2016 Presidential Thoughts, RUN BERNIE , RUN … Vermont Socialist Senator Bernie Sanders Says He’d Make a Better President Than Hillary Clinton
RUN BERNIE … RUN!!! WILL HILLARY HAVE A CHALLENGE FROM THE LEFT?
In an interview with Time, the senator from the Socialist Republic of Vermont, Bernie Sander (VT-
IS), had much to say on a wide range of issues like the legalization of marijuana, social security, and Barack Obama’s job as president; however, the biggest news was when Sanders said that he would make a better president than Hillary Clinton. When asked who would make a better president, Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders, he said … Bernie Sanders. Will the Independent socialist, who caucuses with Democrats in the Senate be the thorn in Hillary’s 2016 presidential election side? The Independent Socialist Senator said he “liked Hilliary” and she is a “very, very intelligent person”. However, Sanders said there needs to be a leader “to wage a political revolution in this country which brings millions of people into the political process to stand up and fighting for their rights in a way that we have not seen right now,” and Hillary Clinton was not the leader of that movement.
Q. Who do you think would make a better President, Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders?
Bernie Sanders. So you’re asking your question more direct. [Laughter] And I think in this particular moment when the problems facing this country are so severe, when we have seen class warfare being waged by the billionaires against the working families of America, when we have seen the billionaire class use its money in an unprecedented way for its political purposes to let more right wing extremists, I think we need people in leadership roles in the House and the Senate and governors’ chairs, in the White House, who are prepared to stand up and say, ‘You know what? This country belongs to all of the people: the waiters and the waitresses who are trying to make it on low incomes, they have a right to see their kids go to college and all people, that the United States is going to join the rest of the industrialized world in guaranteed health care to all people as a right and not any longer be the only country, major country on earth that does not guarantee that right, that all kids regardless of income have the right to a college education, that we need a tax system which in fact makes it very clear that the wealthy and large corporations are going to start paying their fare share of taxes, that we’re going to have real campaign finance reform so that the Koch brothers and other billionaires cannot buy elections, that we’re going to overturn Citizens United.’ Do you think that’s Hillary Clinton’s agenda? I don’t think so.
There is no truth to the rumor that when asked about a Sanders 2016 presidential run, Hillary said … What difference does it make!
But is Sanders really willing to run for president? More importantly as Liberland asks,” The big question is whether Sanders runs as an independent, which he is, or as a Democrat, a party with which he caucuses, but with which he many differences.” If Sanders runs as either, it will be problematic for Hillary Clinton and Democrats. If Sanders runs in the Democrat primary, Hillary will be forced to move to the LEFT to attract the base.If Sanders runs as an Independent in the general election, he will siphon the far Left vote from an establishment Hillary Clinton. We say Run Bernie, Run!!!
Personally, I agree with 0.000527% of Bernie Sanders’ agenda; however, I will give him his due and that he is an unabashed, self-proclaimed socialist. Because he stands by his beliefs and policies, no matter how wrong I think they might be, I give him kudos for standing by his socialist principles. However, after saying what he did about the need for a political revolution and Hillary not being the standard bearer of that movement, I would cry foul and bullsh*t if now Sanders did not run and instead sat back and got in line behind Hillary Clinton like a good establishment Democrat.
The reality is, these days Bernie Sanders probably represents more of what the Democrats are all about these days than Hillary Clinton. Vermont don’t stop there, let’s add former Green Mountain Gov. Howard Dean back for another run as well … YEEHAAA!!!
Freedom of the Press? Not in an Obama World … The FCC Wants to Grill Reporters, Editors & News Station Owners About How They Decide Which Stories to Run
WHEN WILL THE TYRANNY STOP WITH THIS OUT OF CONTROL IMPERIALISTIC PRESIDENT?
It would appear that Barack Obama wants to put government FCC monitors in America’s news rooms to determine why media outlets cover certain stories. ARE YOU KIDDING ME!!! So now we are going to have government lackeys in news rooms to monitor and make sure that the media is covering the stories they want them to? Could Barack Obama and the Obama administration possible trample on the United States Constitution and Freedom of Speech any more?
