Psychiatrist: Obama corrupting America with socialism

brucefan

EOG Dedicated
Psychiatrist: Obama corrupting America with socialism
Book author warns economic 'rescue' will turn citizens into 'wards of state'


By Chelsea Schilling
? 2009 WorldNetDaily

Only a month into Barack Obama's presidency, an acclaimed psychiatrist is warning that Americans are being slowly corrupted by socialism as Obama's policies intrude into their economic, social and political lives ? a tactic he believes will secure future votes for the Democratic Party.

"We have a desperate population, and it's feeling even more desperate than usual," Dr. Lyle Rossiter told WND. "People are really quite frightened. They're looking for magic, and they think they are going to find it in this man."

Rossiter is a forensic psychiatrist and author of "The Liberal Mind: The Psychological Causes of Political Madness." In his book, he explains how the kind of liberalism being displayed by both Barack Obama and the Democratic Party can only be understood as a psychological disorder. He examines how modern liberal collectivism undermines the legal and moral foundations of ordered liberty.

Rossiter warned that Obama, after only six weeks in office, is well on his way to institutionalizing a modern parental state ? and his socialist programs will ultimately damage the moral fiber of the American people.

"This is not a stimulus program that is going to work economically," Rossiter said. "In the meantime, the character of the people ? virtues of self-reliance, self-direction, self-determination, altruistic concern for others, charitable care for others rather than government-mandated welfare programs, regulation and taxation ? all the capacities that made this country great are being contaminated.

"We are being corrupted by these programs."

Rossiter said Obama has seduced Americans into believing he can deliver them from economic distress associated with the housing, banking and unemployment crises.

"He has a particular gift for rhetorical speech that's inspiring, seductive and inviting," he said. "He's a quite charming person in his manner. People have been looking for someone to rescue them, and Obama has presented himself as the hero of the day."

However, Rossiter predicts Obama's collectivist rescue plan will end in disaster.

"He's headed for a very severe fall because the expectations are far in excess of what anyone could possibly provide," he said. "We've reached the point where, not only can the economy not respond to the stimulus, we have an incredible amount of debt. The entire project is going to collapse, and he will be humiliated."

Human nature is not conducive to socialism, Rossiter warned. Imposition of a collectivist system and policies encouraging citizens to seek help through government intervention and social programs may prove to be a death blow to the nation's spirit and liberties.

"If you keep trying to do it, you are going to destroy the character of the people," he said. "You may be able to subjugate them and get them into this dependent state, but, ultimately, society collapses because it's conceptually flawed."

While liberal policies eventually fail, he said the nation may suffer massive economic damage from oppressive taxation, stifling regulation and depreciated currencies; massive political damage in the form of irrational expectations of what government can and should do for the people; and, most of all, the permanent corruption of citizens by destroying their reverence for self-reliance, voluntary cooperation and genuine altruism.


"What Obama and the Democrats are doing is a profoundly political move to increase the numbers of voters by getting them on welfare so they will continue to vote Democratic," he said." Their immigration program is geared toward the same end ? to provide legalization and benefits for illegal immigrants because they know 70 percent of those people voted Democratic."

Rossiter said the good news is that the collectivist agenda always self-destructs because it profoundly misconceives human nature and the human condition, but it will not do so before great damage has been done. It will attack the moral and ethical foundations of liberty, repeatedly violate the laws of economics and corrupt the character of the people as it invites them to become wards of the state.

"All of my fears in 'The Liberal Mind' are developing faster than I thought they would," Rossiter said. "It was bad enough under Bush, who expanded government beyond all bounds, federalized education and further socialized health care with a drug bill for seniors. It will get worse under Obama."



Socialism is on the Move"

 

brucefan

EOG Dedicated
Re: Psychiatrist: Obama corrupting America with socialism

How to Achieve Socialism
By Jacob Hornberger



Have you ever wondered how countries such as Cuba, North Korea, and China became completely socialist? It's really not a mystery. Government officials, most of whom suffer from an insatiable thirst for power, seize upon some human tragedy or disaster and tell the people, "If you will just give us power over your lives and fortunes, we will taken care of you and protect you from harm." The citizenry, many of whom live lives of fear and insecurity, cannot pass up the bargain. What could be better than to be take care of by a paternalistic state and protected from the bad things that life presents?

Of course, it's all a scam, one in which people surrender their freedom in the hope of achieving a feeling of safety and security, only to find that they are just as insecure as ever, if not more so, given the brutal methods that government resorts to in order to maintain its control.
As government wields increasing control over the lives and fortunes of the citizenry, the tendency to blame government itself for the problems dissipates. Like children who are scared of antagonizing their parents, who wield life or death power over them, adults in a socialist society are scared to death to upset the entity in charge of taking care of them.

I had a first-hand experience with this phenomenon when I visited Cuba several years ago. A young cab driver and his wife told me why Cubans must be very careful about criticizing the government or its socialist system. It's not just the nonexistence of civil liberties but also because of Cuba's socialist economic system.

Keep in mind that in a purely socialist system, the government is the owner of everything. In Cuba, while there were a few small exceptions when I was there, for all practical purposes the state was the sole employer. Let that sink in: Virtually everyone in Cuba works for the state. Thus, if an employee gets fired, he has no other employer with whom to go to work. If the state wants to get nasty by refusing to rehire a person, it can mean death by starvation.

