Obama and his Dad's paper on Socialism

I did a blog on this a couple years back (or at least it feels like a couple years, and I didn't look it up). Barak H. Obama, Sr. wrote a critique of Sessional paper No. 10 called Problems Facing Our Socialism. Here's a copy on line of that critique: http://www.politico.com/static/PPM41_eastafrica.html

I thought with 3 and a half years of President Obama's administration behind us, I would revisit this. A lot has changed, and I've learned a lot, so I wanted to look with fresh eyes at the comparison. I'll put direct quotes from the critique in quotation marks.

"If it is accepted that it is the leaders of a country who usually formulate and define ideologies, then the only source for this definition would be to get it from them either through their speeches, press reports or papers or through their actions."

Could this be why President Obama's administration refuses to admit to our definition of Socialism? Remember the media person who claimed we're all socialists? They down grade and try to make socialism palatable. It shouldn't be palatable to ANY natural born American. According to Sr. Obama, we need only look at their actions, speeches and press reports to define their ideology. How many industries did President Obama nationalize? The car industry, banks, etc. That's one definition of socialism. Spreading the wealth is another facit of socialism.

"After all, how can one talk of the independence of something people do not know?"

Is this the reason that President Obama and his people constantly attack the Tea Party movement? They want the "unwashed masses" to not fully understand the Tea Party or what's really going on in Washington. They want them to concentrate on what they're trying to scare them with. The claim that the Republicans want to take everything away from them (welfare, social security, SSI for the disabled, military pay and military retirement pay). What they don't say is that it is the President's responsibility to determine what gets paid. So, if he defaults on anything, he chose to. Also, do a little research into Communist countries, like China.  There is no welfare, food stamps, unemployment insurance, etc., in China.  You don't work, you don't eat.  They also hide this fact from the public so no one knows what Obama really wants.  Yea, Communism, they say to the ones who know no better.  Communism is utopia.  But once their base of voters who get all the government handouts get him re-elected, all the benies will go away.  Let's sit back and watch the ghetto revolt then.  We, who are used to working for a living, will last a little longer.

"...differ from scientific socialism unless one takes the statement 'society in turn will reward these efforts' to be different than 'reward to each according to his needs.'"

Yes, these two statements are different. Society rewards differently than a government would. And who can quantify needs? Is this like everyone needs a cell phone, because it's just safer? If you can't afford one, the government will provide you with one. It's like the welfare recipients I see. They're on welfare, but they all have IPhones. I don't have an IPhone. My family has to work for our money and it doesn't go that far. (Update for Christmas my brother in law gave me a refurbished IPhone and is paying part of the data package for me for a year.)


"...one cannot say that solutions cannot be the same where causes are different."

I suppose this is why the Marxists, Communists, Anarchists, and Muslims are all working together. They have the same end goal in sight: the destruction of the American way of life. I got news for you, Mr. Obama: when the Marxists, Anarchists and Muslims are done with you, do you think they'll still consider you useful? And to the Occupy Wall Street gang, do you know that when you don't get the utopia you thought you were going to get, and revolt, you'll be the first to go, too?

"If left to the individual, consolidation will take a long time to come. We have to look at priorities in terms of what is good for society and on this basis we may find it necessary to force people to do things they would not do otherwise."

I believe this sums up the regulations czar...nudge, nudge, push, push. If you've ever read The Road to Serfdom, he mentions (paraphrased) that all socialists become fascists when they realize the only way to get what they want is to MAKE everyone accept it.

"If the government should, however feel that individual ownership is the best policy to take in order to bring development, then it should restrict the size of farms that can be owned by one individual throughout the country and this should apply to everybody from the President to the ordinary man."

Well, except for applying to everyone, this is what Obama is trying to do with all the farm regulations. He now wants all farm equipment to be listed as commercial vehicles, and everyone who drives it must have a Commercial Driver's License. This will put a lot of farms out of business, and he can break that land up and give it to someone else. To my family members who own more than 10 acres of land, I hope you're listening.  I believe the accepted amount was 5 acres.  I wonder if everyone will still be chearleading him when they have to give up their land.

"...so long as we maintain free enterprise one cannot deny that some will accumulate more than others."

Ahh, that's why he is against capitalism. It means everybody is not the same. That's because some will work their butts off to get better off, and some want to sit on their butts and collect unemployment for 2 years, or welfare.

"...taxation can be used as a means of forced saving."

As in the country saving money, not the people. It goes on...

"...there is no limit to taxation if benefits derived from public services by society measure up to the cost in taxation which they have to pay."

This is why he wants to tax the rich more.

