Obama’s Spreading the Wealth Socialist Plan … To Pay for his Voters Gas and Mortgage


In the end the Obama campaign is all about a hand out and a further dependency on the government.

Sharing your money is neither patriotic or neighborly, it is socialism. Every day in America people take the personal responsibility to donate to charities by choice, not government force. What does Obama have against the American Dream and Americans right of choice and prosperity?

This is hardly the American Dream that we grew up with, let alone our parents and grandparents. Nanny government is never what our Founding Fathers ever envisioned.

The American dream has always been to work hard, save your money, and you to can strive for excellence and be rewarded for your determination and effort. Who knew that in today’s America, according to Barack Obama and his followers, that your hard work and effort is not meant to benefit your family. In Obamunism your hard work, blood, sweat and tears is meant to pay for some one else’s gas and mortgage, not your own.

Welcome to the socialist world of entitlements where personal responsibility means nothing. Its about government forced charity and the buying of votes and an election.

One might ask the Obama supporter in the video and all that subscribe to Obumunism the following question. Why is it that Barack Obama cannot seem to personally help out his own family with his own wealth, yet Obama is perfectly comfortable taking, spending and sharing your wealth with others.


Another must see video … how many people actually believe that if Obama becomes President of the United States actually believe that she will not have to pay for gas anymore or have to pay a mortgage. The Obamamessiah will pay for it all with a wave a of a wand and the sprinkling of some fairy dust.

 Peggy Joseph … all my bills will be paid by the Obamamessiah and I will have no personal responsibility.

If you liked this post, you may also like these:

  • Barack Obama’s Joe the Plumber Spread the Wealth a kin to John Kerry’s “Global Test” Comment 4 Years Ago
  • Mortgage Rates Soar As Fed Raises Interest Rates
  • John McCain Says that Obama’s Tax Policies are Socialist … Its not About Joe the Plumber, Its About Spreading Your Wealth
  • The Rise in Mortgage Rates has been rather Troublesome; 6.66% on 6/6/06
  • Gallup … Obama’s Class Warfare Argument Failing with People, 75% Do Not Give a Damn that Romney has Money

  • Comments

    27 Responses to “Obama’s Spreading the Wealth Socialist Plan … To Pay for his Voters Gas and Mortgage”

    1. SUPER DAVE on November 4th, 2008 6:58 am

      a prime example of pure ignorance and stupidity.

    2. Americaneocon on November 4th, 2008 7:05 am

      Being forced to share our money is socialism…

      I don’t mind helping others, and conservatives are more charitable than leftists.

    3. Rusty Bridges on November 4th, 2008 7:06 am

      I believe she meant that she won’t have to worry about being able to pay her bills through a better economy. Still won’t happen.

    4. scott on November 4th, 2008 7:15 am

      Rusty Bridges – no way that is what she meant. She’s is not intellectual enough to think that way. These are the types of people that makes it frightening to me to raise my kids in this country.

    5. Richard on November 4th, 2008 8:03 am

      He won’t pay for our gas and mortgage … we’ll be paying for his. Under a new Democratic regime, the government philosophy will be that we can pay our way out of debt.

      Most people on this forum are here, I believe, because of the Natalee Holloway case. Let us never forget that Obama’s “spiritual adviser” said that Natalee was just another rich white girl, and that our concern for her was just a display of racism. Spiritual?

      Obama did disavow him … once the public got outraged. That in itself says volumes.

    6. SUPER DAVE on November 4th, 2008 8:13 am

      it,s a shame when people in africa say that obama will benefit them ? you can see where our money will go /

    7. katablog.com on November 4th, 2008 8:34 am

      More about Obama’s knowledge about his dear auntie and his lie.

    8. Richard on November 4th, 2008 8:39 am

      Meanwhile, I’ve been seeing lots of articles about how this election was a watershed, heralding changes in the whole campaign technique, etc., etc.

      Reminds me of all the pundits telling us so solemnly about how, after 9/11, things would never be the same. In some ways, perhaps … but not all that many.

      But here’s an article that rings true: how the self-satisfaction of the media have helped erode our culture and washed away the authority with which the mainstream media once delivered news.

      The public has seen that the emperor has no clothes, and although we have more media than ever, it seems, garbage reigns supreme there too.