The cab driver told me that the state never uses that power in such a brutal way. Instead, it simply transfers independent-minded employees to divisions of the "company" in other towns and cities. Thus, the cab driver told me that the state could separate him and his wife by transferring him to a city hundreds of miles away while retaining his wife in Havana.

Now, you might say, "But America still has features of a free-market system and so it's not like in Cuba. Here, private businesses still exist, people are still free to trade, and workers are free to quit their jobs and go to others."

That's true but the problem we're facing is that unless the American people put a stop to it, the inexorable trend is toward a pure socialist system. Ever since the 1920s, each new socialist and interventionist program has brought new crises, which then have been used as the excuse for new socialist and interventionist programs.

Everywhere you look today here in the United States, there is a crisis: Social Security, the drug war, Medicare, Medicaid, the monetary system, the banking system, the financial system, FDIC, welfare, terrorism, immigration. There is obviously a common denominator in all this: the federal government, and specifically its socialist and interventionist (and imperialist) programs.

But we're not supposed to say that. Instead, we're expected to repeat the official mantras that everyone is taught in public school and in state-supported universities: The reasons for all these crises and failures is deregulation, insufficient regulation, the wrong people in office, speculators, greed, OPEC, terrorists, Muslims, illegal aliens, or whatever. We're simply not supposed to even suggest that it's the system itself that is the problem.
In Cuba, this mindset is manifested by a steadfast insistence that Cuba's economic misery is due solely to the U.S. embargo, not Cuba's socialist system. In the United States, it's manifested by a steadfast insistence that the Great Depression was caused by free enterprise and greed and saved by Roosevelt's socialist and interventionist programs. For that matter, just pointing out that Roosevelt's programs were socialistic and fascistic in nature is practically considered an act of heresy, given the idol status that the paternalistic state has achieved for many Americans.

As Ludwig von Mises pointed out, the never-ending series of interventions ultimately leads to a complete nationalization of everything. Thus, it's no surprise that U.S. statists are now calling for a complete government takeover of the banking industry, just like in the socialist paradise of Cuba. What next -- a nationalization of the oil industry, just like in Venezuela and Mexico?

That's the road America is headed down and has been heading down for several decades -- the road to socialism, the road to serfdom. The only issue is whether freedom-loving Americans will put a stop to it before it's too late.

Jacob G. Hornberger is founder and president of The Future of Freedom Foundation. He was born and raised in Laredo, Texas, and received his B.A. in economics from Virginia Military Institute and his law degree from the University of Texas. He was a trial attorney for twelve years in Texas. He also was an adjunct professor at the University of Dallas, where he taught law and economics. In 1987, Mr. Hornberger left the practice of law to become director of programs at The Foundation for Economic Education in Irvington-on-Hudson, New York, publisher of The Freeman.

He is a regular writer for The Future of Freedom Foundation's publication, Freedom Daily, and is a co-editor or contributor to the eight books that have been published by the Foundation.
 

Doc Mercer

EOG Master
Re: Psychiatrist: Obama corrupting America with socialism

Joey C has some room at his "pad" in Canada for ya Bruce

hate to see ya get stressed out!!!
 

gopherbob

EOG Dedicated
Re: Psychiatrist: Obama corrupting America with socialism

i think socialism is a very good thing. in fact, after they nationalize the banks, i want our government to nationalize the auto industry as well as the oil industry.
 

Doc Mercer

EOG Master
Re: Psychiatrist: Obama corrupting America with socialism

Bruce:

if you and Glenn Beck and Wayne Allan Root hate this country so much why not consider the advantages of Canada?

Hell .. throw in Joey C and that makes for an "entertaining" weekend golf outing at the golf course where Beck can yell: "that fuckin Liberal Media is on my mind ... that is why I five putted partner ..."
 

brucefan

EOG Dedicated
Re: Psychiatrist: Obama corrupting America with socialism

i think socialism is a very good thing. in fact, after they nationalize the banks, i want our government to nationalize the auto industry as well as the oil industry.


All righty then..


 

Doc Mercer

EOG Master
Re: Psychiatrist: Obama corrupting America with socialism

I guess that means Brucefan also hated Reagan as well since Ronnie was a
Socialist as well

Barack and Ronnie .... shame on them Socialists !!!
 

Doc Mercer

EOG Master
Re: Psychiatrist: Obama corrupting America with socialism

Best part?

Palin runs a Socialist state in Alaska

:LMAO:LMAO:LMAO:LMAO:LMAO
 
Re: Psychiatrist: Obama corrupting America with socialism

i think socialism is a very good thing. in fact, after they nationalize the banks, i want our government to nationalize the auto industry as well as the oil industry.

If nationalization works better in one industry, why not nationalize everything and dissolve the free market (individual free choice) all together? (Not a rhetorical question.)

I mean, unless I'm reading you incorrectly, you're saying government-run anything is more efficient, productive and "progressive" than anything in the private sector, right?

So, gopherbob, my next question is this:

How many government resources would Obama have to "invest" in his computer company to produce one of these?



:+clueless
 

Doc Mercer

EOG Master
Re: Psychiatrist: Obama corrupting America with socialism

Joey:

interesting how Reagan was a Socialist .... have you changed your views?
 

gopherbob

EOG Dedicated
Re: Psychiatrist: Obama corrupting America with socialism

If nationalization works better in one industry, why not nationalize everything and dissolve the free market (individual free choice) all together? (Not a rhetorical question.)

