Categories
Archives
HELP US KEEP YOU BETTER INFORMED ABOUT THE TRICKS OF THE RADICAL PROGRESSIVE REVOLUTION PLEASE DONATE ANY AMOUNT YOU CAN
target="_top">

Posts Tagged ‘Communist’

Stunning Video Shows Obama Admitting that Communist Mentored Him and Taught Him about ‘White Racism’!

by Onan Coca
In a stunning video that has somehow been kept quiet until now, a much younger Barack Obama is seen discussing his close ties to the infamous communist Frank Marshall Davis (on whom the FBI still has a very large file). What had long been a dark rumor whispered among conservatives and scoffed at by the left, has finally been proven true… and the truth comes from Obama’s own words. In the run up to his first election as President, much was made of Obama’s connections to the racist preacher Jeremiah Wright and to the violent revolutionaries Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn. But the Democrat left and their lapdogs in the media refused to connect the dots, so the most anti-American President ever was soon elected to office.

I’m sure they’ll choose to ignore this video, too. But we won’t. We’ll watch as a man who pretends to love America admits that he was counseled and mentored by a man who openly hated America.obama-davis-300x166

From the Gateway Pundit:

obama davisIn an extraordinary development, film of Obama explicitly and openly identifying “Frank” as Frank Marshall Davis has suddenly surfaced on the Internet. It is described as having been recorded on September 20,1995, with the program originally airing on Channel 37 Cambridge Municipal Television as an episode of the show “The Author Series.” Obama admits the mysterious “Frank” from his book Dreams from my Father is indeed the communist Frank Marshall Davis. But Obama does NOT say Davis was a communist. America’s Survival, Inc. President Cliff Kincaid discusses the significance of this discovery.

In the interview Obama can be heard admitting that everything he learned about racism he learned from a communist agitator who hated America.

“And the conversation finally ends with me having a conversation with a close friend of my maternal grandfather, a close friend of gramps, a black man from Kansas named Frank. Actually at the time a fairly well known poet named Frank Marshall Davis who had moved to Hawaii and lived there. And so I have a discussion with him about the kinds of frustrations I’m having and he sort of schools me that I should get used to these frustrations.”

Read more at http://eaglerising.com/17408/stunning-video-shows-obama-admitting-that-communist-mentored-him-and-taught-him-about-white-racism/#VERvcmUO5EP4PdcM.99

The Communist States of America

by Matt Barber

A preferred ploy of left-wing change agents is to ridicule critics when they point out the undeniable parallels between the goals of today’s “progressive” movement, to include the Democratic Party in general, and the goals of the early, and very much still alive, communist movement.

If, for instance, one mentions the historical fact that nearly every adult who, at any time, was in any position of influence over a young, soon-to-be-radicalized Barry Soetoro was an avowed communist, to include his own parents, then one is immediately mocked and dismissed as a neo-McCarthyite hack pining for the bygone days of the Red Scare. This is an evasive, ad hominem strategy employed by those who are caught, for lack of a better word, red-handed.

To all this I say, if the jackboot fits, wear it. If it quacks like a commie and goose-steps like a commie, then a commie it is.

There are multiple layers within “progressivism’s” pseudo-utopian, truly dystopian Marxist philosophy. The left’s lust for redistributionist statism is well-known. Less understood, however, is the “progressive” rush toward cultural Marxism.

Cultural Marxism entails, among other things, that secularist aspect of left-wing statist ideology that seeks, within society, to supplant traditional values, norms and mores with postmodern moral relativism. Cultural Marxists endeavor to scrub America of her Judeo-Christian, constitutional-republican founding principles, and take, instead, a secular-statist Sharpie to our beloved U.S. Constitution.
Comm Amer

Historian and U.S. military affairs expert William S. Lind describes cultural Marxism as “a branch of western Marxism, different from the Marxism-Leninism of the old Soviet Union. It is commonly known as ‘multiculturalism’ or, less formally, Political Correctness. From its beginning, the promoters of cultural Marxism have known they could be more effective if they concealed the Marxist nature of their work, hence the use of terms such as ‘multiculturalism.’”

Pastor, attorney and Massachusetts gubernatorial candidate Scott Lively is globally admired by liberty-loving traditionalists. Conversely, he’s universally reviled by cultural Marxists. He drills down a bit deeper: “Cultural Marxism is a variation of the Marxist strategy to build a utopian socialist order on the ashes of Christian civilization, but through subversion of the moral culture, especially the elimination of the natural family, rather than solely through destruction of capitalism.”

