Spread the Tax Hooey!

The problem with Obama is a simple one. One association does not a radical make. But in Obama's case, the list of left-wing radical mentors and associates is seemingly endless, (Davis, Ayers, Wright, Khalidi , etc., etc.) with a new revelation practically every day. With that trend, a picture begins to emerge, and that picture is that Obama is as steeped, not in just left-wing political thought, but in radical left-wing economic and race ideology, to the same extent that Pat Robertson was steeped in the ideology of the radical Religious Right. I would not have voted for Pat Robertson for dog catcher, and for similar reasons, I will not vote for Obama.

In the exchange with "Joe the plumber" Obama unintentionally revealed that he really is as radical as his early political mentors and acquaintances, Davis, Ayers, Wright, Khalidi etc., (gee, there sure seem to be a lot of them) and that he is into the failed economic policy of wealth redistribution. Now there is absolute proof. In 2001, Obama, the "community organizer" turned legislator, said in an interview:

"And I think one of the tragedies of the civil rights movement was that the civil rights movement became so court-focused, I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and organizing activities on the ground that are able to bring about the coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributive change, and in some ways we still suffer from that,"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iivL4c_3pck

2001 Chicago Public Radio Interview.

Obama's tax and spending plans alone would be bad enough, but add Reid and Pelosi to the mix, with the three of them controlling both houses of Congress and the executive branch without any effective restraint, and you have something that should causes concern even among moderate Democrats.
See Wall Street Journal: A Liberal Supermajority:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122420205889842989.html

Indeed, some democrats are publically saying as much. See Barney Franks comments on the news, including face the nation last week, stating essentially that Democrats in Congress intend to greatly raise taxes and go on a spending spree.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u1Mazjm_A5k

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cJGnSAlqjoU

See http://www.taxfoundation.org/blog/show/23617.html

Obama's ill-conceived programs will require him to tax, and his health care plan alone is a substantial hidden tax on all business, large an small. In reality, it does not really matter who he taxes, those taxes are going to be passed through the economy. He has to tax, because it is they only way he can pay for his massive social engineering experiments. Any first year economics student knows that taxation is a tool used to contract an economy experiencing inflation, because it reduces demand by reducing the amount of money individuals and businesses have to spend. It is contractionary, which is exactly what you do not want to do when the problem is that the economy is contracting already into recession. Like Hoover and FDR, Obama's plans will only make it worse for longer.

See e.g. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/10/03/opinion/main4499465.shtml
And
http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/FDR-s-Policies-Prolonged-Depression-5409.aspx


The democrats failed social engineering policies in the housing market are what brought us to ruin. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lr1M1T2Y314&feature=related
Even Bill Clinton says so. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XsynspIqAoE
Obama and a supermajority of Democrats simply is not the change we need, nor is it change we can afford.

Obama's plan for jobs on Pennsylvania, Virginia , West Virginia , Kentucky, Tennessee, and other states, and Obama's plan for dealing with the high cost of energy, including electricity generation.

An audiotape of an interview Barack Obama did in January 2008 with The San Francisco Chronicle has surfaced in the final days of the presidential campaign. On the tape Obama tells the interviewer, . " so if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can. . . It's just that it will bankrupt them because they're going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that's being emitted."

Now, why would Obama say that in San Francisco and not Pennsylvania? We have seen this before, yes? Something about guns and religion.

And why did Newsweek take their story on the Pennsylvania campaign down yesterday after this story broke?

Obama said he denounced and left the radical Trinity United Church but it???s not true!!

Obama has Trinity United pastor Rev Ottis Moss accompanying him on his campaign!!

More and more disturbing stuff on Obama's past and his real intentions are just starting to surface.

As I predicted over a year ago ..... Obama is a big fraud and America is being duped !!

???Nowforsomethingotherthanthetruth??? exemplifies the measures employed by the McCain campaign starting with the anonymous smear emails that began when McC hired the Bush propaganda machine.

This deception campaign tries to benefit from party loyalties. It preys upon hate, prejudice and fear, and on the ???unanswered questions??? fabricated by the anonymous emails this campaign perpetrated. Links to debunks of many of those fabrications are in an earlier posting.

This is by far the greatest extreme ever in American politics. It is a fundamental threat to our political process. It would further entrench the Bush operatives who took over the McC campaign, and the republican lobbyists who represent only the megarich who looted our economy.