I mean, unless I'm reading you incorrectly, you're saying government-run anything is more efficient, productive and "progressive" than anything in the private sector, right?

So, gopherbob, my next question is this:

How many government resources would Obama have to "invest" in his computer company to produce one of these?



:+clueless
i just want the banking, auto, and the oil industries nationalized now. aw, what the hell, throw in the airlines and utilities too. i didn't say nationalize everything,
just a choice few industries.
 
Re: Psychiatrist: Obama corrupting America with socialism

i just want the banking, auto, and the oil industries nationalized now. aw, what the hell, throw in the airlines and utilities too. i didn't say nationalize everything,
just a choice few industries.

Fair enough.

Why only a few "choice" industries and not everything?

What criteria are you using for picking winners and losers?
 

brucefan

EOG Dedicated
Re: Psychiatrist: Obama corrupting America with socialism

Obama Just Might Be a Socialist


Monday, July 20, 2009, 10:56 AM
By Wayne Allyn Root, Author
The Conscience of a Libertarian: Empowering the Citizen Revolution with God, Guns, Gambling & Tax Cuts


Have you read the headlines this past week? Obama has proposed trillions of dollars in new taxes, and trillions of dollars of irresponsible, unsustainable new spending. With no way to pay for it all?except to wipe out small businessmen and women, and wipe out the upper middle class?and enslave our children and grandchildren with a mountain of debt and heavy taxes for a lifetime. It is, plainly and simply, the VERY definition of Socialism.

Let's say it out loud- Obama is a Socialist. There isn't any need to debate anymore. No point in even arguing. If liberals and the biased liberal media won't face facts?I'm going to put the facts right in their faces. Up close and personal- Jeff Foxworthy style. Jeff Foxworthy literally defined rednecks?he didn't leave any doubt. All you could do was laugh and say, ?Jeff hit that one right on the nose.? Well I'm going to now define a Socialist. And when I'm done, you can only cry and say, ?Wow, Wayne sure described that Obama fellow.?

Here are the FACTS. Read 'em and weep:

If you want government to take over business?banks?carmakers?Wall Street?highjack the entire economy?YOU MIGHT BE A SOCIALIST.

If you think it's just fine and dandy for government to decide CEO salaries?to hire and fire CEO's? and pick the Board of Directors of private companies? YOU MIGHT BE A SOCIALIST..

If you think 32 czars appointed by Obama?can run the American economy by committee- even though few if any have ever run a business?and if you think it's OK to appoint a car czar who admits publicly he knows NOTHING about cars? YOU MIGHT BE A SOCIALIST.

If you want to give as much as $100 billion dollars of taxpayer money to GM and Chrysler just so they can go BANKRUPT anyway?but then hand the company to the unions that bankrupted them in first place? YOU MIGHT BE A SOCIALIST.


If you think it's OK for government to tell GM and Chrysler what kind of cars to build?what size?what gas mileage?even if those "green cars" can never make a profit...even if the taxpayers will lose $100 billion dollars... ?YOU MIGHT BE A SOCIALIST.


If you think it's perfectly acceptable to break the ?rule of law? and shaft shareholders, bondholders, bankers, hedge funds, and secured creditors who took tremendous risks and loaned billions of dollars to Chrysler and are therefore first in line in any bankruptcy proceeding, and own 100% of Chrysler BY LEGAL CONTRACT?so that you can hand a majority ownership to your friends in the auto unions who are last in line and completely unsecured by law?but who gave you millions of dollars in campaign contributions?YOU MIGHT BE A SOCIALIST.

If you want to pass Cap and Trade and convert America to a ?green economy? to create millions of jobs?even though Spain is the greenest economy in all of Europe?and they have 18% unemployment, the highest in all of socialist Europe?YOU MIGHT BE A SOCIALIST.

If you support Cap & Trade?a giant expansion of government power and control over industry?that is the biggest tax increase in history?that will double or triple every American's electric bills and make gasoline go up to $5 or $6 per gallon?and increase the cost of every product made with electricity, or driven to stores with gasoline?and put entire industries out of business?and cost millions of American jobs?because China and India won't participate?ALL IN MIDST OF A DEPRESSION?YOU MIGHT BE A SOCIALIST.


If you support Universal Healthcare?even though a huge majority of Americans are happy with their present plan?and government is the one that has screwed up health care in the first place with over-regulation?even though government has run the U.S. Postal service into bankruptcy?and run Amtrak into bankruptcy?and the public school system is a shambles and loses tens of billions per year?and Medicare and Medicaid threaten to bankrupt the entire economy with their gigantic losses?and government has run up a $5.3 Trillion dollar unfunded liability just for pensions and free healthcare for government employees?and you think government is the answer to CUTTING the costs of healthcare...YOU MIGHT BE A SOCIALIST.

If you think government can save money on healthcare?even though the exact same people that run government have brought you an almost $2 Trillion dollar deficit?and almost $100 Trillion in debt?almost double world GDP (all the money made in the world each year)?and despite the fact that government loses money in every department and every agency, at every level, every year since inception?YOU MIGHT BE A SOCIALIST.

? and you're definitely an IDIOT.

If you propose paying for universal healthcare with taxes on the health benefits of every employee in America?EXCEPT union employees?YOU MIGHT BE A SOCIALIST.

If you want to lower the cost of healthcare?but you won't support tort reform?even though lawyers and legal abuse and waste and fraud combine to cost the healthcare system almost one trillion dollars a year?and you're a lawyer yourself?YOU MIGHT BE A SOCIALIST.