True though this may be, the ideological seeds of contemporary cultural Marxism nonetheless sprout from deep within the dead soil of historical communism. It is not economic redistributionism alone through which “progressives” seek to both “fundamentally transform America” and otherwise conquer the world, but, rather, and perhaps primarily, it is also through victory over the pejoratively tagged “social issues” (i.e., the sanctity of marriage, natural human sexuality and morality, ending the abortion holocaust, religious liberty, the Second Amendment and the like).

This is neither speculative nor hyperbolic. Both the historical record and the U.S. Congressional Record bear out this sinister reality. Regrettably, today’s “low-information voters” as Rush Limbaugh calls them – to include the useful idiots within the GOP’s “moderate” and libertarian wings – are simply too lazy, shortsighted or both to learn the facts.

“Surrender on the ‘social issues’!” demands the GOP’s cultural Marxist-enabling kamikazes.

In 1963, U.S. Rep. A.S. Herlong Jr., D-Fla., read into the Congressional Record a list of “Current Communist Goals” as enumerated by Dr. Cleon Skousen in “The Naked Communist,” penned in 1958. I encourage you to read the whole list, but for now let’s focus on those goals that most closely align with the seditious agenda of America’s “progressive” movement. It’s actually most of them. Though Herlong was a Democrat, the list reads like today’s Democratic Party Platform.

How far has fallen the party of the jackass:Communist_with_a_soft_spot_for_Isla1

Develop the illusion that total disarmament [by] the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength.
Permit free trade between all nations regardless of Communist [or, today, Islamic] affiliation and regardless of whether or not items could be used for war.
Provide American aid to all nations regardless of Communist [or Islamic] domination.
Grant recognition of Red China. Admission of Red China to the U.N.
Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one-world government with its own independent armed forces.
Resist any attempt to outlaw the Communist Party.
Do away with all loyalty oaths.
Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.
Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions by claiming their activities violate civil rights.
Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers’ associations. Put the party line in textbooks.
Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, policymaking positions.
Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures.
Communist_with_a_soft_spot_for_IslaContinue discrediting American culture by degrading all forms of artistic expression. (An American Communist cell was told to “eliminate all good sculpture from parks and buildings, substitute shapeless, awkward and meaningless forms.”)
Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them “censorship” and a violation of free speech and free press.
Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV.
Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as “normal, natural, healthy.”
Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with “social” religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity which does not need a “religious crutch.”
Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principal of “separation of church and state.”
Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.
Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the “common man.”
Belittle all forms of American culture and discourage the teaching of American history on the ground that it was only a minor part of the “big picture.”
Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture – education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics, etc.
Infiltrate and gain control of more unions.
Infiltrate and gain control of big business.
Transfer some of the powers of arrest from the police to social agencies. Treat all behavioral problems as psychiatric disorders which no one but psychiatrists can understand [or treat].
Dominate the psychiatric profession and use mental health laws as a means of gaining coercive control over those who oppose Communist goals.
Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce. Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents.
Create the impression that violence and insurrection are legitimate aspects of the American tradition; that students and special-interest groups should rise up and use [“]united force[“] to solve economic, political or social problems.
Internationalize the Panama Canal.
Repeal the Connally reservation so the United States cannot prevent the World Court from seizing jurisdiction [over domestic problems. Give the World Court jurisdiction] over nations and individuals alike.
If achieving these specific communist goals was the final “progressive” step toward the larger goal of securing communist governance in America, then, tragically, “progressives” have realized that larger goal.

Look around. We are no longer the United States of America. We have become The Communist States of America.

Which means, for those who love liberty, revolution is once again at hand

Read more at http://eaglerising.com/5397/communist-states-america/#e48layjMrvzRkf2M.99

Obama slams America in speech promoting the communist idea of income redistribution

by Joe NewbyObama Teaching

While speaking at an event sponsored by the George Soros liberal think tank Center for American Progress on Wednesday, Barack Obama slammed America while promoting income redistribution, The Blaze reported.

“Statistics show not only that our levels of income inequality rank near countries like Jamaica and Argentina, but that it is harder today for a child born here in America to improve her station in life than it is for children in most of our wealthy allies, countries like Canada or Germany or France,” he claimed. “They have greater mobility than we do, not less.”

Oddly enough, Obama invoked free-market champion Adam Smith to make his case for more government interference in the economy.

