Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Saturday, October 25, 2008
This Credit Crisis Started in 1970s Under Democrat Carter, Barak Obama will Continue Crisis
Go to URL:http://www.IBDeditorials.com for Investor's Business Daily's interview with
Terry Jones discussing the current crisis.
Democrats started this mess in the 70s with a noble social experiment to extend home ownership to people who were not credit worthy. Republicans could have addressed this problem seriously, but failed to do so over the years.
Obama's party is responsible for the mess and his policies - the failed socialist policies of the 60s generation - will only further the crisis and drive this economy into the ground.
Do not be decieved.
This country needs more than someone who learned to turn a literary phrase in college and while sitting in church listening to black liberation theology.
Terry Jones discussing the current crisis.
Democrats started this mess in the 70s with a noble social experiment to extend home ownership to people who were not credit worthy. Republicans could have addressed this problem seriously, but failed to do so over the years.
Obama's party is responsible for the mess and his policies - the failed socialist policies of the 60s generation - will only further the crisis and drive this economy into the ground.
Do not be decieved.
This country needs more than someone who learned to turn a literary phrase in college and while sitting in church listening to black liberation theology.
Friday, October 17, 2008
Does biology influence our political opinions?
When scientists find that our reactions to politics stem from our reactions to loud obnoxious noises and threatening images, that would explain why I'm so annoyed by Dr. Joseph Cramer's Deseret News column on Saturday, 27 September 2008 entitled "Does biology influence our political opinions?" It's just so much loud noise, ill analyzed.
One need only search history to see the ridiculous claim advanced (by Oxley, et al) in the September 19 issue of Science, and the book The Attachment of Politics by Kraemer and Roberts.
Wonderful people on the Left - liberal, accepting people: Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao, Castro, Che Guevarra, all of whom left thousands and millions in mass graves!
Ah, but they make their surviving cohorts feel so safe and nurtured! In this way, such "liberalism" is self perpetuating. The safe surviving liberals will grow up so accepting of others - ask diehard Soviets and readers of Mao's Little Red book.
Ah, breathe the air of safety - amid the underlying stench of massacred millions.
The researchers are too narrow in their analysis - too North American in their myopia. The world-wide view doesn't bear their premise out.
Far from being calm, nurtured, peaceful individuals, many liberals are angry, reactionary radicals, bent on revolution and slaughter of those they find responsible for their plight.
Oxley and his fellow myopes think with full bellies, safe within their upper middleclass wombs, where they've touched no one and anyone liberal, hungry and insecure have never touched them, or pulled a knife on them or pointed a gun at their heads.
That would skew the results of their research!
On a wider scale, fanatics on the Left and the Right are so far left and right that they start to meet each other on the other side of the circle.
Fear of change can be found on both sides of the aisle. Especially frightening are paranoid liberals who distrust anyone over 30 years old, and who are so dogmatic they can't see any value in holding on to practice and policies that have proven track records over centuries.
These are so radical in their world view, that they kill millions who stand in the way of "human progress."
They did get one thing right.
When the leftist liberals riot in the streets, overthrow govenrments, and kill innocents - that kind of politics affects our biology!
One need only search history to see the ridiculous claim advanced (by Oxley, et al) in the September 19 issue of Science, and the book The Attachment of Politics by Kraemer and Roberts.
Wonderful people on the Left - liberal, accepting people: Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao, Castro, Che Guevarra, all of whom left thousands and millions in mass graves!
Ah, but they make their surviving cohorts feel so safe and nurtured! In this way, such "liberalism" is self perpetuating. The safe surviving liberals will grow up so accepting of others - ask diehard Soviets and readers of Mao's Little Red book.
Ah, breathe the air of safety - amid the underlying stench of massacred millions.
The researchers are too narrow in their analysis - too North American in their myopia. The world-wide view doesn't bear their premise out.
Far from being calm, nurtured, peaceful individuals, many liberals are angry, reactionary radicals, bent on revolution and slaughter of those they find responsible for their plight.
Oxley and his fellow myopes think with full bellies, safe within their upper middleclass wombs, where they've touched no one and anyone liberal, hungry and insecure have never touched them, or pulled a knife on them or pointed a gun at their heads.
That would skew the results of their research!
On a wider scale, fanatics on the Left and the Right are so far left and right that they start to meet each other on the other side of the circle.