If you propose paying for universal healthcare by punishing "the rich" with a 5% surcharge on their incomes...even though that same group you are punishing (small business owners) already pays virtually all the taxes and creates 75% of the jobs in America...YOU MIGHT BE A SOCIALIST.


If you support a VAT tax just like socialist Europe...that puts a deadly tax on every product in America...at every level of production and purchase...on top of all our other state, federal and local taxes...YOU MIGHT BE A SOCIALIST.



If you support CARD CHECK?a new proposed law of the land?that takes away the right of Americans to vote in private...and allows union goons with tatoos and baseball bats to intimidate employees while they are forced to vote publicly to unionize?and will turn all of America into one big Michigan?the union state with the highest unemployment in America? YOU MIGHT BE A SOCIALIST.


If you are in favor of bailouts of certain companies and certain industries?who just happen to give you large campaign contributions?all with taxpayer money?and you don't even ask the permission of the taxpayers?and you don't or won't disclose who got the money or how much...and you don't even say please or thank you, even though it's our money paying for it all?and you never even bothered to read the 1000+ page bailout bill (delivered to you only hours before you voted YES)? YOU MIGHT BE A SOCIALIST.


If you believe it's greedy for American taxpayers to want to keep more of their OWN money?but it's not greedy to demand that government confiscate other people's money and redistribute to you?even though you didn't earn it?YOU MIGHT BE A SOCIALIST.

If you call it a ?tax cut? when you give a welfare check to people that never paid taxes in the first place?YOU MIGHT BE A SOCIALIST.

If you propose the biggest income tax increase in history on "the rich"?AND take away deductions from "the rich" including mortgage deductions that threaten to wipe out the entire housing market...and also raise the capital gains taxes of "the rich"?and also take the cap off FICA taxes on "the rich"?and also bring back the death tax on "the rich??and also universal health care surcharges on "the rich"?and possibly tax the health benefits of "the rich"? and also hit everyone in America with Cap & Trade taxes?and add a deadly new VAT tax on top of income taxes?and add sugar taxes?all while taxpayers are being hit with higher state income taxes, higher state sales taxes and higher property taxes? all in the middle of a depression?and you think that's ?small and reasonable and fair??YOU MIGHT BE A SOCIALIST.

If you like The Nanny State?if you like the results of the Michigan economy run by unions (the first state to hit 15% unemployment)?or WORSE the California economy?a state that has spent itself into oblivion, insolvency and bankruptcy?and you want to turn the whole of America into one big Michigan?or one big California?YOU MIGHT BE A SOCIALIST.

If you think all your friends deserve a government job for life?and should belong to a government employees union?and get paid obscene salaries far higher than the private sector?and receive bloated pensions for life ?and receive free health care for life?and a guaranteed job for life?even though many of them couldn't get a private sector job?all for just sitting at a desk for 25 years looking at their watch waiting for retirement at age 50...so they can collect a fat pension for the next 40 (or more) years?and you want to pay for all that on the taxpayer's dime?YOU MAY BE A SOCIALIST.

By the way?if after all that?you're a Columbia University economics professor, and you ever gave a student named Barack Obama an A?YOU MIGHT BE A SOCIALIST.


If you think school choice and charter schools and vouchers are bad?even though they have helped countless minority children trapped in failing hellholes called public schools?if you think competition is bad and public schools should have no competition?if you think rewarding good teachers with higher pay and firing bad teachers is a bad idea?if you think people have no right to decide where to use their own property tax money?to choose the best education possible for their children?YOU MIGHT BE A SOCIALIST.

And If you think it's perfectly fine to appoint a Supreme Court justice for life, who thinks that a Latina woman can make better decisions from the bench than a white male simply because of the color of her skin?YOU MIGHT BE A RACIST.

Ladies and Gentleman?I think it's safe to say that our country, our economy, our education system, and capitalism itself is being run and ruined By SOCIALISTS, RACISTS and IDIOTS.

It's time to stand up?it's time to fight?it's time to put manners and politeness aside... it's time to offend...it's time to yell, scream, protest and get angry?it's time to take action?it's time to take back our country before there is no country or economy left to take back?before the American Dream is dead?before capitalism is destroyed?before our children are enslaved by big government and big taxes for generations to come?
I believe that it is time for a CITIZEN REVOLUTION.

I'm Wayne Allyn Root. Today is the day my book comes out, ?The Conscience of a Libertarian: Empowering the Citizen Revolution with God, Guns, Gambling & Tax Cuts.? Today is also my birthday?and I'm spending it trying to save this great country. God Bless all of you. And may God Bless America.


Wayne Allyn Root was the 2008 Libertarian Vice Presidential candidate
 
Re: Psychiatrist: Obama corrupting America with socialism

Have you read the headlines this past week? Obama has proposed trillions of dollars in new taxes, and trillions of dollars of irresponsible, unsustainable new spending. With no way to pay for it all?except to wipe out small businessmen and women, and wipe out the upper middle class?and enslave our children and grandchildren with a mountain of debt and heavy taxes for a lifetime. It is, plainly and simply, the VERY definition of Socialism.


We all know Obama is a disaster now, but Do you think Obama was born a loser or do you think he acquired this talent along the way as he was growing up ?