      Journalists Will Get Last Paychecks Wondering What Happened
      By Cal Thomas Published on 11/4/2008

      More than the economy has melted down. What remains of big media credibility has also liquefied and won’t recover anytime soon, if it ever does.

      Don’t take my word for it. The ombudsman for The Washington Post acknowledges that conservatives have a point when they claim an imbalance in coverage of Barack Obama and John McCain.

      In her Nov. 2 column, Deborah Howell writes, “…it’s true that The Post, as well as much of the national news media, has written more stories and more favorable stories about Barack Obama than John McCain. Editors have their reasons for this, but conservatives are right that they often don’t see their views reflected enough in the news pages.”

      In the tank for Obama

      What might be “their reasons”? There is only one answer: Too many journalists have been in the tank for Obama and wanted to see him elected president. Some Post reporters (Howell doesn’t say how many) “complained to me that suggestions for issues coverage have been turned aside” in favor of horse-race coverage, despite reader complaints about too much coverage of the race itself and not enough of the candidates’ positions on the issues.

      Journalism is the only profession I know that ignores the wishes of its consumers. If a department store found that most of its customers preferred over-the-calf socks to ankle-length socks, would that store ignore customer preferences for the longer socks because the president of the company preferred the ankle-length style? Not if the store wanted to make a profit in the sock department. Yet journalists have this attitude: “we know what’s good for you, so shut up and take it.”

      Howell calls this arrogance, “a disease easily caught by journalists, who can overlook its symptoms.” One sees this on cable TV. Larry King will assemble a “panel” of journalists to answer the question “Are the media biased?” The journalists declare they are not and that is supposed to settle the matter. In only the rarest of cases are they confronted with their biases and held accountable.

      That is because, as Howell writes, “We believe that we have a collective ‘nose for news’ and the judgment to know best what readers need to know and how to present it. We believe in our own wisdom and experience and in the purity that keeps us out of politics and special-interest groups. We have our own rules and we don’t change them. We seldom ask for input from readers. We believe that if it weren’t for us, the world couldn’t be as well informed and democracy wouldn’t operate as it should.”

      Big media locked in outdated liberalism

      Re-read the sentence, “We have our own rules and we don’t change them.” That is what’s wrong with modern media. Everything else gets updated, including our computer software, but the big media won’t change. They remain locked in a ’60s liberalism and a supreme self-assurance that only they know what’s best for the country. When information options were fewer, they could get away with it. No more. News consumers now have many choices.

      The media rationalize their loss of readers and viewers by blaming the Internet and alternative media, like talk radio and cable. But if big media had practiced balanced coverage, chances are that talk radio and cable news might not exist. These prosper because they circumvent the biases of the established media.

      You know things are bad when journalists begin admitting bias. Columnist Michael Malone wrote on ABCNews.com that campaign coverage has been so biased, he is ashamed to tell people he is a journalist. The Colorado Springs Gazette carried an opinion column about “The Death of Objectivity,” which criticized slanted coverage.

      Most people will never meet a presidential candidate so their impressions are formed by media coverage. If McCain is portrayed as old and out of touch, rather than experienced and toughened by his prisoner of war experience and Obama is presented as young, hip and “news,” that leaves an impression on those voters who don’t dig beneath the superficial.

      The media now own Barack Obama. Let’s see how long they take to turn on him once he starts making mistakes. The public has already turned on big media, but big media is too into denial to notice. People are no longer buying their product; newsrooms are being downsized. “Journalists” are now left to wonder what happened to their once-great profession, as they pick up their final paychecks.

    9. Richard on November 4th, 2008 8:42 am


      We remember the hullaballoo that seized Washington when Jimmy Carter took office … and look at the results.

      Unfortunately, the young people of today don’t remember a day when the principles of ‘objectivity,’ ‘nonpartisanship,’ and ‘truth’ were the ideals of the news business.

      Back then, the media reported the news.

      Now the media ARE the news. Or think they are.

      And we see the results.