Fear of change can be found on both sides of the aisle. Especially frightening are paranoid liberals who distrust anyone over 30 years old, and who are so dogmatic they can't see any value in holding on to practice and policies that have proven track records over centuries.
These are so radical in their world view, that they kill millions who stand in the way of "human progress."
They did get one thing right.
When the leftist liberals riot in the streets, overthrow govenrments, and kill innocents - that kind of politics affects our biology!
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Barak Obama Advances the Failed Socialist Policies of the Past
Obama's closing statement confirms where he will take us.
He will socialize medical care. Provide medical care for all. Set your calendars for fifteen months ahead to be seen - even for cancer.
In other words, it will be the difference between the Post Office vs. UPS and FEDEX. Which delivery system will be more efficient in saving your life?
He will socialize college educations. Even for those students who have no business attending, but should be in trade courses.
Let's go in a new direction with McCain, not the failed socialist policies of the past!
He will socialize medical care. Provide medical care for all. Set your calendars for fifteen months ahead to be seen - even for cancer.
In other words, it will be the difference between the Post Office vs. UPS and FEDEX. Which delivery system will be more efficient in saving your life?
He will socialize college educations. Even for those students who have no business attending, but should be in trade courses.
Let's go in a new direction with McCain, not the failed socialist policies of the past!
Sunday, October 12, 2008
We Already Know McCain's the Right Stuff
When Ronald Reagan was shot, he said to a distraught Nancy, "Honey, I forgot to duck." And to his doctors: "I hope you're all Republicans." He showed of what stuff he was made.
In the coming days, as we decide the direction of the nation, we know the stuff of which John McCain is made. He has proved himself in days as a POW in Hanoi during the Vietnam War.
We do not know Barak Obama. His past is questionable.
In the coming days, as we decide the direction of the nation, we know the stuff of which John McCain is made. He has proved himself in days as a POW in Hanoi during the Vietnam War.
We do not know Barak Obama. His past is questionable.
Friday, October 10, 2008
Don't Bail Them Out, Mises Institute Article Advises
Don't Bail Them Out
Daily Article by Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr. Posted on 9/10/2008
It was the singular achievement of Murray Rothbard's America's Great Depression to have demonstrated that the Great Depression was a crisis manufactured and prolonged by the attempts to stop an inevitable downturn. The policy response — creating more money, propping up prices, ginning up employment, and a host of other devices — took a stock-market price collapse and a banking liquidation and spread the mess throughout every sector of the economy. What might have lasted a year to 18 months instead lasted 16 years.
At the time, Ludwig von Mises tried to warn against intervention. See his Causes of the Economic Crisis. So did F.A. Hayek. See his Prices and Production. So did Lord Robbins. See his book The Great Depression.
And yet, that is not the conventional wisdom. The conventional wisdom is that the Depression was a natural disaster, a hurricane that swept through society that had to be fixed by the government. Another view, found in the work of the monetarists, is that it was caused by the failure of the government to create oceans of paper. This seems to be the view of Bernanke.
America is now imprisoned by these fallacious views of cause and effect. For this reason, we see virtual unanimity that the bailout (call it want you want: conservatorship, nationalization, socialization, whatever) of Freddie and Fannie must take place.
On the day following the nationalization, a day that will live in infamy, the Wall Street Journal editorialized against the Democrats and their reform efforts, but didn't actually oppose the bailout; instead it observed that we are all somehow "on the hook." The paper also published a piece by McCain/Palin which said that the bailout is "sadly necessary."
The New York Times called it "a reasonable and reassuring move." The Los Angeles Times wrote that the bailout was "inevitable," and complained that Freddie and Fannie should only help 20% and not half of borrowers. Steve Forbes in his magazine wrote that "drastic action" had to be taken because a default would "have triggered the worst financial meltdown since the Great Depression."
It's interesting, isn't it, that all these people believe that waving the magic money wand can make reality just go away. That incredible superstition seems to be the official position of the entire US establishment. And we like to flatter ourselves into believing that we live in an age without illusions!
As for those who should know better, Greg Mankiw, author of the leading economics textbook, writes that because "it was likely to happen eventually" it is "better to get on with it." The supposedly free-market economics blog Marginal Revolution warns that without the bailout, "most of the U.S. banking system would be insolvent," failing to point out that a system that needs a bailout with fiat money is already insolvent.
The Cato Institute agrees that the Treasury had to bail out the mortgage industry because it "was forced to do so," and since Fannie and Freddie are indeed "too big to fail." The Heritage Foundation agrees that it was a "necessary step" and a "vital move toward reform."