 

scrimmage

What you contemplate you imitate
Re: Psychiatrist: Obama corrupting America with socialism

We all know Obama is a disaster now, but Do you think Obama was born a loser or do you think he acquired this talent along the way as he was growing up ?
A "loser" wouldn't have attained his position;he has the "talent" required to further the interests suitably,of,and as determined by the ruling elite,which installed him,to carry on the American Empire.
Speaking of psychiatrists,Obama may have extended Dick Cheney's Secret Service protection,but they can't protect him from having to live with himself.

Obama Authorizes Extended
Secret Service Guard for Cheney

<SMALL>July 21st, 2009 <!-- by Kevin --></SMALL>

By James Gordon Meek and
Thomas M. DeFrank
Via:New York Daily News
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/pol...keeps_protection_thanks_to_uncle_sam_bam.html

Former Vice President Dick Cheney?s Secret Service protection has been extended for at least another six months, beginning Tuesday[7/21/2009].

Normally, ex-veeps only get six months of protection at taxpayer expense. But Cheney asked for an extension, and President Obama ? whom Cheney has excoriated in several interviews since leaving office ? recently signed off.
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano signed the order extending Cheney?s security detail, her spokeswoman Sara Kuban confirmed Monday.

If the Obama administration hadn?t gone along with Cheney?s request, he would have been forced to hire his own security agents ? or go without.
Cheney?s friends have said he has become more concerned about his privacy and personal safety in recent years.


The Nightmare
Posted on Jul 20, 2009
By Mr.Fish
Cartoon from:
http://www.truthdig.com/cartoon/item/20090720_the_nightmare/
 

ZZ CREAM

EOG Master
Re: Psychiatrist: Obama corrupting America with socialism




We all know Obama is a disaster now, but Do you think Obama was born a loser or do you think he acquired this talent along the way as he was growing up ?

Our President is a Great American and will save us all in spite of his verbose detractors.
 

scrimmage

What you contemplate you imitate
Re: Psychiatrist: Obama corrupting America with socialism

Our President is a Great American and will save us all in spite of his verbose detractors.
It's been 6 months -as of 7/20/2009-, lets read some selections from an article on the "World Socialist" web site on how the "Great American's" been doing.
It's ironic while Conservatives,Liberterians,and others consider and label Obama a "socialist",actual Socialists think otherwise.
The 2 party duopoly is tending more towards "fascisim",rule by combinations of government,military,corporate,and NGO elites.

Select passages below from:
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2009/jul2009/pers-j21.shtml

Six months of the Obama administration

21 July 2009
By Joe Kishore

What evaluation can be made in light of six months? experience? The facts speak for themselves. On every critical issue, Obama?presiding over substantial Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress?has continued the basic policy of his predecessor.

Military policy

The direction of the administration on military policy was signaled early on. On January 23, three days after his inauguration, Obama ordered missile strikes by unmanned Predator drones on a location inside Pakistan, killing 18 people. With this initial blood on his hands, Obama proceeded apace.

The war in Afghanistan is now definitively ?Obama?s war.? Under his watch, the US has set in motion a doubling of its forces, from 32,000 to 68,000, and is presently carrying out a major operation to wipe out popular opposition in the south. At least 30 US soldiers and 25 NATO troops have died so far this month, making July the deadliest month to date for occupation forces.

Economic and social policy

On domestic policy, Obama?s overriding concern has been to defend the wealth of the most powerful sections of the corporate and financial elite. Through cash injections, subsidies and loan programs, trillions have been handed out to the banks and financial institutions, with no strings attached. The administration has opposed any real constraints on executive pay or bonuses.

Utilizing the government handouts, the largest banks reported massive profits in the second quarter of 2009, including $3.44 billion for Goldman Sachs and $2.7 billion for JPMorgan Chase. The banks plan on handing out record bonuses this year to their executives and traders.

The very institutions that precipitated the economic crisis through their speculation and looting operations are doing better than ever. This is not an accident. It is the intended outcome of the policy carried out by the Obama administration.

As for the Obama?s principal domestic initiative?health care ?reform??the administration?s proposals are driven by the desire of corporations to slash their employee health care costs and are tailored to the demands of the major players in the health care industry?particularly the insurance and pharmaceutical companies.

The outcome of the administration?s policies to deal with the economic crisis is a massive redistribution of wealth from the bottom to the top.

Democratic rights

On all essentials, the Obama administration has continued the antidemocratic policies of its predecessor. It has invoked ?state secrets? to block court cases challenging torture and domestic spying. The administration reversed a promise to release photos showing US torture of detainees. It has continued the military tribunals and indicated it plans to adopt a policy of indefinite detention for prisoners at Guantanamo Bay.
Obama has repeatedly insisted that there will be no prosecution of any of the crimes carried out by the Bush administration. This means no one will be held accountable and that the crimes will continue.

***
The outcome of the 2008 elections is an object lesson on the failure of American democracy. These elections produced an outcome that is diametrically opposed to the aspirations of the voters who cast ballots for the victor.

It is not possible, through the existing political system, to effect a change in government policy. The basic reason is that the political institutions and parties are the unvarnished instruments of class rule. The financial elite exercises absolute control over every aspect of political life.

