Our Economy. Is Obama Just Stupid, Clueless, In Over His Head? Or Is His Approach A Well Orchestrated Plan Of Financial Destruction For The U.S.?

3-9-09

Our economy is swirling around the toilet bowl ready for the final flush and more people are starting to believe Obama and some in his administration are the ones actually and deliberately pushing down on the handle!

‘Manchurian Candidate’ Starts War on Business’

Commentary by Kevin Hassett

March 9 (Bloomberg) — Back in the 1960s, Lyndon Johnson gave us the War on Poverty. In the 1970s, Richard Nixon launched the War on Drugs. Now that we have seen President Barack Obama’s first-year legislative agenda, we know what kind of a war he intends to wage.

It is no wonder that markets are imploding around us. Obama is giving us the War on Business.

Imagine that some hypothetical enemy state spent years preparing a “Manchurian Candidate” to destroy the U.S. economy once elected. What policies might that leader pursue?

He might discourage private capital from entering the financial sector by instructing his Treasury secretary to repeatedly promise a brilliant rescue plan, but never actually have one. Private firms, spooked by the thought of what government might do, would shy away from transactions altogether. If the secretary were smooth and played rope-a-dope long enough, the whole financial sector would be gone before voters could demand action.

Another diabolical idea would be to significantly increase taxes on whatever firms are still standing. That would require subterfuge, since increasing tax rates would be too obvious. Our Manchurian Candidate would have plenty of sophisticated ideas on changing the rules to get more revenue without increasing rates, such as auctioning off “permits.”

Please read the rest of this bloomberg.com article here>>>

You know I think Mr. Hassett just might be on to something here considering there are millions of people in this country that are convinced Obama was born in Africa and they know it was to only one U.S. citizen. Even if he was born in Hawaii in 1961 as he says he can never be a legitimate President according the laws of this country. He is not and can never be considered a natural born citizen as required by the Constitution to hold the highest office in the land because his father was not a U.S. citizen and those holding the power to do something about it…. damn well know it!

While many have called Obama inept, stupid, clueless, wet behind the ears and completely unqualified to tackle the issues facing our economic health I will go in the opposite direction and say he and minions do in fact, know exactly what they are doing.

Obama is a disciple of long dead Chicago Marxist, community organizer and radical Saul Alinsky. Oh yeah and so is Hillary Clinton who made Alinsky the subject of her senior honors thesis at Wellesley College, a thesis she begged the college to keep under seal when her husband was running for president. Speaking of which has anyone been able to put some eyeballs on Obama’s Columbia University senior thesis? Even Michelle Obama asked Princeton to keep her senior thesis locked up but alas it happened to get released anyway. Why do these people try so hard to keep so much information about their past under wraps?

(That would be a rhetorical question for those that didn’t catch the sarcasm.)

Alinsky penned a few books in his time but the one that became the inspiration for his real fans would probably be Rules for Radicals, a tome filled with all kinds of information to get the true radicals up off their asses and out into the streets raising all kinds of hell. After all Alinsky was an OG community organizer of the first order.

Back in his day Alinsky was described as foul mouthed, loud mouthed, and narcissistic, demanding to be the center of attention despite his nerdy looks and big black old school horn-rimmed glasses. Wait, nerdy and a narcissist? Where have I heard that before?

In his book he outlined 12 rules his devotees could implement to best effect their radical agenda of very effective, focused anti-government and anti-corporate activism.

RULE 1: “Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have.” Power is derived from 2 main sources – money and people. “Have-Nots” must build power from flesh and blood. (These are two things of which there is a plentiful supply. Government and corporations always have a difficult time appealing to people, and usually do so almost exclusively with economic arguments.)

RULE 2: “Never go outside the expertise of your people.” It results in confusion, fear and retreat. Feeling secure adds to the backbone of anyone. (Organizations under attack wonder why radicals don’t address the “real” issues. This is why. They avoid things with which they have no knowledge.)

RULE 3: “Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy.” Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty. (This happens all the time. Watch how many organizations under attack are blind-sided by seemingly irrelevant arguments that they are then forced to address.)

RULE 4: “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.” If the rule is that every letter gets a reply, send 30,000 letters. You can kill them with this because no one can possibly obey all of their own rules. (This is a serious rule. The besieged entity’s very credibility and reputation is at stake, because if activists catch it lying or not living up to its commitments, they can continue to chip away at the damage.)

RULE 5: “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.” There is no defense. It’s irrational. It’s infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions. (With the left wing media firmly in the pocket of the socialists in power this becomes a very easy thing to do.)

RULE 6: “A good tactic is one your people enjoy.” They’ll keep doing it without urging and come back to do more. They’re doing their thing, and will even suggest better ones. (CodePink marching in the streets, piling up shoes in from of the Bush White House sounds about right.)

RULE 7: “A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.” Don’t become old news. (Iraq war, enough said.)

RULE 8: “Keep the pressure on. Never let up.” Keep trying new things to keep the opposition off balance. As the opposition masters one approach, hit them from the flank with something new. (Attack, attack, attack from all sides, never giving the reeling organization a chance to rest, regroup, recover and re-strategize.)