Sure, these people have plenty of recommendations about what should have been done in the past, and lots of ideas about what should be done in the future. As for the present, they are ready to propagandize for the largest socialist operation in American history. In all of these latter cases, we are looking not at a problem of economic education, but rather the lack of courage to stand up to the state when it is needed most.
Pretty much alone in both predicting the calamity and actually opposing the bailout are those who have learned from the Misesian tradition, people such as Nouriel Roubini of the RGE Monitor, investor Jim Rogers, and of course our own scholars such as Mark Thornton, George Reisman, Robert Blumen, and pretty much all of our adjunct scholars, who have said plainly and clearly that this is a dreadful error, one that will worsen the present meltdown. Of course Ron Paul was right all along, as the evidence proves.
Let us address this claim that not bailing out the system and not nationalizing the mortgage market would lead to a financial meltdown on the level of the Great Depression. It makes no sense to warn that we will repeat the past if we fail to do the things that actually made the past as bad as it was. The truth is exactly the opposite: to avoid another Depression-length downturn, we need to avoid the mistakes of the past, among which were the policies that attempted to keep failing firms and industries afloat in difficult economic times.
What should have happened in 1929 is precisely what should happen now. Let the price system prevail! The government should completely remove itself from the course of action and let the market reevaluate resource values. That means bankruptcies, yes. That means bank closures, yes. But these are part of the capitalistic system. They are part of the free-market economy. What is regrettable is not the readjustment process, but that the process was ever made necessary by the preceding interventions.
Let me state this very plainly: I do not believe for one second that if the government fails to nationalize Freddie and Fannie, the world as we know it will come to an end. Those who are saying so are trying to scare the population, the same as with every other major demand by the regime. It was the same with NAFTA, the WTO, the war on terror, the war on bird flu, the nationalization of airport security, and everything else.
$32 $25
If the government did nothing but sell off the assets of the mortgage giants, we do not know for sure what would happen, but the market has a way of finding value and readjusting. I would expect about 18 months of difficulties. Banks would fail just as many businesses in the free market fail every day. Housing prices would fall more, just as all market prices are subject to change. But the process of readjustment would be smooth and rational. Most importantly, we would all stop living a lie and believing an illusion.
Contrary to what the blogging heads say, there is nothing that makes this nationalization inevitable. We need to let the market handle the entire process, come what may. I guarantee that this solution is a better one than creating another trillion or so to bail out failing enterprises.
Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr. is president of the Ludwig von Mises Institute in Auburn, Alabama, editor of LewRockwell.com, and author of Speaking of Liberty. See his Mises.org archive. Send him mail. Comment on the blog.
Daily Article by Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr. Posted on 9/10/2008
It was the singular achievement of Murray Rothbard's America's Great Depression to have demonstrated that the Great Depression was a crisis manufactured and prolonged by the attempts to stop an inevitable downturn. The policy response — creating more money, propping up prices, ginning up employment, and a host of other devices — took a stock-market price collapse and a banking liquidation and spread the mess throughout every sector of the economy. What might have lasted a year to 18 months instead lasted 16 years.
At the time, Ludwig von Mises tried to warn against intervention. See his Causes of the Economic Crisis. So did F.A. Hayek. See his Prices and Production. So did Lord Robbins. See his book The Great Depression.
And yet, that is not the conventional wisdom. The conventional wisdom is that the Depression was a natural disaster, a hurricane that swept through society that had to be fixed by the government. Another view, found in the work of the monetarists, is that it was caused by the failure of the government to create oceans of paper. This seems to be the view of Bernanke.
America is now imprisoned by these fallacious views of cause and effect. For this reason, we see virtual unanimity that the bailout (call it want you want: conservatorship, nationalization, socialization, whatever) of Freddie and Fannie must take place.
On the day following the nationalization, a day that will live in infamy, the Wall Street Journal editorialized against the Democrats and their reform efforts, but didn't actually oppose the bailout; instead it observed that we are all somehow "on the hook." The paper also published a piece by McCain/Palin which said that the bailout is "sadly necessary."
The New York Times called it "a reasonable and reassuring move." The Los Angeles Times wrote that the bailout was "inevitable," and complained that Freddie and Fannie should only help 20% and not half of borrowers. Steve Forbes in his magazine wrote that "drastic action" had to be taken because a default would "have triggered the worst financial meltdown since the Great Depression."