What is perhaps most remarkable is the fact that the Obama administration barely makes an effort to conceal its class character. It seems to assume that Obama?s persona by itself is sufficient to quell opposition.
 

scrimmage

What you contemplate you imitate
Re: Psychiatrist: Obama corrupting America with socialism

What socialism?The Wall Street Journal reported how the top paid employees now earn 33% of all pay in the US up from 28% in 2002,or a total of $2.1 trillion[which doesn't include many extras].
Obama's not changing this trend very much.If an 8% per employee payroll tax were added to business,they would do better,since employer health care programs currently make up an average 13% of costs.A company would pay the 8%,and drop employees health care coverage.
It's not like the folks making the big bucks are using the capital to create many good paying jobs for the rest either,instead cost cutting continues as workers worldwide are pitted against one another.

Pay of Top Earners Erodes Social Security
July 21 2009
By Ellen Schultz
Excerpt from:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124813343694466841.html

The nation's wealth gap is widening amid an uproar about lofty pay packages in the financial world.

Executives and other highly compensated employees now receive more than one-third of all pay in the U.S., according to a Wall Street Journal analysis of Social Security Administration data -- without counting billions of dollars more in pay that remains off federal radar screens that measure wages and salaries.



Highly paid employees received nearly $2.1 trillion of the $6.4 trillion in total U.S. pay in 2007, the latest figures available. The compensation numbers don't include incentive stock options, unexercised stock options, unvested restricted stock units and certain benefits.

The pay of employees who receive more than the Social Security wage base -- now $106,800 -- increased by 78%, or nearly $1 trillion, over the past decade, exceeding the 61% increase for other workers, according to the analysis. In the five years ending in 2007, earnings for American workers rose 24%, half the 48% gain for the top-paid. The result: The top-paid represent 33% of the total, up from 28% in 2002.

The $2.1 trillion figure understates executive pay, however, because it includes just salary and vested deferred compensation, including bonuses. It doesn't include unvested employer contributions and unvested interest credited to deferred-pay accounts. Nor does it include unexercised stock options (options aren't subject to payroll tax until exercised), and unvested restricted stock (which isn't subject to payroll tax until vested; the subsequent appreciation is taxed as a capital gain).

Also not included in the total compensation figures is executive pay never subject to payroll tax. This category includes incentive stock options (which are generally taxed as capital gains), "carried interest" income received by hedge-fund and private-equity fund partners (also taxed as capital gains), and compensation characterized as a benefit (benefits generally aren't subject to any taxes).

Benefits, a category that includes employer-provided health care and contributions employers make to rank-and-file pension plans, totaled nearly $1 trillion in 2007; it isn't possible to tell what portion represents benefits for executives, such as life insurance.

The ability to delay paying payroll taxes on compensation, something that generally is available only to highly paid employees, is in itself an economic benefit that ultimately boosts paychecks.

 

scrimmage

What you contemplate you imitate
Re: Psychiatrist: Obama corrupting America with socialism

this fits the bush administration to a T !

This has been coming for years.Nothing new.
The Bush/Obama administrations both to a "T",the question is why do some insist "this" is called "socialism",when it's clearly something starting with an "f".
Can "this" be both "s" and "f"?

Obama: More Polished Than the Last Puppet

By Cindy Sheehan
?When a government lies to you, it no longer has authority over you.? Cindy Sheehan. Dallas, Tx; 2005
July 22, 2009 "Information Clearing House" -- Okay, so the United States of America has had a new puppet regime for six months now. I was never so much into giving Obama a ?chance? and I think it?s way past time to call Obama and his supporters out, like we called Bush and his supporters out. Our Presidents are merely puppets for the Robber Class and Obama is no exception.

I am observing very little ?change? in actual policy, or even rhetoric from an Obama regime. Granted, his style and delivery are more polished than the last puppet, but especially in foreign policy, little has changed. Evidently we elect Presidents based on empty rhetoric and if we can find someone who can say very little using many words, that?s better. I knew a year ago when Obama and his ilk were blathering on about ?change? that they didn?t mean positive ?change? for us, but it?s a shame Obama?s voters didn?t ask him to be a little more specific or demand some good ?change.?

Besides foreign policy where he is a complete disaster, it appears Obama?s jobs program is little more than adding tens of thousands of troops to an already bloated military, instead of bringing troops home from anywhere. Billions will go to the money trap of the Pentagon to invest in recruiting, where the budgets of peace groups who do counter recruitment are tanking.

The blueprint for this disastrous administration came early when O appointed nothing but neocons to his foreign policy team. The Secretary of State and the National Security advisor have even both admitted that the Council on Foreign Relations/Henry Kissinger are calling the shots.
Sec. Clinton at a speech at the new HQ for the Council on Foreign Relations:
"I have been often to, I guess, the mother ship in New York City, but it?s good to have an outpost of the Council right here down the street from the State Department. We get a lot of advice from the Council (Council of Foreign Relations), so this will mean I won?t have as far to go to be told what we should be doing and how we should think about the future."
National Security Advisor, James Jones, who also VERY coincidentally, I?m sure, was on the boards of directors of Chevron and Boeing, had this to say earlier this year:
'As the most recent National Security Advisor of the United States, I take my daily orders from Dr. Kissinger. Jones was also giving a speech to the Council on Foreign relations at the time. Kissinger is a fabulous role model for war, don?t you think."