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
As reported at Mediaite, FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai wrote an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal bringing people’s attention to this study, saying “the government has no place pressuring media organizations into covering certain stories.” And while participation is technically voluntary, ignoring them would not be a wise decision for any news outlet that wants an FCC license. We all know that the MSM is bias and pretty much in lockstep leans to the left, but it is not the governments job to interfere with what they report or how they report . “Participation is voluntary—in theory,” supposedly; however, the FCC’s questions, queries and interrogations may be hard for the broadcasters to ignore as it is this very government agency that could put a media outlet out of business if they spitefully withhold an FCC license. But of course the Obama administration has never gone after or targeted a specific group of people who opposed him, have they … IRS-GATE!
AMERICA, THIS IS WHAT TYRANNY LOOKS LIKE! LET’S JUST COME OUT AND SAY IT … THIS IS ANTI-AMERICAN. WELCOME TO OBAMA’S USS
An Obama administration plan that would get researchers into newsrooms across the country is sparking concern among congressional Republicans and conservative groups.
The purpose of the proposed Federal Communications Commission study is to “identify and understand the critical information needs of the American public, with special emphasis on vulnerable-disadvantaged populations,” according to the agency.
However, one agency commissioner, Ajit Pai, said in a Wall Street Journal op-ed piece Wednesday that the May 2013 proposal would allow researchers to “grill reporters, editors and station owners about how they decide which stories to run.”
He also said he feared the study might stifle the freedom of the press.
Who is Obama kidding?
This is just heinous as Obama uses the death of Daniel Pearl to make it appear that he is for Freedom of the Press
“Reminded us of how valuable a free press is.”
“reminded us that there are those who would go to any leangth in order to silence journalists …”
“A well informed citizenry that is able to make choices and hold governments accountable …”
Obama says, “Clear out the press so that we can take some questions”
Questions that the FCC poses in the study to news managers and staffers, including the following. Honestly, what business is it of the federal government?
- What is the news philosophy of the station?
- How do you define critical information that the community needs?
- Who decides which stories are covered?
- Have you ever suggested coverage of what you consider a story with critical information for your customers (viewers, listeners, readers) that was rejected by management?
VP Joe Biden Tells Democrats, Be Optimistic on State of the Nation ‘In Spite of Who’s President’ … “The American People Are With Us”… Really, The American People Are Against Obama!
HE SAID WHAT? … Did Vice President Joe Biden just diss Barack Obama and then say Americans Agree with Democrats?
Joe Biden told fellow Democrats at the House Democratic Caucus Issues Conference in Cambridge, MD that they should be optimistic about the state of the nation, “in spite of who’s president.” Hmm, kind of an interesting word choice when the current president is Barack Obama, a Democrat. This was Biden’s best effort to rally the beleaguered Democrat troops who face a tough uphill climb in the upcoming 2014 midterm elections thanks to the policies, agenda and signature piece of legislation from who is president.
“It always surprises me when we don’t have the degree of optimism that we should about the state of the nation,” Biden said. “And in spite of who’s president, in spite of who’s in the Congress, the American people are so much stronger, so much more resilient, so much more capable, that even the ridiculous policies of our friends on the right cannot keep them from moving forward.”
Baghdad Bob a delusional Joe Biden went on to say, “I can’t imagine our prospects being viewed by the press and everyone else as being a whole hell of a lot brighter by the time we turn in September then now. The American people are where we are. Let’s go out and make every single effort not just to defend, but to aggressively push, aggressively push our agenda.”
Isn’t it interesting that Biden would reference the MSM viewing the Democrats prospects first and then calling “We the People,” the Americans who are adversely affected by Barack Obama’s and Democrat’s policies as … “everyone else”. Not like we do not know that the liberal MSM is in the tank for Obama and has been since the beginning. The media has been AWOL on vetting Obama, holding his feet to the fire, questioning his failed economic and domestic policies and investigating the all too-numerous scandals like IRS-gate, Benghazi-gate, “Fast & Furious” and NSA-gate. It would appear that Biden and Obama believe that the MSM will continue to be their own personal Gunga Din heading into the 2014 midterms.