McC was a maverick. He promised to root out the lobbyists he said are what???s wrong with Washington. He said he would not take the low road employed by the Bush machine when it smeared him. He sold out when he got behind and subscribed to the ideology that the end justifies the means.

McC would continue the Bush tax give away to the rich that McC previously opposed and called ???irresponsible??? because ???it only benefits the rich.???

McC now wants to give more billions in tax give aways to oil companies that have just reported the largest profits in history for two consecutive quarters, while he claims that lowering taxes for everyone under $250k in after-deduction income will somehow keep businessmen from starting businesses.

???Nowfor??? has employed many of the themes in the anonymous viral emails. He recently said it was ???revealed that Obama has PLO buddies??? referring to Rashid Khalidi to whom McC donated $440k:

http://richmonddemocrat.blogspot.com/2008/10/mccain-funded-rashid-khalidi.html Guilt by association.

"Nowfor" continues repasting that the cause of our problem is a law decades old that encourages loans to qualified low income people.

Alan Greenspan said the cause is that an entire financial system was built outside of regulation; "we trusted" these self-interested looters ???to regulate themselves???. Credit Default Swaps resulted. They increased from $106 trillion in '02 to $531 trillion under R stewardship.

The legitimate news has reported that Fannie and Freddie paid many millions to McC's campaign manager, Rick Davis, who received up to $35K/mo. from Fannie and Freddie from 2000 to while he has been McC's campaign manager.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/22/us/politics/22mccain.html and http://www.newsweek.com/id/164732/page/1

Trillions were looted from our economy because the Rs allowed it. The Rs, including McC's campaign manager, are in the pockets of big money.

Without solutions, it is necessary to campaign with deception, misdirection, fear, smears, hypocrisy.

Attempts to hijack our political process with deceit and abuse of the trust of party loyalties are reasons I'm voting for Obama after 40 years of never voted for a Dem.

A 40

With thanks to wendydk, here are answers to some of the smears against Obama using various non-partisan sources. Investigate for yourselves before believing anyone's version of the facts or "unanswered questions":

Where Obama was born and his birth certificate: http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html

Rezko: http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/money.asp

Ayers: http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/ayers.asp

Rashid Kahlidi: http://jews4barack.com/react/?p=23 and McCain???s donations to him http://richmonddemocrat.blogspot.com/2008/10/mccain-funded-rashid-khalidi.html

Are three former Fannie Mae executives economic advisers to Obama?
http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/are_three_former_fannie_mae_executives_economic.html

Is Obama's brother really dirt poor in Kenya and living on a dollar a day?
http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/is_obamas_brother_really_dirt_poor_in.html

How many times did Obama vote PRESENT as a state senator and why?
http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/how_many_times_did_obama_vote_present.html

Obama"s relationships with corrupt Chicago politicians
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/guilt_and_associations.html

NRA ads regarding Obama violating second amendment right to bear arms
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/nra_targets_obama.html

Jerome Corsis The Obama Nation:
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/corsis_dull_hatchet.html

Obama wants to teach sex ed to Kindergartners?
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/off_base_on_sex_ed.html

Obama plans painful tax increases for working families:
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/a_new_stitch_in_a_bad_pattern.html

Context Included: Obama on Iran
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/context_included_obama_on_iran.html

Did Obama write that he would stand with the Muslims and that he nurses a pervasive sense of grievance and animosity toward whites:
http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/did_obama_write_that_he_would_stand.html

Other purported quotes from Obama???s books: http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/ownwords.asp

Did Hamas endorse Barack Obama?
http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/did_hamas_endorse_barack_obama.html

Claims that Obama is a Muslim, attended a Wahabi school in Indonesia, took his Senate oath on the Koran, refuses to recite the Pledge of Allegiance and is part of an Islamic plot to take over the U.S.
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/sliming_obama.html

Barack and Michelle Obama spent $450 on lobster and caviar at the Waldorf at taxpayer expense
http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/did_michelle_obama_spend_450_on_room.html

50 Obama lies and counting
http://jews4barack.com/react/?p=9

The Jeremiah Wright and Louis Farrakhan Controversies
http://jews4barack.com/react/?p=21


A 40 year republican

And lets not forget the Court, and decisioins like Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. 469 (2005).