    10. txchic on November 4th, 2008 8:55 am

      this is why we need intelligence tests to vote, have children or purchase weapons. what a moron.

      doesn’t ms. joseph realize that she’ll only get what’s left over after obama pays back his biggest supporters? people like ayers, wright, acorn, etc…

    11. SUPER DAVE on November 4th, 2008 10:07 am

      word is that the Redskins threw the game last night in favor of barrybama.
      previously when redskins played and won on election week, republicans won presidency.
      the loss last night was on purpose. i just didn’t see any interest on the skins offense and not much more from the defense.

    12. Michelle on November 4th, 2008 10:27 am

      This is exactly what I have been saying all along. People are being led to slaughter by Obama. They are under his spell.

      Ignorance is all around and unfortunately they are voting for the wrong kind of change.

    13. Sharon Chicago on November 4th, 2008 10:44 am

      What Kool Aid has she been drinking?….

      When McCain wins tonight, I will not be driving
      into the city…. because the blacks will start
      another racial war!

    14. SUPER DAVE on November 4th, 2008 11:19 am

      obama believes in “economic justice” defined as brutal taxation of the ‘wealthy” defined as any American who makes over 250,000.00 a year. so obama will punish those who worked hard and give the money to the “poor”. this is nothing more than farrakkan’s nation of islam (socialist) plan for financial “reparation” , paying blacks money today for slavery 150 to 200 years ago.

    15. yoyo muffintop on November 4th, 2008 12:37 pm

      Sharon Chicago: “When McCain wins tonight, I will not be driving
      into the city…. because the blacks will start
      another racial war!”

      There ya go – the racism always ends up coming out some time.
      Grow up.

      Why would you assume that there would be any race riots?

    16. Sharon Chicago on November 4th, 2008 1:26 pm

      15. Yo Yo…. because 95% of the blacks are voting for O’Bama based on discrimation towards the whites.

      In other words Yo You, they only voted for O’Bama because he has black skin and they did not vote for McCain because he has white skin.

      So their votes are prejudice votes for a black person just like many of the white people discriminated against the blacks in the 60′s.

      They have gone backwards in my opinion, putting a
      line in the sand again blacks against whites now.

      That was a stupid thing to do …voting for someone based on their skin color.

      I guess most blacks have not reached that point of equality in their own minds and want to live in the yester years
      of the past and think like Rev Wright and O’Bama do!

      I would NEVER do that… O’Bama’s shady record speaks for itself and that is why I would NEVER vote for him!

    17. Sharon Chicago on November 4th, 2008 1:32 pm

      Oh Yo You…I didn’t answer your question after your comment….

      There will be an upheavel riot if O’Bama does not win here in Chicago because they are thinking
      he is the “chosen one” and are delerious in reverence to him and need to repent and do a self examination to call forth the “real Jesus”.

      Bottom line answer “they will be angry because a black man did not win the election to become president of America”…. that is why they will riot…

      See it is all racial on their parts…voting for him and rioting … and I truly love my black brothers and sisters but many have been decieved!

    18. CBB on November 4th, 2008 2:00 pm

      My take on this video is a little different. My fear is that she really won’t have to worry about paying for anything because her expenses will be deducted from all of us “working stiff’s” paycheck.

    19. Maggie on November 4th, 2008 2:09 pm

      Black Panthers intimidating voters in Philly.. I watched a Fox news reporter talking to one of these guys and the guy lied and said he was part of security , standing by the doors, 2 of them and one was swinging a nightstick. Cops came and removed the Black Panther guy with nightstick.


      TOLEDO, OHIO — Toledo police are gearing up for possible “Civil unrest” during and after tomorrow’s elections.

      In an internal memo obtained exclusively by NBC 24 News, officers are ordered to “Have their riot equipment with them Tuesday and Wednesday”. Police chief Mike Navarre confirms, officers will have gear similar to the equipment they used during the 2005 race riots. “They have been asked to have their helmets and their gas masks available tomorrow and Wednesday.”, Navarre says, “That’s the equipment they would not normally carry with them on a normal day”.

      Navarre also says, officers will not be stationed at individual polling stations. But the memo says otherwise. It reads, “On Tuesday, units shall be directed to patrol the polling locations”.

      A Repeat of 2004 Philly Voter Chaos, Fraud
      Posted by: Amanda Carpenter at 7:46 AM
      GOP Election Board members have been tossed out of polling stations in at least half a dozen polling stations in Philadelphia because of their party status.

