Trickle Up Poverty (9 page)

From Churchill to No Will

Winston Churchill is one of the greatest champions of freedom the world has ever known. After Churchill led England to victory over Nazi Germany in World War II, he faced an election in Britain. Keep in mind that socialists and communists were on the opposite end of the political spectrum from the Nazi enemy they’d just helped to conquer. As such, socialism was seen by some as a legitimate political philosophy. You know, many of the sheeple viewed it as just another valid political antidote to Nazi tyranny. However, the opposite was true. Churchill was among the few who realized it. Churchill saw the menace that socialism represented for free people everywhere, which is why he used his radio broadcasts to expose what would happen if socialists came to power. Listen to Churchill’s words and tell me they’re not equally important to Americans today as we battle the forces of totalitarianism under the presidency of Barack Obama:

My friends, I must tell you that a Socialist policy is abhorrent to the … idea of freedom. Although it is now put forward in the main by people who have a good grounding in the liberalism and radicalism of the early part of this century, there can be no doubt that socialism is inseparably interwoven with totalitarianism and the abject worship of the state. It is not alone that property, in all its forms, is struck at, but that liberty, in all its forms, is challenged by the fundamental conceptions of socialism.

Look how even today they hunger for controls of every kind, as if these were delectable foods instead of war-time inflictions and monstrosities. There is to be one state to which all are to be obedient in every act of their lives. This state is to be the arch-employer, the arch-planner, the arch-administrator and ruler, and the arch-caucus boss.

[N]o socialist system can be established without a political police. Many of those who are advocating socialism or voting socialist today will be horrified at this idea. That is because they are shortsighted, that is because they do not see where their theories are leading them.

No socialist government conducting the entire life and industry of the country could afford to allow free, sharp, or violently-worded expressions of public discontent. They would have to fall back on some form of Gestapo.61

More than sixty years after Churchill spoke these words, they describe exactly what is happening under our socialist president today. I should point out that Churchill’s opponent in that election, Clement Attlee, was the leader of the socialist Labor Party. Among the issues that Attlee was promoting were a national healthcare system and a birth-to-death welfare state. That’s precisely Barack Obama’s agenda.

Does that sound unfair?

Didn’t President Obama use every trick in the book to ram through socialized health care? (I’ll document more on that in a subsequent chapter.) Without question, Obama and his minions are out to do nothing less than imprison us in a totalitarian socialist system in which the federal government usurps our God-given right to make decisions for ourselves. That’s what his socialist redistribution of our earnings through confiscatory tax policies and legislative initiatives is all about. He’s assuring that trickle up poverty becomes institutionalized in America.

That will be the Obama legacy.

In the years immediately following World War II in America, although our country didn’t face quite so direct a confrontation with our socialist-communist enemies as did Great Britain, the process leading to the totalitarian-wannabe regime that is now in power in the White House was nonetheless steadily advanced. The gradual implementation of socialist policies in the United States was furthered by the efforts of a pair of radical socialist Columbia University professors, Richard Andrew Cloward (rhymes with “coward”) and Frances Fox Piven (rhymes with “driven”). This husband and wife duo were lifelong members of the Democratic Socialists of America. The Cloward-Piven strategy they advanced in their writings and teachings centered on leveraging a manufactured crisis to advance the socialist agenda in America along with the redistribution of wealth.

Remember what Obama’s radical Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel, said? “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste.”62 That’s right out of the Cloward-Piven playbook. That’s why Team Obama thrives on creating or leveraging crises by demanding quick action, which is a vehicle for socialist change. That is what the Cloward-Piven strategy is all about. In short, in order to usher in socialist change, Cloward-Piven taught:

Make a crisis

Make it publicly visible

Make sure it involves disrupting some institutional or societal sector

Capitalize on the social unrest it produces

Here’s a perfect example. In the middle of the healthcare cyclone, when the national debate had reached a fevered pitch, Obama started talking about the illegal immigration issue. Why? He wanted to create a thunderstorm to go along with the healthcare cyclone in order to really rock the boat and knock the opponents of his socialist healthcare plan off their feet. What did Obama propose? The granting of amnesty to twenty million illegal aliens. He did that to overwhelm the system along the lines of the Piven strategy—flood the system with more unrest in order to break it down.