"Theoretically, there is nothing that can stop the government from taxing 100 per cent of income so long as the people get benefits from the government commensurate with their income which is taxed. Assuming that development and the achievement of a high per capita income is a benefit to society as a whole I do not see why the government cannot tax those who have more and syphon some of this revenues into savings which can be utilized in investment for future development, thereby reducing our reliance on foreign aid."

The ends justify the means? If you let President Obama tax the rich at high rates, he will keep lowering the top wage until it includes everyone who isn't already on welfare. And do you really think these power hungry people in Congress will use the money wisely?  Will it go into a fund like Social Security, where if there's a surplus, they just throw it in the general fund and use it how they want?

"Nationalization should not be looked at only in terms of profitability alone, but also, or even more, on the benefit to society that such services render and on its importance in terms of public interest. ... railways would not have been nationalized world-wide since it is the least profitable so that in all countries it is subsidized by government."

Can you say high-speed rail system? If no one uses it, let it fail. It's not a benefit to society to let our money go down the drain on something no one wants to use. But instead, let's tax other transportation more so that people will see it as a benefit. 

"There is a statement in the paper about encouraging tourism. It is surprising that the government thinks only about lodges but not about making it cheap so as to include those who are not so rich. At the present time, the cost of living is too high for tourists. The hotels charge exorbitant rates and there are no price controls so that only the very rich can afford to come to Kenya as tourists....The government ought to do something about this."

He's encouraging the government to set the rates for hotels so the poor can come to his country. Obama hasn't done this yet....YET. But he took over the banks, he took over the car industry (except for Ford). He already claims America is among the richest nations, and we ought to spread our wealth to less fortunate people.

In closing, I guess you can't really blame President Obama for these views. He was taught them from childhood by a communist mother and a Muslim father/step-father. But these are NOT American ideals. Americans believe in working for what they get. At least they used to. I remember as a child, and even into my teen years, it was an embarrassment to be on Welfare or food stamps (back when they were actually stamps handed out and not an innocent looking debit card). They better be glad I'm not a cashier at a grocery store. I'd yell really loudly, "Oh, this is government subsistence!" Every time someone came through with one of those debit cards.

Ain't Obamacare Great?

More on the woes of Obamacare.  My husband had a motorcycle accident last year (September).  It was a nasty break to both bones in his leg, just above the ankle.  He went through two surgeries.  But FIRST, the ambulance took us to a hospital that doesn't take our insurance.  We were in the Emergency room, after the x-ray was taken, and they attending physician said that the surgeon had call that weekend and wouldn't be able to get to him until Monday.  This happened on Friday.  The emergency room has to take whatever insurance you have, but not the hospital.  So we asked if, instead of getting admitted and waiting until Monday if there was anyway he could be sent home with pain killers and we could go to our own orthopedic surgeon.  He actually had to call so they knew he had an appointment before they would release him, which is good, I suppose.  We didn't realize just how bad the break was.  They sent him home with a prescription for pain pills, and he went to his doctor on the following Monday, with the first surgery on the next day.

So, after 2 surgeries, time in a cast and then a walking boot, he was given permission to walk.  He broke a screw.  They put him in a cast again, changing it every 2 weeks, for 3 months.  He was given permission to walk again, and broke another screw.  They did a CT and determined that part of one of the bones was not healing.  His orthopedic surgeon wanted to send him to "a specialists specialist." I guess that means it was beyond him, so he wanted someone better than he was.  He chose the best in our area to refer him to. 

President Obama said with government health care, you would have your pick of doctors.  Apparently this "specialist's specialist" doesn't take Tricare Prime.  So they found another one, he didn't take Tricare Prime, either.  After a week, he got an email that they "finally" found one.  It made it sound like they had to go through all the trauma orthopedic specialists in our area.  So we got the best one that will take Tricare, not the best one.

Folks, this is not an individualized case.  This happens ALL the time.  Obamacare must be appealed.  The statement that you can keep your doctor, or choose which doctor you want under your existing plan is a lie.  There, I said it.  Apparently no one in government has the courage to come out and say it but us little people. 