What does redistributive mean. Well, remember that it was the liberal Left-Wing Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court that brought us this little jewel, holding that the government could take your real property, like your home, not for public use like a road or school, but to give to another private individual, such as a political contributor or other party hack or interest group. You remember this one.

Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. 469 (2005), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States involving the use of eminent domain to transfer land from one private owner to another to further economic development. The case arose from the condemnation by New London, Connecticut, of privately owned real property so that it could be used as part of a comprehensive redevelopment plan. The Court held in a 5-4 decision that the general benefits a community enjoyed from economic growth qualified such redevelopment plans as a permissible "public use" under the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment. Justice John Paul Stevens wrote the majority opinion; he was joined by Justices Anthony Kennedy, David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer.

The decision was widely criticized by American politicians and the general public. Many members of the general public viewed the outcome as a gross violation of property rights and as a misinterpretation of the Fifth Amendment, the consequence of which would be to benefit large corporations at the expense of individual homeowners and local communities. Some in the legal profession construe the public's outrage as being directed not at the interpretation of legal principles involved in the case, but at the broad moral principles of the general outcome.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelo_v._City_of_New_London

The Wall Street crisis was planned the night of Obama's meeting at Bill Ayres home to put Obama in The White House. Together they put a beautiful plan into place.

This Strategy was first elucidated in the 1966 issue of 'The Nation' Magazine by a pair of radical Socialist Columbia University professors, Richard Andrew Cloward and Frances Fox Piven.

David Horowitz summarizes it as:

"The strategy of forcing political change through an orchestrated crisis. The "Cloward-Piven Strategy" seeks to hasten the fall of Capitalism by overloading the Government bureaucracy with a flood of impossible demands, thus pushing society into crisis and economic collapse.
unquote

Obama begin with ACORN by funneling millions into their organization. He then trained ACORN to stage protests in banks to force them to issue risky loans or they would be threatened to face racial charges. ACORN was trained to intimidate financial institutions into giving ???Ninja??? loans to people with NO assets, NO job and NO income, who couldn???t afford these loans.

That caused the housing bubble two years ago it was by ACORN's actions they were able to destroy our credit system.

As this played out, D-Barney Frank and D-Chris Dodd were able to cover up the millions of improvident loans to these bad risky house buyers. And Barney Frank and his chums successfully were able to block all of President Bush's attempts to put a rein on this problem.

So Fannie & Freddie was forced to purchase all these failed subprime mortgages.

Then both Frank and Dodd denied that there were any problems, and refused the Bush Admin. requests to set up a regulatory agency to watch over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and they were still pushing for these agencies to go even further in promoting sub-prime mortgage loans almost up to the 'minute they failed'.

Democrats then blamed Bush saying it happened on his watch knowing it would hurt the Republican Party in the election setting it up that Barack Obama could use this to his advantage.

Karl Marx once compared a Revolutionary struggle with the work of the mole, who sometimes burrows so far beneath the ground that he leaves no trace of his movement on the surface.

Barack Obama is that Marxist mole !

BREAKING NEWS ALERT....

Obama taped conversation with San Francisco Chronicle states his policies ???will bankrupt coal mining operations that produce gas emissions in states like Pennsylvania, Ohio, Virginia and North Carolina
which it will cause energy prices to skyrocket....." .....more info nobody knew until now about what Obama wants to do!!

The problem with Obama is a simple one. One association does not a radical make. But in Obama's case, the list of left-wing radical mentors and associates is seemingly endless, (Davis, Ayers, Wright, Khalidi , etc., etc.) with a new revelation practically every day. With that trend, a picture begins to emerge, and that picture is that Obama is as steeped, not in just left-wing political thought, but in radical left-wing economic and race ideology, to the same extent that Pat Robertson was steeped in the ideology of the radical Religious Right. I would not have voted for Pat Robertson for dog catcher, and for similar reasons, I will not vote for Obama.

"Nowforthetruth"; See below what Greenspan said about your bogus thesis.

You are also now selling guilt by association that Obama has PLO buddies referring to Rashid Khalidi. McCain donated $440k to Khalidi.

See for yourselves at: http://richmonddemocrat.blogspot.com/2008/10/mccain-funded-rashid-khalidi.html

"Nowforthetruth", a little more "truth" about guilt by association....