But it does not stop there when it came to Biden’s head in the sand comments. Anvil Joe made the preposterous comment to Democrats that, “The American people are where we are.” Really, in what sense, in the United States? The American people are in no way any where near where Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and their lock-step, rubber stamp Democrats have lead this country. In fact, they more the American people learn the truth of the lies that have been told to them and adversely affected by Democrat foreign and domestic policy, the more they are not with Democrats.
A question to Joe Biden, exactly what are the people with you on? The fact of the matter is that the American people are not with Democrats and it is scaring them silly that they may lose even more House seats in 2014 and talk of losing the Senate to the GOP is a real possibility. Vulnerable Democrat candidates are running from Obama, his agenda and their vote. Obama is also acting as Emperor in arbitrarily extending Obamacare deadlines so to protect Democrat politicians, not to help the American people or America.
THE FACTS … The American People Are NOT with Democrats.
I. Barack Obama’s Overall Job Approval rating is barely above 40% with the American people. (Average of polls: 41.4% Approve – 52.4% Disapproval [-11% Disapprove])
- Gallup: 40% approve – 52% Disapprove
- FOX News: 42% Approve – 53% Disapprove
- McClatchy/Marist: 42% Approve – 52% Disapprove
- Reuters/Ipos: 40% Approve – 54% Disapprove
- NBC/WSJ: 43% Approve – 51% Disapprove
II. President Obama Job Approval – Economy. (Average of polls: 40.6% Approve – 55.7% Disapprove [-15.1% Disapprove])
- McClatchy/Marist: 41 Approve – 54% Disapprove
- ABC News/Wash Post: 43% Approval – 56% Disapprove, -13
- FOX News: 38% Approve – 59% Disapprove, -21
- Associated Press: 42% Approve – 56% Disapprove, -14
- Quinnipiac: 39% Approve – 56% Disapprove, -17
- GWU/Battleground: 40% Approve – 57% Disapprove, -17
III: Public Approval of Health Care Law. (Average of polls: 36.3% Approve – 51.3% Against/Oppose [-15 Oppose/Against])
- FOX News: 37% For – 55% Against/Oppose
- Gallup: 41% For – 51% Against/Oppose
- NBC News/WSJ: 34% For – 48 % Against/Oppose
- Associated Press: 27% For – 42 % Against/Oppose
- Quinnipiac: 38% For – 56% Against/Oppose
- GWU/Battleground: 41% For – 56% Against/Oppose
IV: Direction of Country. (Average of polls: 29.6% Right Direction – 63.6% Wrong Track [-34.0 Wrong Tack])
- The Economist/YouGov: 29% Right Track – 62% Wrong Track
- McClatchy/Marist: 31% Right Track – 66% Wrong Track
- Rasmussen Reports: 29% Right Track – 63% Wrong Track
- Reuters/Ipsos: 23% Right Track – 62% Wrong Track
- NBC News/WSJ: 28% Right Track – 63% Wrong Track
- ABC News/Wash Post: 34% Right Track – 64% Wrong Track
- CBS News: 33% Right Track – 61% Wrong Track
- Associated Press: 35% Right Track – 64% Wrong Track
- GWU/Battleground: 24% Right Track – 67% Wrong Track
V: The American people, including Democrats, are overwhelmingly opposed to how Obama is conducting executive orders and circumventing Congress is how government is supposed to work.
VI. The American people are against Obama going around Congress, except if you are a Democrat or Black, and of course if it were a GOP president.
VII: Barack Obama and Democrats rail about income inequality and the income gap, yet every single demographic in America believes that it has increased under Obama.
Liberal & Obama Supporter Attorney Jonathan Turley Says Expansion of Barack Obama’s Presidential Powers Threatens Liberty
WOW, IF THIS DOES NOT WAKE PEOPLE UP, NOTHING WILL … LIB ATTY AND OBAMA SUPPORTER BLASTS OBAMA’S ACTIONS
Last night on ‘The Kelly Files,’ Jonathan Turley, a liberal Constitutional attorney and Obama supporter said a mouthful last night with regards to the imperial president, Barack Obama’s “unilateral” and Unconstitutional actions. Turley stated, “I’m afraid this is beginning to border on a cult of personality for people on the left” and Well, you know, a system in which a single individual is allowed to rewrite legislation or ignore legislation is a system that borders on authoritarianism.”