Let me remind you that Columbia University, Obama’s alma mater, is where Cloward taught! I think it’s very likely Obama took his courses, given his leftist background at Occidental. If you recall, Obama said he sought out the Marxist professors. Of course, we don’t know who his professors were at Occidental, Columbia, or Harvard because, as a WorldNetDaily columnist quipped, “The Obama camp guards those scores, like his SAT scores, more tightly than Iran does its nuclear secrets.”63

What’s more, there’s a virtual blackout on all of Obama’s personal records—from his adoption, baptism, and passport information to his files when he was a senator of Illinois. Tell me why we are not permitted to see his kindergarten school records? What could possibly be so explosive from seeing his grades during his time at Punahou elementary school? If he’s as brilliant as some have claimed, why aren’t we permitted to read any of his scholarly writings at Harvard Law or the University of Chicago? Is there a reason why his Columbia thesis is being kept from the public eye? Why are we not allowed to see his Occidental College or Columbia University grades? Most presidents release that information.

Why the secrecy? Might it reveal something about the roots of his pan-Leninism?

While we don’t know with certainty if Obama studied under Cloward at Columbia, we do know that Obama’s childhood mentor, Frank Marshall Davis, was a member of the Communist party. We know that Obama admits attending socialist conferences. We know that Obama admits reading Marxist literature. We know that Obama became a “community organizer” and came into contact with the Democratic Socialists of America, who endorsed his campaign for Illinois state Senate seat. And we know that Obama became friends with William Ayers, a member of the Socialist Group “Students for a Democratic Society.” And yet, in spite of these facts about his radical associations and Marxist mentoring, Barack Obama has infiltrated government bureaucracy at the highest level of all!

We now know that Barack Obama, in his days as a community organizer, employed tactics espoused by these leftist enemies of America. We also know he’s using them to define and implement his legislative agenda today. In fact, one of the ways to understand how insidious the leftist agenda is to look at its priorities:

Confiscating money from taxpayers and consumers, as has been done with the passage of stimulus and healthcare legislation;

Making a killing in financial dealings by taking advantage of the so-called “priority,” as John Paulson and Goldman Sachs did in taking advantage of the 2008 financial meltdown; and

Distracting the public from a real or important issue that they don’t want to deal with for fear of hurting the cause of an enemy of America, as the Obama administration has done by, among other things, soft-pedaling the federal government’s refusal to enforce existing immigration laws.

Make no mistake about it: The primary reason for the existence of the left, including Obama and all the principal players in his administration, is to bring about the downfall of western capitalist democracies. Remember, our Socialist-in-Chief Obama has said that he’s committed to “fundamentally transforming the United States of America.”64 Just look below the glossy surface of every one of Obama’s legislative initiatives. In each case, you’ll find evidence that he either wants to overwhelm the capitalist system and bring it to its knees, or he wants to take direct control of a significant segment of the American economy in order to weaken our country and advance the cause of our totalitarian enemies.

Unfortunately, those totalitarian enemies now include—along with such rogue nations as Iran, Venezuela, and North Korea—the United States itself. If we allow the Obama administration to continue to advance its nefarious agenda, America will continue on the path toward becoming an enemy of free speech and religious choice, of individual initiative and the creation of wealth. Under this president, we’re on the way to becoming our own worst enemy.

Barack Obama and his radical czars are out to do nothing less than reduce

America to second-rate nation status. Which explains their delusional desire to leverage the nonissue of global warming to control businesses, their intentional subversion of our national defense, while both causing and then taking advantage of the recent financial crisis, and their unlawful support of encouraging aliens to enter this country illegally—as you’ll see in the coming pages.