From:
http://informationclearinghouse.info/article23121.htm
 

brucefan

EOG Dedicated
Re: Psychiatrist: Obama corrupting America with socialism

I know, I know, the picture is doctored,its not actually Obama, its someone who looks like Obama, he just was at the Party for the ice cream cake they served at the end of the party, thats not the New party he knew, he thought the party stood for tax cuts, blah blah blah

:LMAO:LMAO:LMAO:LMAO:LMAO

Obama participated in socialist party
<!-- end head --><!-- deck -->[SIZE=+1]Activist recalls president's time with radical Chicago political group[/SIZE]




<!-- end deck --><HR SIZE=1>[SIZE=-1]Posted: August 23, 2009[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]4:27 pm Eastern[/SIZE]



[FONT=Palatino, Times New Roman, Georgia, Times, serif]By Aaron Klein[/FONT]
<!--- copywrite only show on NON commentary pages as per joseph meeting 8/23/06 ------>[SIZE=-1]<!-- copyright -->? 2009 WorldNetDaily <!-- end copyright -->[/SIZE]
<!-- begin bodytext --><TABLE align=right border=0><TBODY><TR><TD width=302>
Excerpt from New Party publication (Courtesy New Zeal blog)


</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
JERUSALEM ? President Obama participated in a controversial 1990s political party with a socialist agenda, recalls a major member of the organization known as the New Party.
WND previously reported on newspaper evidence showing Obama was a member of the New Party, which sought to elect members to public office with the aim of moving the Democratic Party far leftward to ultimately form a new political party with a socialist agenda.
Now a former top member of the New Party recounted in a WND interview Obama's participation with his organization.
"A subcommittee met with (Obama) to interview him to see if his stand on the living wage and similar reforms was the same as ours," recalled Marxist activist Carl Davidson.
"We determined that our views on these overlapped, and we could endorse his campaign in the Democratic Party," Davidson said.
Davidson was a Chicago member and activist within the New Party. He told WND he handled some of the New Party member databases and attending most of the party's meetings.
Davidson is also a notorious far-left activist and former radical national leader in the anti-Vietnam movement. He served as national secretary for the infamous Students of a Democratic Society antiwar group, from which the Weatherman domestic terrorist organization later splintered.
Davidson remembers Obama attending one New Party meeting to thank attendees for voting for him.
Davidson said that to his knowledge Obama was not a member of the New Party "in any practical way" - using qualifying language.
Becoming a New Party member requires some effort on behalf of the politician. Candidates must be approved by the party's political committee and, once approved, must sign a contract mandating they will have a "visible and active relationship" with the party.
Asked whether Obama signed the New Party contract, Davidson replied there was "no need for him to do so."
"At the end of our session with him, we simply affirmed there was no need to do so, because on all the key points, the stand of his campaign and the New Party reform planks were practically the same," Davidson told WND.


Davidson denied the New Party was specifically a socialist party, claiming, "The vast majority of active members were low- and middle-income blacks in the inner city fighting for their immediate demands."
But the socialist-oriented goals of the New Party were enumerated on its old website.
Among the New Party's stated objectives were "full employment, a shorter work week, and a guaranteed minimum income for all adults; a universal 'social wage' to include such basic benefits as health care child care, vacation time and lifelong access to education and training; a systematic phase-in of comparable worth and like programs to ensure gender equity."
The New Party stated it also sought "the democratization of our banking and financial system ? including popular election of those charged with public stewardship of our banking system, worker-owner control over their pension assets [and] community-controlled alternative financial institutions."
Many of the New Party's founding members were Democratic Socialists of America leaders and members of Committees of Correspondence, a breakaway of the Communist Party USA.
Obama attended several DSA events and meetings including a DSA-sponsored town hall meeting Feb. 25, 1996, entitled "Employment and Survival in Urban America." He sought and received an endorsement from the DSA.
Asked by WND whether he thinks Obama has socialist leanings, Davidson stated, "The truth is that Obama was and is a liberal Democrat and an Alinskyist community organizer ? which if you know much about Alinsky, is just militant liberalism."
"Obama was never a man of the left, either in his views or in being a member of an actual socialist organization," added Davidson.
While running for the Illinois state Senate in 1996 as a Democrat, Obama actively sought and received the endorsement of the New Party, according to confirmed reports during last year's presidential campaign.
The New Party worked alongside the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, or ACORN. The New Party's aim was to help elect politicians who espoused its policies.
Among New Party members was linguist and radical activist Noam Chomsky.
Obama's campaign last year denied the then-presidential candidate was ever an actual member of the New Party.
But the New Zeal blog dug up print copies of the New Party News, the party's official newspaper, which show Obama posing with New Party leaders, listing him as a New Party member and printing quotes from him as a member.
<TABLE align=center border=0><TBODY><TR><TD width=388>
Barack Obama pictured in New Party publication (Courtesy New Zeal blog)


</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
The party's spring 1996 newspaper boasted: "New Party members won three other primaries this Spring in Chicago: Barack Obama (State Senate), Michael Chandler (Democratic Party Committee) and Patricia Martin (Cook County Judiciary).
The paper quoted Obama saying, "These victories prove that small 'd' democracy can work."
The newspaper lists other politicians it endorsed who were not members but specifies Obama as a New Party member.
New Ground, the ]newsletter of Chicago's Democratic Socialists of America, reported in its July/August 1996 edition that Obama attended a New Party membership meeting April 11, 1996, in which he expressed his gratitude for the group's support and "encouraged NPers (New Party members) to join in his task forces on voter education and voter registration."
The New Party, established in 1992, took advantage of what was known as electoral "fusion," which enabled candidates to run on two tickets simultaneously, attracting voters from both parties. But the New Party went defunct in 1998, one year after fusion was halted by the Supreme Court.
According to DSA documents, the New Party worked with ACORN to promote its candidates. ACORN, convicted in massive, nationwide voter fraud cases, has been a point of controversy for Obama over the presidential candidate's ties to the group.
In 1995, the DSA's New Ground newsletter stated, "In Chicago, the New Party's biggest asset and biggest liability is ACORN.
"Like most organizations, ACORN is a mixed bag ," the newsletter said. "On one hand, in Chicago, ACORN is a group that attempts to organize some of the most depressed communities in the city. Chicago organizers for ACORN and organizers for SEIU Local 880 have been given modest monthly recruitment quotas for new New Party members. On the other hand, like most groups that depend on canvassing for fundraising, it's easy enough to find burned out and disgruntled former employees And ACORN has not had the reputation for being interested in coalition politics ? until recently and, happily, not just within the New Party."
<!-- AddThis Button BEGIN -->********