This is a must watch interview and remember, this is coming from a lib. Turley is basically describing … “TYRANNY”.
KELLY: Let me ask you about this because in that soundbite we played before we went to commercial, you said the framers would be horrified because everything they did was to create balance between the branches of government and we’ve lost that.
TURLEY: Well, I’m afraid it’s quite serious because the framers created a system that was designed to avoid one principle thing, the concentration of power in any one branch. Because that balancing between these branches in this fixed orbit is what not only gives stability to our system but it protects us against authoritarian power, it protects civil liberties from abuse.
And what we’ve been seeing is the shift of gravity within that system in a very dangerous way that makes it unstable, and I think that’s what the president is doing. I think that we’ve become a nation of enablers. We are turning a blind eye to a fundamental change in our system. I think many people will come to loathe that they remained silent during this period.
KELLY: We heard a lot of objections when President Bush expanded the powers of the presidency from the left and from the media. They haven’t been raising the same objections now that we have a Democrat in The White House. And you say they do so at their own peril.
TURLEY: I’m afraid this is beginning to border on a cult of personality for people on the left. I happen to agree with many of President Obama’s policies, but in our system it is often as important how you do something as what you do.
And I think that many people will look back at this period in history and see nothing but confusion as to why people remained so silent when the president asserted these types of unilateral actions. You have a president who is claiming the right to basically rewrite or ignore or negate federal laws. That is a dangerous thing. It has nothing to do with the policies; it has to do with politics.
KELLY: Why is it so dangerous? What’ so bad that will come of this?
TURLEY: Well, you know, a system in which a single individual is allowed to rewrite legislation or ignore legislation is a system that borders on authoritarianism. I don’t believe that we are that system yet. But we cannot ignore that we’re beginning to ignore a system that is a pretense of democracy if a president is allowed to take a law and just simply say, ‘I’m going to ignore this,’ or, ‘I’m going to shift funds that weren’t appropriated by Congress into this area.’
The president’s State of the Union indicated this type of unilateralism that he has adopted as a policy. Now, many people view that as somehow empowering. In my view, it’s dangerous, that is what he is suggesting is to essentially put our system off line. This is not the first time that convenience has become the enemy of principle. But we’ve never seen it to this extent.
KELLY: What is supposed to be done about it? You know, I know in your testimony before Congress you cited Ben Franklin who believed that the other branches would work in their own self interest to try to reign in a president who got drunk on his own power, or however you want to put it. You know, Congress doesn’t have — they can withdrawal money, they can move to impeach, they can file lawsuits –which they’ve done — I mean, what are they supposed to do?
TURLEY: Part of the problem really rests with the federal courts. For the last two decades, federal courts have been engaged in a policy of avoidance. They are not getting involved when the executive branch exceeds its powers, they’re just leaving it up to the branches. And often they say Congress has the power of the purse, Congress can simply restrict funds.
But one of the complaints against President Obama is that very clearly dedicated funds in areas like healthcare, have been just shifted by the White House unilaterally to different areas. And the courts have adopted this avoidance policy.
I am astonished by the degree of passivity in Congress, particularly by Democrats. You know, I first came to Congress when I was a young page and there were people that fiercely believed in the institution. It didn’t matter what party held the White House. But what we’re seeing now is the usurpation of authority that’s unprecedented in this country.
A real look into what Barack Obama truly thinks and believes … Its Good to be King
While visiting Monticello with the French president, President Obama said, “That’s the good thing about being president, I can do whatever I want.” Hmm, you think he is joking, huh? Well, he just made another unlawful change in a law passed by Congress delaying certain employers of the employer mandate until 2016. Is some one going to remind Obama that the federal government of United States of America is composed of three distinct branches: legislative, executive and judicial, whose powers are vested by the U.S. Constitution in the Congress, the President, and the federal courts, including the Supreme Court, respectively. The powers and duties of these branches are further defined by acts of Congress, including the creation of executive departments and courts inferior to the Supreme Court. Just asking?