"Nowforthetruth" also said: "Nins, all you prove is that you have perpetual PMS and cannot read. If you are as careless in your practice, you are a danger to your profession." You reveal too much of yourself "Nowforthetruth".

"Nowforthetruth" continues repasting that the cause of our problem is a law decades old that encourages loans to qualified low income people. "Nowforthetruth" continues to repeat well known deceit.

Alan Greenspan stated recently that the problem was not anything like that. Rather, he stated that an entire financial system was built outside of regulation, and "we trusted" these self-interested looters to regulate themselves. Credit Default Swaps were the result.

Credit Default Swaps increased from $106 trillion in '02 to $531 trillion under the R stewardship. No regulation.

While there are several variations of a viral email that tries to blame a few thousands of political donations to some Ds, the actual, legitimate news has reported that Fannie and Freddie paid many millions to Republican lobbyists to lobby Rs, only, to PREVENT REGULATION.

McCain's campaign manager, Rick Davis, received up to $35K/mo. from Fannie and Freddie from 2000 to present, to lobby Rs,only, against regulation. Freddie paid Rick Davis while he has been McC's campaign manager. Freddie donated $250k to the R convention.

These facts are everywhere in the legitimate news: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/22/us/politics/22mccain.html and http://www.newsweek.com/id/164732/page/1 There's much more legitimate news on this.

Trillions were looted from our economy because the Rs allowed it. It is inescapable that the Rs, most prominently McC's campaign manager, were in the pockets of big money while they drove the buss off the cliff with us in it.

You can try to distract people with fears about 'those guys'. Lies, distortion, deception. 'Socialist' is only the last in a long, now desperate, list of labels you have tried to pin on 'that one'. That's all you have left.

Is your most recent reposting here directed to fears about "Socialism", or is it just innuendo, or are we trying to fold in a little racism too?

Since we have no more ideas, let's keep running our campaign on fear, smears and hypocrisy.

Keep talking "Nowforthetruth", you're really helping. You keep demonstrating that we all have to vote against lies and propaganda and attempts to hijack our political process with deceit. Your actions are the kinds of reasons that I'm voting for Obama after 40

Well, one thing we know. Obama won't be a good thing if your working in the coal industry, an industry that uses coal or electricity generated from coal, or in a coal producing State. In a taped interveiw in January, Obama states:

"So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can," Obama said. "It's just that it will bankrupt them because they're going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that's being emitted."

Propaganda anyone?

Some of us built businesses, paid employees, and paid taxes at the highest rate under the Reagan tax structure for well over a decade, and didn't mind or consider those who paid less ignorant, naïve or paying too little.

Naive is to be afraid of the expiration of the Bush tax give away to the rich, and think that is "raising taxes" that will in any way keep business people from creating and building businesses.

It's what, before John McCain fell behind in the election, McC called "irresponsible" because it "benefits only the rich???.

McC now has sold out to the Bush machine that enabled the megarich to loot trillions from our country, while they pay taxes well below what they did under Reagan.

But worse, McC wants to give additional billions of tax give aways to the oil companies, the one's that just reported the biggest quarterly pofits in the history of the world, breaking the then newest record they set the quarter before.

Allowing the Bush tax give away to the rich will only allow that give away to expire.

Only those who make more than $250K AFTER DEDUCTIONS will see their taxes rise back to where they were before the Bush tax give away to the rich.

The McC/Bush propaganda machine has duped anyone who thinks the McC tax position does anything but further enrich the megarich, and think that is to your benefit.

The real threat to us is the Bush/McC propaganda machine that misinforms and scares people into voting to perpetuate the looting of our country by the megarich.

???Country first??? right? Who do you think the lobbyists running McC???s campaign are looking out for?

A 40 year republican

Obama's Links To Radicals Starting To Surface!! www.newsmax.com/timmer

Obama-Farrakhan Ties Are Close, Ex-Farrakhan Aide Says

A former top deputy to Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan tells Newsmax that Barack Obama???s ties to the black nationalist movement in Chicago run deep, and that for many years the two men have had ???an open line between them??? to discuss policy and strategy, either directly or through intermediaries.