 

brucefan

EOG Dedicated
Re: Psychiatrist: Obama corrupting America with socialism

Obama Adm Uses Child-Indoctrinating Socialist to Promote Illegals Pay Program





<EMBED src=http://blip.tv/play/hJNRgfjuRQI%2Em4v width=480 height=360 type=application/x-shockwave-flash allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always"></EMBED>



 

scrimmage

What you contemplate you imitate
Re: Psychiatrist: Obama corrupting America with socialism



Once again:
Why Obama won?t?and can?t?be Roosevelt
By Patrick Martin
13 August 2011

A lengthy commentary published August 7 in the Sunday Review section of the New York Times makes many criticisms of the policies of President Barack Obama, but collapses in the face of the most vital and compelling issue: which class interests the Obama administration serves.

Under the headline, "What Happened to Obama?" Drew Westen, a professor of psychology at Emory University, expresses the disillusionment of many liberal supporters of Obama,...

Westen focuses his critique especially on Obama?s refusal to denounce those responsible for the 2008 financial collapse?the bankers and billionaire speculators?and to promote an aggressively liberal alternative to the bank bailout initiated in the final months of the Bush administration and then expanded after the Democratic administration took over.

Westen contrasts Obama?s failure to the actions and words of President Franklin D. Roosevelt, whose New Deal policies used government resources to "put Americans directly to work," and who made a regular display of hostility to the big bankers, and vice versa. He cites the famous speech in 1936 at Madison Square Garden, when Roosevelt declared, "Never before in all our history have these forces been so united against one candidate as they stand today. They are unanimous in their hate for me--and I welcome their hatred."

While Roosevelt was himself just as committed to the capitalist system as his Wall Street foes, he clearly understood thatin order to save capitalism, it was necessary to chastise the capitalists publicly, to appease popular anger, and to place some constraints on their operations in order to prevent a recurrence of the financial manipulations that produced the 1929 stock market crash.

Westen bemoans Obama?s refusal to follow this example. He writes: "In contrast, when faced with the greatest economic crisis, the greatest levels of economic inequality, and the greatest levels of corporate influence on politics since the Depression, Barack Obama stared into the eyes of history and chose to avert his gaze. Instead of indicting the people whose recklessness wrecked the economy, he put them in charge of it.

...Obama chose to continue the bailout of the banks begun by Geithner, Bernanke and Bush?s treasury secretary, Henry Paulson, and then to greatly expand it. Every aspect of the new administration?s financial and economic policy was driven by the determination to restore solvency to the investment banks, stock traders and hedge funds, at the expense of the working class.

...Obama proposed an economic stimulus policy tailored to boosting corporate profitability, not jobs, and rejected any direct job creation by the federal government. After blocking efforts to limit executive pay at the bailed-out banks, the president demanded a 50 percent wage cut for newly hired auto workers as the price of bailing out General Motors and Chrysler. And his health care "reform" was driven by cost-cutting, not the extension of coverage to the uninsured.

Obama?s policies were determined solely by the interests of the banks and corporations, and it proved impossible for him to disguise this fact from the working class. The Madison Avenue techniques and rhetoric of "hope" and "change" employed during the 2008 presidential campaign proved inadequate for gulling the masses indefinitely in the face of continued double-digit unemployment and declining living standards.

While Westen faults Obama for his failure to indict the Wall Street criminals for causing the 2008 crash, it was precisely his behavior during those critical weeks that reassured the ruling elite that he could be entrusted with the presidency. While Republican John McCain improvised wildly?suspending his campaign, attempting to cancel the first debate, then reversing himself?and congressional Republicans precipitated a stock market collapse by initially voting down the bailout bill, Obama lined up 100 percent behind the Bush administration and the Federal Reserve in mobilizing every possible federal resource to save the banks and speculators.
September 2008 was Obama?s final audition for the White House, and he passed with flying colors. Why should anyone expect anything different from his presidency?
Westen ends his lament with a litany of complaints about the growing economic inequality in America,
where
"400 people control more of the wealth than 150 million of their fellow Americans? the average middle-class family has seen its income stagnate over the last 30 years while the richest 1 percent has seen its income rise astronomically? we cut the fixed incomes of our parents and grandparents so hedge fund managers can keep their 15 percent tax rates."

Obama?s failure to challenge this social reality is not a personal one, or the result of individual policy choices. It rather is an objectively determined expression of very different circumstances from those that prevailed when Franklin Roosevelt was in the White House. The major difference is the long-term historical decline of American capitalism.

Edited from:
Once again: Why Obama won?t?and can?t?be Roosevelt
 
Top