Remember when Our Founding Fathers created a government of, by and for the American people?
At 4:45 POTUS and president Hollande walked out from a portico and strolled in Front of your pool with Leslie Bowman, president of the Monticello Foundation. Looking at a terrace she said that Jefferson loved to admire the landscape from there. POTUS said that he’d like to take a look and seemed delighted to “break the protocol”.
“That’s the good thing as a President, I can do whatever I want” he quipped, walking to the terrace with his guest and Ms. Bowman. Pool now in the mansion as the leaders will come and visit Jefferson’s study.
More from Kristinn Taylor at The Gateway Pundit and the comparisons to France’s King Louis XVI and his wife Queen Marie Antoinette.
New York Governor Andrew Cuomo Says that Conservatives Who are Right to Life & for 1st and 2nd Amendmends ‘Have No Place in the State of New York’
More liberal tolerance … What has taken over the Democrat party … So much of a government in NY state of, by and for the people, all people.
New York Governor Andrew Cuomo said during a WCNY radio interview with Susan Arbetter that that if “extreme conservatives” are “right-to-life, pro-assault-weapon, anti-gay,” then “they have no place in the state of New York, because that’s not who New Yorkers are.” Seriously? Isn’t the governor of a state supposed to represent all the people? Could you imagine if a governor from a “red” state said that no one who was pro-choice, pro-gay or pro-gun control has no place in their state? The MSM would be in a complete and total uproar. Cuomo went on to say that “moderate Republicans have a place in this state” and noted that he can work with moderate Republicans, as they’ve consistently passed his agenda. So only those that agree with Cuomo have a place in New York state. UNREAL! Imagine if Chris Christie made such a comment? Once again we are witness to another double standard. Let’s hope this socialist clown never runs for president.
“Who are they? Are they these extreme conservatives who are right-to-life, pro-assault-weapon, anti-gay? Is that who they are? Because if that’s who they are and if they are the extreme conservatives, they have no place in the state of New York, because that’s not who New Yorkers are.”
This intolerance is coming from a state governor, this is why the framers and Founding Fathers wrote a Bill of Rights to the US Constitution to protect the people from a tyrannical government.
So let’s get this correct, an individual who expresses their First and Second Amendment rights of the US Constitution have no place in New York state? I thought it was the Democrats who claim to have a big tent and are oh so tolerant. The sad reality of Andrew Cuomo’s comments is that he is being seriously and this is what the liberal, socialists who have taken over the Democrat party believe. So for all you folks outside of New York City and who live in upstate New York, you best not be for the rights of new born babies, you best not support the right to bear Arms and you best not be for religious freedom and the right to follow your religious beliefs.
Saturday Night Live Skit Mocks Barack Obama Selfie, the Raul Castro Hand Shake & the Fake Mandela Interpreter
It would appear that SNL has finally realized that the Obama presidency is a joke and easy fodder for their skits … The amazing part about it is that their parody is exactly what basically happened.
“First, I got roped into taking a selfie with the blonde female Danish prime minister. Some people said Michelle was angry at me for that. But, I talked to her afterwards and I can assure you, she was furious.” [pic-look at that body language]
“Finally there was a sign language interpreter who clearly had no idea what he was doing”.
COLORADO SCHOOL SHOOTING: Shooting at Arapahoe High School, One Injured, Gunman Dead … Gunman ID’d as 18 Year Old Karl Halverson Pierson
Sadly, another shooting to report, this time from Arapahoe High School in Centennial, Colorado. The shooting took place on Friday afternoon as the gunman entered the high school with a shotgun at approximately 12:33 p.m., near the student parking lot, he asked for the teacher by name. During the gun fire, a 15 year old girl was shot and injured and was listed in critical condition at an area hospital. Eventually the shooter turned the gun on himself and committed suicide. The school is eight miles from Columbine.
A student identified as 18-year-old Karl Halverson Pierson walked into a Colorado high school with a shotgun Friday, possibly seeking revenge against a teacher, and critically wounded another student before apparently killing himself, police said.