      A Pennsylvania judge previously ruled that court-appointed poll watchers could be NOT removed from their boards by an on-site election judge, but that is exactly what is happening, according to sources on the ground.

      It is the duty of election board workers to monitor and guard the integrity of the voting process.

      Denying access to the minority (in this case Republican) poll watchers and inspectors is a violation of Pennsylvania state law. Those who violate the law can be punished with a misdemeanor and subjected to a fine of $1,000 and sent to prison between one month and two years.

      Those on site are describing the situation as “pandemonium” and there may be video coming of the chaos.

      Some of the precincts where Republicans have been removed are: the 44th Ward, 12th and 13th divisions; 6th Ward, 12th division; 32nd Ward, Division 28.

      “Election board officials guard the legitimacy of the election process and the idea that Republicans are being intimidated and banned for partisan purposes does not allow for an honest and open election process,” said McCain-Palin spokesman Ben Porritt in a statement to Townhall.

      The City of Brotherly Love was roiled in controversy during the 2004 election because of rigged voting machines that showed nearly 2,000 votes for Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry before the polls had opened. A man also used a gun to intimidate poll workers at Ward 30, division 11 in 2004.

      Update: Fox News just did a report about the controversy. The Democrats are saying that the polling station is crowded and election board members need to cycle through the areas intermittently.

      Update 10:53am: Pennsylvania Secretary of State Pedro Cortes says this matter is already being heard in court and should be resolved soon. He says there was a dispute of the names of the poll watchers on record. This is a different story than the Democratic officials told Fox News earlier this morning.

    20. Maggie on November 4th, 2008 2:22 pm

      The sad part about the video of the woman talking about her gas and mortgage is..many believe this. What they are going to wake up to is another story.

    21. Murphy on November 4th, 2008 2:30 pm

      Black Panthers guarding polling , Armed Forces votes not counted ,dead people voting,123% of registered votes of one county in Mississippi voting , Supreme Court refuses to rule on voter fraud in Ohio and this is called a fair election ! Good Grief we sound like a 3rd world country and where is Jimmy Carter to make sure the elections are not being stolen!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    22. Michelle on November 4th, 2008 3:00 pm

      There is nothing fair about this election. The sad thing is: No matter who wins there will be talk of the election being stolen. How can we really know the truth? Dead people voting, convicted felons voting, people voting more than once. This whole thing has turned into a nightmare.

      I will be so glad when all this b.s. is over, though I don’t think this Country will ever be the same after today.

    23. yoyo muffintop on November 4th, 2008 3:28 pm

      #17 – well that makes absolutely no sense.

      And I highly doubt anything is true with your last sentence.

    24. Susan on November 4th, 2008 4:13 pm

      How damn stupid can this woman, Peggy Joseph, really be???

      I tried to explain to a young lady who is voting for Obama that IT’S NOT UP TO OUR PRESIDENT, OUR GOVERNMENT (federal, state or local) OR ANYONE ELSE TO PROVIDE FOR US OTHER THAN OURSELVES!! I couldn’t believe she actually feels Obama will provide for her :-(

      Get a clue already…

    25. SUPER DAVE on November 4th, 2008 4:23 pm

      this election was bought and paid for before it got off the ground. everything about the democratic side of this race stinks of criminal
      but, what would you expect from this democratic race ?
      you are looking at what our country will become with barry soetoro. yes, he admitted his real name is barry.

    26. Sharon Chicago on November 4th, 2008 7:20 pm

      Obama, seedy to say the least… loser… phoney yes person to America…you are devious and elegal in every sense… Why are so many decieved…

      because of your skin color… how stupid and ignorant they are…… stupid

    27. Michelle on November 4th, 2008 8:19 pm

      I know it’s not over yet BUT in case it continues in the direction it is going, I want to say this. I guess those other countries were right, America is stupid, stupid, stupid.

      Get ready for it.

    Leave a Reply

    Support Scared Monkeys! make a donation.

    • NEWS (breaking news alerts or news tips)
    • Red (comments)
    • Dugga (technical issues)
    • Dana (radio show comments)
    • Klaasend (blog and forum issues)
    E-mail It