RULE 9: “The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.” Imagination and ego can dream up many more consequences than any activist. (Perception is reality. Large organizations always prepare a worst-case scenario, something that may be furthest from the activists’ minds. The upshot is that the organization will expend enormous time and energy, creating in its own collective mind the direst of conclusions. The possibilities can easily poison the mind and result in demoralization.)

RULE 10: “If you push a negative hard enough, it will push through and become a positive.” Violence from the other side can win the public to your side because the public sympathizes with the underdog. (Unions used this tactic. Peaceful [albeit loud] demonstrations during the heyday of unions in the early to mid-20th Century incurred management’s wrath, often in the form of violence that eventually brought public sympathy to their side.)

RULE 11: “The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.” Never let the enemy score points because you’re caught without a solution to the problem. (Hope and change you can believe in, sound familiar? Activist organizations have an agenda, and their strategy is to hold a place at the table, to be given a forum to wield their power. So, they have to have a compromise solution.)

RULE 12: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions. (Can anyone say George Bush, Dick Cheney, Karl Rove and Rush Limbaugh?.)

Let’s continue on with a couple of other big fans of Alinsky’s, sociologists Richard Cloward and Frances Piven from Columbia University. (Why don’t we just officially turn that place over to Russia and Iran already!?) This couple adhered to the same philosophy of destroying the capitalistic economy of the United States and came up with what is referred to as the Cloward-Piven Strategy of Orchestrated Crisis.

An article by James Simpson written last September for AmericanThinker.com does a fabulous job of spelling out the manufactured crisis we have been watching unfold before us and how the writings of Alinsky, Cloward and Priven combined with Obama’s ascendancy to the Oval Office are all woven tightly together in this well orchestrated effort to force the fundamental and complete transformation of our economic system and in fact the way of life this country will see under this administration if we continue to allow it.

The Cloward-Piven Strategy of Orchestrated Crisis

In an earlier post, I noted the liberal record of unmitigated legislative disasters, the latest of which is now being played out in the financial markets before our eyes. Before the 1994 Republican takeover, Democrats had sixty years of virtually unbroken power in Congress – with substantial majorities most of the time. Can a group of smart people, studying issue after issue for years on end, with virtually unlimited resources at their command, not come up with a single policy that works? Why are they chronically incapable?

Why?

One of two things must be true. Either the Democrats are unfathomable idiots, who ignorantly pursue ever more destructive policies despite decades of contrary evidence, or they understand the consequences of their actions and relentlessly carry on anyway because they somehow benefit.

I submit to you they understand the consequences. For many it is simply a practical matter of eliciting votes from a targeted constituency at taxpayer expense; we lose a little, they gain a lot, and the politician keeps his job. But for others, the goal is more malevolent – the failure is deliberate. Don’t laugh. This method not only has its proponents, it has a name: the Cloward-Piven Strategy. It describes their agenda, tactics, and long-term strategy.

The Strategy was first elucidated in the May 2, 1966 issue of The Nation magazine by a pair of radical socialist Columbia University professors, Richard Andrew Cloward and Frances Fox Piven. David Horowitz summarizes it as:

The strategy of forcing political change through orchestrated crisis. The “Cloward-Piven Strategy” seeks to hasten the fall of capitalism by overloading the government bureaucracy with a flood of impossible demands, thus pushing society into crisis and economic collapse.

Cloward and Piven were inspired by radical organizer [and Hillary Clinton mentor] Saul Alinsky:

“Make the enemy live up to their (sic) own book of rules,” Alinsky wrote in his 1989 book Rules for Radicals. When pressed to honor every word of every law and statute, every Judeo-Christian moral tenet, and every implicit promise of the liberal social contract, human agencies inevitably fall short. The system’s failure to “live up” to its rule book can then be used to discredit it altogether, and to replace the capitalist “rule book” with a socialist one. (Courtesy Discover the Networks.org)

Newsmax rounds out the picture:

Their strategy to create political, financial, and social chaos that would result in revolution blended Alinsky concepts with their more aggressive efforts at bringing about a change in U.S. government. To achieve their revolutionary change, Cloward and Piven sought to use a cadre of aggressive organizers assisted by friendly news media to force a re-distribution of the nation’s wealth.

In their “Nation” article, Cloward and Piven were specific about the kind of “crisis” they were trying to create:

By crisis, we mean a publicly visible disruption in some institutional sphere. Crisis can occur spontaneously (e.g., riots) or as the intended result of tactics of demonstration and protest which either generate institutional disruption or bring unrecognized disruption to public attention.

No matter where the strategy is implemented, it shares the following features:

1. The offensive organizes previously unorganized groups eligible for government benefits but not currently receiving all they can.
2. The offensive seeks to identify new beneficiaries and/or create new benefits.
3. The overarching aim is always to impose new stresses on target systems, with the ultimate goal of forcing their collapse.

Please read the rest of this outstanding article here>>>

So there you have it, this was a set up that took decades to accomplish but accomplish it they finally did.

Those that think Obama is a bumbling idiot, while technically correct if he was actually in the White House trying to do his very best for the American people, I submit that yes he really does know what he is doing. What he is trying to do is bring this country to its knees and completely re-write the rules for how Americans will live their lives. Rules that he thinks we will just sit back and accept as the new way of doing things in a global society perspective.

Unfortunately for the rest of us, half this country think this change we can believe in crap is a terrific idea.

This entry was posted in Economy, Obama And His Administration, U.S..

Leave a Reply