“Government can’t stand on the sidelines in our efforts because government is us,” he said. “It can and should reflect our deepest values and commitments. If we refocus our energies on building an economy that grows for everybody and gives every child in this country a fair chance at success, then I remain confident that the future still looks brighter than the past and that the best days for this country we love are still ahead.”

The president promised to spend the rest of his term working to shrink what he called the income and opportunity gap between rich and poor.

Obama focused on favorite liberal ideas like increasing the minimum wage, increased education funding, defending food stamp and unemployment compensation and, The Blaze said, “standing with labor unions.”

“It’s well past the time to raise a minimum wage that in real terms right now is below where it was when Harry Truman was in office,” he said to applause.

Targeting favorite liberal constituent groups, Obama called for more aggressive enforcement of collective bargaining laws, and laws providing more legal recourse for women and the LGBT community.

The president also cited the pope in his attack on free-market capitalism.

“Some of you may have seen just last week the pope himself spoke about this at eloquent length. How can it be, he wrote, that it’s not a news item when an elderly homeless person dies of exposure, but it is news when the stock market loses two points? But this increasing inequality is most pronounced in our country. And it challenges the very essence of who we are as a people,” he said.

Conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh skewered Obama for his comments.

“This guy just can’t wait to rip this country apart. He just can’t wait. Every day, whenever there’s an opportunity to criticize this country, he’s the first in line. And that is just an outright falsehood,” Limbaugh said.

Republicans, The Blaze said, responded by citing Census data that shows 6.7 million Americans have fallen into poverty during the Obama administration.

“As of 2012,”The Blaze added, “there was a total of 46.5 million Americans living in poverty, according to the Census Bureau information.”

The Nature of Things

When my grandmother was born a horse was the normal means of transport.  When my granddaughter was born the International Space Striation was the brightest light in the night’s sky. In other words, things change.   When I sat on the couch and watched the first man walk on the moon with my grandmother she didn’t believe it was real.  When I tell my low information neighbors that the International Space Striation is the brightest light in the night’s sky they don’t believe it is true.  In other words, human nature doesn’t change.

To allow our leaders, our fellow citizens, our own kith and kin the charitable label of misguided dreamers is the closest I can come to innocently explaining their roles as either accomplices or instigators of our national decline.  I try to tell myself they are as Lenin and Stalin are reputed to have called them, “Useful Idiots:” well-meaning people who genuinely believe central planning will help the needy.  I try not to let myself think the Progressives and their supporters are actually extremely corrupt and evil people who are actively attempting to transform our beloved experiment in freedom into another forced labor camp striving to achieve Utopia.

The problem with utopian dreams is that they always end in dystopian realities.  Lenin’s dream of a worker’s paradise transformed itself into Stalin’s nightmare of the gulags, starvation, and the eventual destruction of their nation.  Mussolini’s dream of a return to the glories of Rome led directly to the loss of the empire they had and the destruction of their nation.  Hitler’s dream of a Thousand Year Reich led directly to the Gestapo, the holocaust, the worst war in History, and the destruction of their nation.

How can we believe we can follow a dream of utopia to any other end than the one everyone else has arrived at: the dust bin of History?

Some may say, “But we are Americans, and we have always done the things others could not do.”  You will find no more ardent believer in American Exceptionalism than I.   I truly believe, not that diversity is our strength but instead that the blending of all into a uniquely American hybrid has created the most talented, most dynamic, and most successful nation the world has ever known.  It is not the will or the talents of our homegrown American collectivists that I question; it is the very nature of collectivism that I maintain makes the accomplishment of their utopian dream impossible.

People can have the best of intentions; however, if they believe they can take from Peter to pay Paul without making Peter resent the fact that he has less than he had before they don’t know Peter very well.  And if they think they can set Paul up as a perpetual recipient of the swag taken from Peter without creating a pool of Paul’s who constantly want more and who resent those who do the distributing they have never worked in a soup kitchen, a food bank, or a giveaway store for more than a day.

The vast majority of people are not by nature altruistic milk cows, and they resent it when that is how they are viewed by the nameless faceless bureaucracy necessary to make the machinery of utopia crank out the shabby imitation they deliver.  Conversely the vast majority of people are not by nature perpetual mooches content to stand with their hands out waiting for the nameless faceless bureaucracy to deliver the bare minimum needed to survive which is always the bounty that actually drops from the utopian extruder.

I contend that a collectivist redistribution Utopia whether it is called Progressive, Socialist, Communist, Fascist, or merely the right thing to do is contrary to the nature of humanity.