The injured student, a 15-year-old girl, was listed in critical condition at an area hospital. Arapahoe County Sheriff Grayson Robinson said a second student, initially thought to have suffered a gunshot wound, was actually not injured and only covered with blood from the first victim.
The second student was released from the hospital Friday night.
Robinson also said two Molotov cocktails were found at the scene. One was ignited either “immediately prior to or during the shots being fired,” he said, releasing a “significant amount” of smoke. The second was not deployed and rendered safe.
UPDATE I: The shooter has been identified as 18-year-old Karl Halverson Pierson. The incident appears to be an attempted at revenge against the school’s librarian, Tracy Murphy, who was head of the school’s speech and debate team and who had recently kicked Pierson off the team.
Karl Halverson Pierson was the Arapahoe High School student gunman who shot a student inside the school while seeking “revenge” on a staff member, the Arapahoe County Sheriff confirmed Friday night.
Pierson, 18, went into the school armed with a shotgun looking for the school’s librarian, Tracy Murphy — who was head of the school’s speech and debate team and who had recently kicked Pierson off the team, sources told the CALL7 Investigators.
“We were just in the library doing some work and we heard a loud bang. I thought it might have been someone dropping something, but then I heard two more,” said senior Max Minne. “I knew it was a gun for sure.”
Minne, who was studying in the library during his 5th period class, said he started to approach the front door of the library to see what was happening.
“The shooter just ripped through the door, started yelling, ‘Where’s Murphy?’ — That’s the main librarian of the school. I saw him bust through the door of the library with a gun, so I just took off and started yelling, ‘Everyone get out! Everyone get out!’”
UPDATE II: Arapahoe High gunman held strong political beliefs, but he does not look like a Tea Party member. Actually, he appears to be a socialist.
The teenage gunman who entered Arapahoe High School on Friday afternoon and shot two fellow students with a shotgun was outspoken about politics, was a gifted debater and might have been bullied for his beliefs, according to students who knew him.
In one Facebook post, Pierson attacks the philosophies of economist Adam Smith, who through his invisible-hand theory pushed the notion that the free market was self-regulating. In another post, he describes himself as “Keynesian.”
Pierson also appears to mock Republicans on another Facebook post, writing “you republicans are so cute” and posting an image that reads: “The Republican Party: Health Care: Let ‘em Die, Climate Change: Let ‘em Die, Gun Violence: Let ‘em Die, Women’s Rights: Let ‘em Die, More War: Let ‘em Die. Is this really the side you want to be on?”
Carl Schmidt and Brendon Mendelson, both seniors at Arapahoe High, knew Pierson. They said he had political views that were “outside the mainstream,” but they did not elaborate.
Out of the mainstream, really? Has anyone seen lately what the Democrat/Socialist party has been spewing lately? The PJ Tatler makes a very good observation in that Pierson’s political views hardly seem out of the mainstream for Democrats or so they seem very deep thinking. They are the same as Nancy Pelosi talking points (VIDEO) against the GOP.
But oh the all too common hypocrisy from the LEFT, he mocked Republicans, “Gun Violence: Let ‘em Die,” yet Karl Halverson Pierson takes a shotgun into the high school to cause violence and death.
TIME Magazine’s pick as the 2013 Person of the Year is …
Miley Cyrus Pope Francis.
Forgive me if I am a bit skeptical of Time’s choice for Pope Francis as being their ‘Person of the Year” for 2013, but I am. Not that Pope Francis is not a good man or deserving of this award, but TIME made the choice not because of his religious virtue and certainly not because they believe in Catholicism or the message it spreads. Doesn’t it feel like it was yesterday they were doing stories on the coverups of sexual predator Catholic priests? Let’s face it, the reason why they chose him is because Pope Francis criticized “modern capitalism” ,in an attack on “the idolatry of money.”
Like I said, Pope Francis is an easy and justifiable choice, it is the reasons why he was picked that are suspect. In any other year Edward Snowden, the NSA whistle-blower would have won this hands down. He exposed the spying ways of the NSA and will continue to do so for months and years to come. Snowden’s exposing of the NSA has even made US lawmakers and foreign leaders question what this spy organization is doing.