???Remember that for years, if you were a politician in Chicago, you had to have some type of relationship with Louis Farrakhan. You had to. If you didn???t, you would be ostracized out of black Chicago,??? said Dr. Vibert White Jr., who spent most of his adult life as a member and ultimately top officer of the Nation of Islam.
White broke with the group in 1995 and is now a professor of African-American history at the University of Central Florida in Orlando.
White said Obama was ???part of the Chicago scene??? where Farrakhan, Jesse Jackson, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright Jr. and radicals would go to each other???s events and support each other???s causes.
???Even though Chicago is the third-largest city in the country, within the black community, the political and militant nationalist community is very small. So it wouldn???t be uncommon for [Obama and Farrakhan] to show up at events together, or at least be there and communicate with each other,??? White told Newsmax.
The Anti-Defamation League has denounced Farrakhan and his Nation of Islam as a ???hate group.???
Farrakhan has called Jews ???bloodsuckers,??? ???satanic??? and accused them of running the slave trade. He has labeled gays as ???degenerates.??? In a 2006 speech, the ADL again condemned Farrakhan when he said: ???These false Jews promote the filth of Hollywood that is seeding the American people and the people of the world and bringing you down in moral strength. ??? It's the wicked Jews the false Jews that are promoting lesbianism, homosexuality. It's wicked Jews, false Jews that make it a crime for you to preach the word of God, then they call you homophobic!"

Propaganda anyone?

Some of us built businesses, paid employees, and paid taxes at the highest rate under the Reagan tax structure for well over a decade, and didn't mind or consider those who paid less ignorant, naïve or paying too little.

Naive is to be afraid of the expiration of the Bush tax give away to the rich, and think that is "raising taxes" that will in any way keep business people from creating and building businesses.

It's just what, before John McCain fell behind in the election, McC called "irresponsible" because it "benefits only the rich???.

McC now has sold out to the Bush machine that enabled the megarich to loot trillions from our country, while they pay taxes well below what they did under Reagan.

But worse, McC wants to give additional billions of tax give aways to the oil companies, the one's that just reported the biggest quarterly pofits in the history of the world, breaking the then newest record they set the quarter before.

The McC/Bush propaganda machine has duped anyone who thinks the McC tax position does anything but further enrich the megarich, and think that is to your benefit.

The real threat to us is the Bush/McC propaganda machine that misinforms and scares people into voting to perpetuate the looting of our country by the megarich.

A 40 year republican

Sarah takes all the money she can from federal tax earmarks, hires a lobbyist to get more, and repeatedly tells the electorate that she told Congress "no thanks" on The Bridge To Nowhere, but in fact she took the federal tax funds that were earmarked for it.

She wasn't distributing federal tax funds, 'cause she put THOSE FEDERAL TAX FUNDS into a DIFFERENT POCKET from the pocket from the funds she distributed to Alaskans.

I bet those federal tax funds she didn't REDISTRIBUTE are actually different dollars than the ones I paid for federal taxes.

A lot of the money she distributed came from her raising taxes on the oil companies. The oil companies had to recoup those higher taxes through higher gas prices. I'm also certain that none of the dollars I spent for higher gas prices, were included in the dollars Sarah redistributed to Alaskans.

And since she gave those dollars to all Alaskans, it's not true that she took money from some and gave it to others.

I see. That's really, really, really different, now that I understand. According to "Nowforthetruth" that's not REDISTRIBUTION, that's capitalism.

I see...

A 40 year republican

What does redistributive mean. Well, remember that it was the Left-Wing of the Supreme Court that brought us this little jewel, holding that the government could take your real property, like your home, not for public use, but to give to another private individual, such as a political contributor or other party hack or interest group.

Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. 469 (2005), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States involving the use of eminent domain to transfer land from one private owner to another to further economic development. The case arose from the condemnation by New London, Connecticut, of privately owned real property so that it could be used as part of a comprehensive redevelopment plan. The Court held in a 5-4 decision that the general benefits a community enjoyed from economic growth qualified such redevelopment plans as a permissible "public use" under the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment. Justice John Paul Stevens wrote the majority opinion; he was joined by Justices Anthony Kennedy, David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer

The decision was widely criticized by American politicians and the general public. Many members of the general public viewed the outcome as a gross violation of property rights and as a misinterpretation of the Fifth Amendment, the consequence of which would be to benefit large corporations at the expense of individual homeowners and local communities. Some in the legal profession construe the public's outrage as being directed not at the interpretation of legal principles involved in the case, but at the broad moral principles of the general outcome.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelo_v._City_of_New_London