If you've followed me at all, you know my personal battles.  I have been fighting cancer for 16 months.  Just the last 5 or so months have I felt like doing anything.  Sometimes I wonder if the cure is worse than the disease in this case.  But for the past 8 months, I've also had to take care of my husband, as he's still on crutches.  He can't cook, I have to.  He can't clean the house, I have to.  He can't make coffee and take a cup into the bedroom as he gets ready for work, I have to.  I suppose I'm thankful that his small business that he works for is finding stuff for him to do sitting down.  It's the small businesses that are the backbone of this country.  His boss didn't take a salary for himself for a year, so that he didn't have to lay anyone off.  I don't need to fight Tricare for my health care needs.  I don't need to fight the Medicaid system that my oldest son is on (due to being on SSI for being permanently disabled and the fact that our GOVERNMENT health care kicked him off when he turned 21).  I had to deal with being sent to a collection agency because Medicaid said my trip to the ER with him for a suspected broken wrist wasn't actually an emergency.  How many dollars did they spend trying to get out of paying $1248 and change?  And they'll probably only end up paying about a quarter of what was billed.  This has got to change.  I would almost be willing, even with all our health problems, to pay cash, or be on a payment system, and cut insurance companies out of the loop totally.

I've started getting emails from people that I tried to tell this three years ago.  It states in the health care bill that insurance companies must comply or be fined an extreme amount (something like $1,000 per person insured per day).  They are going to have to provide me with pregnancy coverage?  When I'm post menopausal?  They have to provide me with contraceptives when my husband has had a vasectomy and I'm post menopausal?  That is just ridiculous.  And then turn around and force young people to be insured or pay a penalty, when they are healthy and don't need a Cadillac program? 

You need to wake up and smell the coffee.  This is all designed to destroy America and make her the nanny state that Greece is.  You see where that got Greece, right?  People, pretty soon American will be burning if we don't reverse this now.

Update (June 13, 2012):  The Specialist's specialist they sent my husband to didn't take Tricare PRIME, only standard.  They had to find another one.  After finding one that did take Tricare Prime, his original surgeon said he didn't trust any of those to do the surgery, that he'd just do it himself.  So, in other words, we don't get the best trauma surgeon, we get the best that will accept our insurance.  He looked a bit deeper and found one at the VA, but I can't imagine how long it will take to get him into the VA system.  First, he'll have to take a whole day off, the only the good Lord knows when they'll get him in to be seen.  I know I tried to get into the system, only to discover that we made too much money.  I don't know if it will be different for him (seeing as I was only in 4 years and he retired at 20), I guess we'll have to see.  We have to wait until he has enough overtime that we won't miss missing a day.

Indonesian Killings of 1965-66 revisited

There's been a lot of talk about President Obama's past lately. It was brought up again about Obama's book where he stated that he saw a picture (I think as a child) of a black man who was so upset with being black that he tried to bleach his skin in an attempt to be white. This supposedly really disturbed President Obama to the point that he never forgot it. Don't mind the fact that no one can find a magazine article on just that from that time frame.

But it got me remembering about this event, the Indonesian Killings of 1965-66. Barry Soetoro (now Barack Obama) arrived in Indonesia in 1967 (sorry, I forget the month). There's an interesting article (http://www.massviolence.org/The-Indonesian-Killings-of-1965-1966) that speaks in great detail about this event. I have to warn you though, the witness reports are quite graphic.

I went through and pulled excerpts out and compared them to what is happening now.

It starts out with a little history to put everything in context. In 1959, President Sukarno set up Guided Democracy. He felt the Parliamentary Democracy that they had wasn't enough. He wanted the President to have more power. This reminds me so much of our President. He has said if he could go around Congress, he would. He has said that he will institute as much as he can get away with via Presidential Orders. He has tried to get around the Supreme Court with threats, and out right lying about them. He obviously (at least to me) wants just one branch of government, his.

Sukarno was an anti-imperialist. Reminds me of Barak Obama (Barack Obama's dad). Sukarno focused intensely on the ideological aspect of Indonesia and where it was headed in that regards, and basically ignored the economy. Sound like any one we know here and now?

There was an uprising to expel the current President, called the 30 September Movement. This revolved around a group of prominent Generals being executed (6 of them) and having their bodies dumped in an unused well. The movement then seized the state broadcasting service so they could put out their own propaganda of what happened. Suharto moved quickly to squelch the 30 September Movement and take control of the media. He shut down Communist and other leftist publications and put out his own propaganda. Again, doesn't this remind you of what has become of our media? Our media is no longer a news reporting organization, but an arm of the office of President, walking in lock step with whatever comes out of that office. What happened to reporters breaking news of cover-ups? How long have they been anti-conservative?

An emphasis was placed on the killing of General Sasution's daughter and the murdered Generals were elevated to hero status. The funeral of the daughter sparked violence against the communist party at the time, PKI. This so sounds like every time President Obama tries to fan the flames of any controversy. I'm immediately reminded of the Treyvon Martin case, where he came out trying to associate himself into the situation by saying if he had a son, he'd look like Treyvon. Really? The 17 year old with gold teeth and tattoos, or the sweet 12 year old they paraded around? An only slightly veiled attempt to make his base of voters hate everything white. What is a white Hispanic, anyway?