However, Snowden finished second to Pope Francis for pretty much one reason and that is Time’s media bias to push Obama’s agenda of “income equity” otherwise known as socialism.
Once there was a boy so meek and modest, he was awarded a Most Humble badge. The next day, It was taken away because he wore it. Here endeth the lesson.
How do you practice humility from the most exalted throne on earth? Rarely has a new player on the world stage captured so much attention so quickly—young and old, faithful and cynical—as has Pope Francis. In his nine months in office, he has placed himself at the very center of the central conversations of our time: about wealth and poverty, fairness and justice, transparency, modernity, globalization, the role of women, the nature of marriage, the temptations of power.
And yet in less than a year, he has done something remarkable: he has not changed the words, but he’s changed the music. Tone and temperament matter in a church built on the substance of symbols—bread and wine, body and blood—so it is a mistake to dismiss any Pope’s symbolic choices as gestures empty of the force of law. He released his first exhortation, an attack on “the idolatry of money,” just as Americans were contemplating the day set aside for gratitude and whether to spend it at the mall.
NY Times Reports: The Obama Administration Doesn’t Want You to Call ObamaCare “Redistribution” … Even Though It Is And They Know(Knew) It
What’s in a word, except everything.
The New York Times is reporting that Barack Obama and his administration does not want you to call Obamacare the “R” word. Not racism, but “REDISTRIBUTION”. Just as Barack Obama and Democrats have suddenly distanced themselves from calling Obama’s signature piece of legislation Obamacare as it has become toxic. They also do not want you to call Obamacare a redistribution of wealth, when it obviously is. America, how else do you think that so many millions of uninsured poor people were going to miraculously get insurance, from the healthcare fairy? The fact of the matter is, that they knew it all along and demonized Republicans when they stated the truth. Now suddenly millions of Americans don’t like it when the redistribution of wealth, the money grab is not just from the rich, but from the middle class as well. We said a long time ago, be very careful what Obama and his band of socialist define as rich, it might just be you.
Rebecca M. Blank was a top candidate in 2011 to lead President Obama’s Council of Economic Advisers, but then the White House turned up something politically dangerous.
“A commitment to economic justice necessarily implies a commitment to the redistribution of economic resources, so that the poor and the dispossessed are more fully included in the economic system,” Ms. Blank, a noted poverty researcher, wrote in 1992. With advisers wary of airing those views in a nomination fight, Mr. Obama passed over Ms. Blank, then a top Commerce Department official and now the chancellor of the University of Wisconsin. Instead he chose Alan Krueger, a Princeton economist.
“Redistribution is a loaded word that conjures up all sorts of unfairness in people’s minds,” said William M. Daley, who was Mr. Obama’s chief of staff at the time. Republicans wield it “as a hammer” against Democrats, he said, adding, “It’s a word that, in the political world, you just don’t use.”
These days the word is particularly toxic at the White House, where it has been hidden away to make the Affordable Care Act more palatable to the public and less a target for Republicans, who have long accused Democrats of seeking “socialized medicine.” But the redistribution of wealth has always been a central feature of the law and lies at the heart of the insurance market disruptions driving political attacks this fall.
“Americans want a fair and fixed insurance market,” said Jonathan Gruber, a health economist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology who advised Mr. Obama’s team as it designed the law. “You cannot have that without some redistribution away from a small number of people.”
The National Review On-line has 8 takeaways from the NYT article, here are a few:
- The White House intentionally hid Obamacare’s redistributive goals.
- Policy experts knew all along but didn’t tell the public.
- David Axelrod blames American political culture for Obama’s needing to lie in the first place
- Republican charges Obama feels must be deflected by disguising the truth: redistribution, socialized medicine, redistributor-in-chief, spreading the wealth around, closet socialist. (Read the rest of the takeaways HERE)
Make no mistake about it America, Barack Obama and Democrats lied to you and it was most certainly intentional. Their entire model of Obamacare is based on the redistribution of wealth and bringing others up while taking you down. That’s what socialists deem fair.