If Obama and his czars are allowed to succeed, they will cause global economic and military chaos the like of which we have not witnessed since Winston Churchill led Britons in the war against totalitarianism at the middle of the last century. What’s more, if Obama succeeds, we’ll go from the USSR to the USSA—the United Socialist States of America—in one generation. America’s last hope can be found in the true conservative patriots working with the Tea Party movement to stop this socialist revolution in its tracks.

I, for one, am committed to that fight.

You Say You Want a Revolution

You may wonder why Barack Obama’s associations are such a big deal. You know, what’s so bad about Marxism? Was communism such a bad thing? What’s wrong with socialism? Let’s start there. After all, according to a January, 2010, Gallup poll, more than half (53 percent) of Democrats and a third (36 percent) of all Americans have a favorable view of socialism.65 Do these people hold a wrong understanding of this political and economic theory? Or, are they correct in their belief that socialism is praiseworthy?

What’s more, if there’s nothing fundamentally wrong with socialism, Marxism, Leninism, and all the other “isms,” if they’re just another acceptable approach to governing a nation, then the fact that Barack Obama is an ardent follower of Lenin and Marx, and pals around with avowed communists, would be of little consequence. If he’s right that redistributive change really does benefit the American middle class (as he has claimed, saying, “I think when you spread the wealth around it’s good for everybody”66), then shouldn’t we welcome socialism along with the horde of Obamanics who have already bought into it? Or, if the worst thing that could be said of socialism is that it’s benign, we might just agree to disagree and move on.

No harm, no foul, right?

If, however, socialism in its various forms has a long track record of enslaving the hearts, minds, and souls of the people subjected to it, then we sure as hell had better wake up and put the brakes on this man before he does any more damage to the country. So which is it? Is socialism a friend or foe of the people? Should we embrace it or erase it?

As you’ll see in chapter three, the despotic Soviet Union enslaved the people and killed tens of millions in slave labor camps—all in the name of economic freedom under a very different economic system than ours. What you may not understand is that Leninism, Marxism, and Trotskyism—all the “isms” of the Soviet Union—are not quite dead. In fact, their followers have taken center stage. Take President Obama. He’s not a “NEO-CON,” but what I call a “NEO-COM.” He’s a neo-communist.

What do I mean by that?

Traditionally, in communist countries such as Cuba, North Korea, and the former Soviet Union, communism brought with it complete state control of the culture and the economy. Today, however, communist nations such as China are operating a little differently. They have hybridized their state control of the economy, for example, by permitting limited levels of capitalistic freedom.

That’s why you can go to McDonald’s on the mainland.

But don’t let the presence of a few Big Macs fool you.

The People’s Republic of China is still ruled by the Communist Party of China and not the people, in spite of what notions “People’s Republic” may bring to mind. As such, there’s zero tolerance for freedom of speech. You say or write the wrong thing—boom—you’re suddenly locked away in a hellhole for years. Likewise, there’s no freedom of religion, no freedom of thought. So while their brand of communism isn’t identical to the iron heel of Lenin, it’s still a form of communism, thus, neo-communism.

Like its cousin in China, Obama is pursuing more of a neo-communism or “soft” socialist-communist approach. In a way, he’s using a “tri-brid” revolutionary plan: some Marxism, some Leninism, and some Trotskyism. While we don’t have commissars in America as are found in communist countries, we do have czars and czarinas. This cadre of like-minded companions shapes the direction of the government without congressional oversight or approval and is only accountable to Comrade Obama.

Any European with reasonable political knowledge knows what’s going on here in America. I’m afraid, however, that the American voter is terminally naïve. How else can we explain 64.6 million sheeple voting him into office? They were willing to give Obama the benefit of the doubt in spite of the evidence, that’s how. I bet they’d refuse to believe what I’m saying about Barack Obama even if they were to see him with their own two eyes marching around the White House under a Lenin banner wearing a Che Guevara shirt and red beret.