This article states that the 30 September Movement and the following propaganda campaign provided the trigger for the mass killings that followed. This sounds to me like what is going on all the time. Can you say Occupy Wall Street? The White House is desperately seeking a trigger for violence in this country.

The next section deals with Decision Makers, Organizers and the actors. The thing I note the most is that it happened in 1965-66, but carried through to 1969. This would have been the time that Barry Soetoro was there with his mother and step father. Attending a Muslim school. Many people had gone into hiding and it took until this later date to find them and arrest them. It is believed that they (Suharto and his military) made proposals to arm and train peasants and workers to help kill the communists. This sort of reminds me of how if you're conservative and blind, they can take away your guns. But if you're a member of the Black Panthers, you can threaten people at the polling booth with batons and get away with it. It also speaks of Fast and Furious, does it not? Let the guns walk across the border to thugs in Mexico, and not enforce the immigration process and maybe they'll come North and kick butt.

The Army also used various religious organizations; the youth wing of Islamic Organizations, religious scholars for Islam. They said it was their religious duty to rid Indonesia of communists. That also sounds familiar.

Whenever they spoke of the killings, they always focused the explanation on political rivalry, ideology or different institutional interests. But that doesn't explain how it was taken to the village level. Some levels suggest that the PKI (communists) overstepped their boundaries on grabbing land. They also attacked religious leaders by calling them devils for holding so much land. One religious leader received a supposed hit list of Islamic Clergy that were to be assassinated. It is supposed that it was a plant from the military in charge of propaganda. This makes me wonder if Barack Obama is really a communist, or just wants to fan any flame he can to get riots so he can take over. Maybe he has no ideology at all, but just wants to destroy what he has always been told is an imperialist country. If he can get a form of Guided Democracy like Indonesia, it won't matter if he gets taken out of office. They will control anyone who gets in, and he's already set for life. We will only be able to choose from who they want us to vote for. I fear that's already happened. Why did Herman Cain, a black man who happens to be conservative as well as a good business man, get driven out of the running?

The military not only encouraged the killing of the communists, they trained people to do it. Some believe there was a level of coercion, as in if they didnt' participate, they would be victims of the same violence. This goes to the comment by the Obama administration person who said make an example out of someone who doesn't walk lock step with the EPA in the oil industry; crucify them.

The next section deals with victims and I'm not going to narrate it. It's a bit too graphic for my blog, which states no adult information. You'll have to go to the link at the beginning of the blog to read it. It did say that it's estimated that 500,000 people were killed Besides this, 600,000-750,000 people were imprisoned and tortured. They put the prisoners in 3 groups. Group A was those directly involved in the 30 September Movement. They were seldom found innocent and many received the death penalty.

Group B was normal PKI that the military FELT were involved (emphasis added). They were imprisoned in remote areas away from family and forced to build roads and infrastructure (another term we've heard lately - shovel ready jobs?).

Group C was imprisoned closer to home so they could receive visits and food from family. These involved the 26 different mass organizations that had some affiliation with the PKI. Most were farmers unions or other workers unions who may not have even shared their political views, just thought the union was for them. These (and I assume any others who were released and didn't die in prison) had sever limitations placed on their freedoms. They faced strict restrictions on employment, compulsory registration and monitoring as well as a loss of voting privileges. Those in jail were on shortened rations and many died of starvation or illnesses

In some cases women were sent to jail with their children. In some cases the children were sent to relatives for the duration of their prison term. I have to wonder where are the records of Obama's mother when she sent him to Hawaii to be taken care of by his grandmother? Sometimes children were forcibly removed from the homes of suspected communists. Stanley Ann Dunham wasn't exactly secretive about her communist connections, now was she? Former political prisoners and the children and grandchildren of suspected members connected to the 30 September Movement were barred from working in some areas, such as teachers, lawyers, journalists,civil servants and the military. Makes one wonder why the Obamas gave up their lawyers licenses, doesn't it? Maybe he couldn't get back into the country because he was a child of someone involved?

So many questions. There are still members alive who were witnesses or lived through this period. I've heard (though can't prove) that every time this comes up, Islam threatens anyone who wants to dig deeper. I do know that I mentioned it twice on the Blaze, to have my comments struck from the record. I had to double space words, with spaces between all the letters so my comments didn't get flagged in order to get it through a 3rd time.

I still want to know: Why would President Obama be haunted by pictures seen as a child of a black man trying to bleach his skin to become white, but mutilated bodies hanging in the streets of Indonesia and people being drug out of their houses doesn't haunt him?