It's interesting, isn't it, that all these people believe that waving the magic money wand can make reality just go away. That incredible superstition seems to be the official position of the entire US establishment. And we like to flatter ourselves into believing that we live in an age without illusions!
As for those who should know better, Greg Mankiw, author of the leading economics textbook, writes that because "it was likely to happen eventually" it is "better to get on with it." The supposedly free-market economics blog Marginal Revolution warns that without the bailout, "most of the U.S. banking system would be insolvent," failing to point out that a system that needs a bailout with fiat money is already insolvent.
The Cato Institute agrees that the Treasury had to bail out the mortgage industry because it "was forced to do so," and since Fannie and Freddie are indeed "too big to fail." The Heritage Foundation agrees that it was a "necessary step" and a "vital move toward reform."
Sure, these people have plenty of recommendations about what should have been done in the past, and lots of ideas about what should be done in the future. As for the present, they are ready to propagandize for the largest socialist operation in American history. In all of these latter cases, we are looking not at a problem of economic education, but rather the lack of courage to stand up to the state when it is needed most.
Pretty much alone in both predicting the calamity and actually opposing the bailout are those who have learned from the Misesian tradition, people such as Nouriel Roubini of the RGE Monitor, investor Jim Rogers, and of course our own scholars such as Mark Thornton, George Reisman, Robert Blumen, and pretty much all of our adjunct scholars, who have said plainly and clearly that this is a dreadful error, one that will worsen the present meltdown. Of course Ron Paul was right all along, as the evidence proves.
Let us address this claim that not bailing out the system and not nationalizing the mortgage market would lead to a financial meltdown on the level of the Great Depression. It makes no sense to warn that we will repeat the past if we fail to do the things that actually made the past as bad as it was. The truth is exactly the opposite: to avoid another Depression-length downturn, we need to avoid the mistakes of the past, among which were the policies that attempted to keep failing firms and industries afloat in difficult economic times.
What should have happened in 1929 is precisely what should happen now. Let the price system prevail! The government should completely remove itself from the course of action and let the market reevaluate resource values. That means bankruptcies, yes. That means bank closures, yes. But these are part of the capitalistic system. They are part of the free-market economy. What is regrettable is not the readjustment process, but that the process was ever made necessary by the preceding interventions.
Let me state this very plainly: I do not believe for one second that if the government fails to nationalize Freddie and Fannie, the world as we know it will come to an end. Those who are saying so are trying to scare the population, the same as with every other major demand by the regime. It was the same with NAFTA, the WTO, the war on terror, the war on bird flu, the nationalization of airport security, and everything else.
$32 $25
If the government did nothing but sell off the assets of the mortgage giants, we do not know for sure what would happen, but the market has a way of finding value and readjusting. I would expect about 18 months of difficulties. Banks would fail just as many businesses in the free market fail every day. Housing prices would fall more, just as all market prices are subject to change. But the process of readjustment would be smooth and rational. Most importantly, we would all stop living a lie and believing an illusion.
Contrary to what the blogging heads say, there is nothing that makes this nationalization inevitable. We need to let the market handle the entire process, come what may. I guarantee that this solution is a better one than creating another trillion or so to bail out failing enterprises.
Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr. is president of the Ludwig von Mises Institute in Auburn, Alabama, editor of LewRockwell.com, and author of Speaking of Liberty. See his Mises.org archive. Send him mail. Comment on the blog.
Thursday, October 9, 2008
Essentially Dishonest Obama
Barak Hussein Obama, by keeping his platform quiet and hidden, by speaking generalities and not specifics is dishonest.
Were he to tell all of what he truly believes, the man would not be elected. He's a socialist with ties to socialists in Kenya, with bonds to Weathermen Underground - old school terrorists-turned-professors, and as anti-Free Market "spy" he worked among "the enemy" right out of college.
Michelle Obama seethes behind her facade - her damning of America, her only being proud since her husband's entry into national politics.
Disingenuous.
Were he to tell all of what he truly believes, the man would not be elected. He's a socialist with ties to socialists in Kenya, with bonds to Weathermen Underground - old school terrorists-turned-professors, and as anti-Free Market "spy" he worked among "the enemy" right out of college.
Michelle Obama seethes behind her facade - her damning of America, her only being proud since her husband's entry into national politics.
Disingenuous.
