of Paulson's early success got "around in the world of hedge funds" and Soros invited Paulson for lunch, "asking for details of how he laid his bets, with instruments that didn't exist a few years ago"

Paulson made billions betting against the ABX Index. When you bet against the value of an index it exerts pressure on it -- hastening a decline and thus a decline in the value of the products that are priced using this index.

....

Robert Morgenthau, the legendary district attorney for Manhattan, penned an op-ed for the Wall Street Journal recently highlighting the dangers of overseas hedge funds (Too Much Money is Beyond Legal Reach):

A major factor in the current financial crisis is the lack of transparency in the activities of the principal players in the financial markets. This opaqueness is compounded by vast sums of money that lie outside the jurisdiction of U.S. regulators and other supervisory authorities.

The $700 billion in Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson's current proposed rescue plan pales in comparison to the volume of dollars that now escape the watchful eye, not only of U.S. regulators, but from the media and the general public as well.

There is $1.9 trillion, almost all of it run out of the New York metropolitan area, that sits in the Cayman Islands, a secrecy jurisdiction. Another $1.5 trillion is lodged in four other secrecy jurisdictions.

....

Hedge funds are a major source of donations for Democrats. The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, which Schumer heads, received $779,100 from employees of private-equity head funds in June 2007 (as the tax battle was heating up in the Senate), far exceeding the $60,000 received by the Republican Senate Committee.

....

... sources have mentioned that "financial terrorism" may be at work.

....

It seems that Obama was just lucky that a market slide seems to have decisively swung the campaign in his favor. That Obama was again lucky that the meltdown occurred just as John McCain was overtaking him in the polls. And that Obama simply lucked out that one of his most influential supporters, one of the world's most adept fund managers (as the Bank of England learned the hard way) also benefited from the meltdown in the markets.

This financial tsunami, and its timing, like the election-eve sex-scandal exposés of his opponents during his Illinois races, might just be one in a long chain of Barack Obama's "lucky" breaks.

If so, Barack Obama must be the luckiest politician, ever.

....

Market manipulations to achieve geopolitical ends. Is it beyond the realm of possibility?

....

And here's a final, unpleasant thought: Pakistan. This is a country with 25 percent inflation and a currency in free fall; a country with a jihadist insurgency on its border with Afghanistan, permanent hostility on its border with India, nuclear weapons and a tradition of street demonstrations in response to suspect newspaper articles. Dozens of people, with all kinds of agendas, have an interest in using financial markets to destabilize Pakistan, and Afghanistan along with it. Eventually, one of them will.


BTW — HOW TO TELL IF YOU’RE AN ELITIST — SEE: http://townhall.com/Columnists/BenShapiro/2008/10/21/you_know_youre_an_elitist_if.