Sunday, October 5, 2008
Sample Headlines, Internat'l Business Daily Shows Obama's Socialism
Here are some headlines and leads from IBD:
Read them here: http://www.ibdeditorials.com/
Have Americans been so lulled by Barack Obama's smooth talk that they don't realize his plans would expand government into a massive socialist behemoth? His is a soft-spoken, hard-left agenda.
Part Eighteen
Obama's McKnight In Shining Armor
Election '08: Obama needed help getting into Harvard Law School. He got it from a disciple of Saul Alinsky who shared the socialist agitator's belief in the radical change the young community organizer could embrace.
Part Seventeen
Chicago Commune
Election '08: Barack Obama summed up well the perversity of Democratic Party thinking when he told Fox News' Bill O'Reilly that it is "neighborliness" for Washington to hike taxes on those who are "sitting pretty."
Part Sixteen
How Obama Applies Alinsky's Rules
Election '08: Barack Obama's mocking of John McCain, while urging his followers to "get in their face," are tactics right out of his radical hero Saul Alinsky's playbook: ridicule and agitation.
Part Fifteen
Community Organizer In Chief
Election '08: Barack Obama claims he worked for a "small group of churches" as a community organizer. In fact, he was hired by a radical Alinskyite group, and Saul Alinsky's own son has outed him.
Part Fourteen
Sojourning Socialists
Election '08: Barack Obama has joined forces with a white socialist he calls a "good friend" — the Rev. Jim Wallis, founder of "Sojourners." He too believes in "liberation theology," sans the black nationalism. In fact, Wallis is the white version of Jeremiah Wright, sans the black rage.
Part Thirteen
Michelle's Boot Camps For Radicals
Election '08: Democrats' reintroduction of militant Michelle Obama in Denver was supposed to show her softer side. But it only highlighted a radical part of her resume: Public Allies.
Part Twelve
Alice In Obamaland
Election '08: One of the "lies" Barack Obama says are being told about him is quite true. It involves a staunch admirer of the Soviet Union and its communist society who helped launch Obama's political career.
Part Eleven
Finding Friends On Far, Far Left
Election '08: The saying that a man is known by the company he keeps is true of political relationships. In Barack Obama's case, some of the groups that support him are an indictment of his political orientation.
Part Ten
Like Father, Like Son
Election '08: Barack Obama's economic blueprint sounds like one his communist father tried to foist on Kenya 40 years ago, with massive taxes and succor shrouded as "investments."
Part Nine
Obama's Radical Roots And Rules
Election '08: Most Americans revile socialism, yet Barack Obama's poll numbers remain competitive. One explanation: He's a longtime disciple of a man whose mission was to teach radicals to disguise their ideology.
Part Eight
Obama's Little Red Schoolhouse
Schools: While Obama's children enjoy the best education money can buy, he wants to deny inner-city children the education change we can believe in — school choice. He prefers cradle-to-diploma collectivist education.
Part Seven
Reparations By Another Name
Election '08: Barack Obama says Washington shouldn't just offer apologies for slavery, but also "deeds." Don't worry, he says, he's not talking about direct reparations. Relieved? Don't be.
Part Six
Obama Finds An ACORN
Election '08: The man who includes being a community organizer on his short resume has a long association with a far-left group that would organize our communities into socialist gulags.
Part Five
Young Obama's Red Mentor
Election '08: The mainstream media have finally gotten around to revealing Barack Obama's early mentor. But they've downplayed the mystery man's communist background.
Part Four
Obamanomics Flunks The Test
Election '08: Barack Obama the lawyer-organizer could use a crash course in economics. His economic plan's assumptions, based on long-discredited Marxist theories, are wildly wrongheaded.
Part Three
Obama Wants You
Election '08: Barack Obama calls it "Universal Voluntary Public Service." We call it a plan for national involuntary servitude. Kennedy asked us what we could do for our country. Obama has ways to make us volunteer.
Part Two
Obama's Global Tax
Election '08: A plan by Barack Obama to redistribute American wealth on a global level is moving forward in the Senate. It follows Marxist theology — from each according to his ability, to each according to his need.
Part One
Barack Obama's Stealth Socialism
Election '08: Before friendly audiences, Barack Obama speaks passionately about something called "economic justice." He uses the term obliquely, though, speaking in code — socialist code.
More editorials on Election 2008 and Politics
Related Topics »Election 2008 »Politics »Media & Culture More Topics
© Copyright 2008 Investor's Business Daily. All Rights Reserved.
Read them here: http://www.ibdeditorials.com/
Have Americans been so lulled by Barack Obama's smooth talk that they don't realize his plans would expand government into a massive socialist behemoth? His is a soft-spoken, hard-left agenda.
Part Eighteen
Obama's McKnight In Shining Armor
Election '08: Obama needed help getting into Harvard Law School. He got it from a disciple of Saul Alinsky who shared the socialist agitator's belief in the radical change the young community organizer could embrace.
Part Seventeen
Chicago Commune
Election '08: Barack Obama summed up well the perversity of Democratic Party thinking when he told Fox News' Bill O'Reilly that it is "neighborliness" for Washington to hike taxes on those who are "sitting pretty."
Part Sixteen
How Obama Applies Alinsky's Rules
Election '08: Barack Obama's mocking of John McCain, while urging his followers to "get in their face," are tactics right out of his radical hero Saul Alinsky's playbook: ridicule and agitation.
Part Fifteen
Community Organizer In Chief
Election '08: Barack Obama claims he worked for a "small group of churches" as a community organizer. In fact, he was hired by a radical Alinskyite group, and Saul Alinsky's own son has outed him.
Part Fourteen
Sojourning Socialists
Election '08: Barack Obama has joined forces with a white socialist he calls a "good friend" — the Rev. Jim Wallis, founder of "Sojourners." He too believes in "liberation theology," sans the black nationalism. In fact, Wallis is the white version of Jeremiah Wright, sans the black rage.
Part Thirteen
Michelle's Boot Camps For Radicals
Election '08: Democrats' reintroduction of militant Michelle Obama in Denver was supposed to show her softer side. But it only highlighted a radical part of her resume: Public Allies.
Part Twelve
Alice In Obamaland
Election '08: One of the "lies" Barack Obama says are being told about him is quite true. It involves a staunch admirer of the Soviet Union and its communist society who helped launch Obama's political career.
Part Eleven
Finding Friends On Far, Far Left
Election '08: The saying that a man is known by the company he keeps is true of political relationships. In Barack Obama's case, some of the groups that support him are an indictment of his political orientation.
Part Ten
Like Father, Like Son
Election '08: Barack Obama's economic blueprint sounds like one his communist father tried to foist on Kenya 40 years ago, with massive taxes and succor shrouded as "investments."
Part Nine
Obama's Radical Roots And Rules
Election '08: Most Americans revile socialism, yet Barack Obama's poll numbers remain competitive. One explanation: He's a longtime disciple of a man whose mission was to teach radicals to disguise their ideology.
Part Eight
Obama's Little Red Schoolhouse
Schools: While Obama's children enjoy the best education money can buy, he wants to deny inner-city children the education change we can believe in — school choice. He prefers cradle-to-diploma collectivist education.
Part Seven
Reparations By Another Name
Election '08: Barack Obama says Washington shouldn't just offer apologies for slavery, but also "deeds." Don't worry, he says, he's not talking about direct reparations. Relieved? Don't be.
Part Six
Obama Finds An ACORN
Election '08: The man who includes being a community organizer on his short resume has a long association with a far-left group that would organize our communities into socialist gulags.
Part Five
Young Obama's Red Mentor
Election '08: The mainstream media have finally gotten around to revealing Barack Obama's early mentor. But they've downplayed the mystery man's communist background.
Part Four
Obamanomics Flunks The Test
Election '08: Barack Obama the lawyer-organizer could use a crash course in economics. His economic plan's assumptions, based on long-discredited Marxist theories, are wildly wrongheaded.
Part Three
Obama Wants You
Election '08: Barack Obama calls it "Universal Voluntary Public Service." We call it a plan for national involuntary servitude. Kennedy asked us what we could do for our country. Obama has ways to make us volunteer.
Part Two
Obama's Global Tax
Election '08: A plan by Barack Obama to redistribute American wealth on a global level is moving forward in the Senate. It follows Marxist theology — from each according to his ability, to each according to his need.
Part One
Barack Obama's Stealth Socialism
Election '08: Before friendly audiences, Barack Obama speaks passionately about something called "economic justice." He uses the term obliquely, though, speaking in code — socialist code.
More editorials on Election 2008 and Politics
Related Topics »Election 2008 »Politics »Media & Culture More Topics
© Copyright 2008 Investor's Business Daily. All Rights Reserved.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