People by nature want to be self-reliant.  They want to make things better for themselves and their children.  People want to strive for something noble, and they want to feel as if their lives matter.  Yet in an industrial world divided into haves and have nots it is easy to understand how the frustration of being a have not can convince someone that there needs to be a more equitable division of the material goods which modern civilization abundantly provides.

Having come from a blue collar family and having spent the majority of my life as a self-employed boom or bust house painter I can well relate to not having health insurance because you can’t afford it, I couldn’t.  I can relate to having mornings where you don’t know what you will feed your family that night because I have had those days.  I know what it is like to be a high school dropout who can’t get anything except a menial low paying job, because I have been that person.  Yes, I can relate to the situations which might make a person believe we need to spread the wealth around.

I also know what it feels like to have to get food stamps and other things from public and private assistance just to make it through the day because I have done so.  I know how the welfare people make you feel, the way they treat you as if you are trying to take their personal money or the condescension of pity.

What I can’t relate to is either thinking it is a good thing to consign our fellow citizens to such a life or to being satisfied with such a life.

Not only does a welfare state corrupt both the dispensers and the recipients it carries the seeds of its own destruction. Eventually the recipients will want more than the dispensers are willing to give, and revolution or collapse will be the end result.

In addition, since redistribution as a state policy always means stealing from Peter to pay Paul, ultimately the thief will need a gun.  Though Peter may be a nice person and at first say, “Sure I can contribute something to help poor old Paul,” if poor old Paul never gets back on his feet sooner or later Peter will wonder why Paul doesn’t start providing for himself.  At that point the contributions are no longer voluntary and they must be taken one way or another.  There is also the question of how many Pauls can Peter carry without either shrugging like Atlas or becoming a Paul himself in self-defense. As Margret Thatcher taught us, “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money.”

Plunder empires always collapse.  Utopias always end up eating the goose that laid the golden egg.  Central planning and collectivism: the Progressive dream for a Great Society has never, can never, and will never succeed. It just isn’t natural.

Dr. Owens teaches History, Political Science, and Religion.  He is the Historian of the Future @ http://drrobertowens.com © 2013 Robert R. Owens drrobertowens@hotmail.com  Follow Dr. Robert Owens on Facebook or Twitter @ Drrobertowens / Edited by Dr. Rosalie Owens

 

 

ACORN HAS BEEN PLANNING TO ELECT COMMUNIST BILL DE BLASIO A NYC MAYOR SINCE 2001…..

deblasio41-550x394

Hence the reason de Blasio personally thanked former ACORN chief Bertha Lewis’ new group after he won the Dem primary.

Via NY Post:

The leftist group ACORN has been plotting for more than a decade to install Bill de Blasio at City Hall, a Democratic Party source has told The Post.

“Without exaggeration, ACORN’s long-range plan since 2001 was to elect de Blasio mayor,” said the Democratic insider. “De Blasio was a big ACORN project.”

The Democratic mayoral candidate has marched in lock step with ACORN, now renamed New York Communities for Change, even before he took public office in 2001.

The group backed de Blasio that year over Legal Aid Services director Steven Banks in a six-way Brooklyn City Council race, despite Banks’ reputation at the time as a one of the city’s leading champions of the poor and liberal causes.

Eight years later, ACORN was back at de Blasio’s side and, with the union-financed Working Families Party, helped him become public advocate, a perch he used to become the Democratic nominee for mayor.

A key cog in the de Blasio political machine is Bertha Lewis, the former ACORN head who also co-founded the Working Families Party.

On primary election night earlier this month, when she stood on stage t next to de Blasio, Lewis made it clear ACORN’s work had paid off.“We’re baaaack. The right wing will have to deal with it,” she chuckled.
But Lewis scoffed that she or the organization had a “master plan” to elect de Blasio as the city’s chief executive.
“Shame on us,” she quipped. “We don’t think that far ahead. We take one race at a time.”
But she added: “There’s no doubt we were there for Bill. New York ACORN supported Bill for council. Then we supported him for public advocate.”
De Blasio told The Post he’s proud to stand with Lewis and her group.
“Bertha Lewis is one of the city’s most passionate and effective progressive leaders, and I’m proud to have worked with her for years,” he said.
NYCC/ACORN has been crusading for more subsidized housing and a higher minimum wage. It’s also at the forefront of the fight against the expansion of charter schools.
It receives hundreds of thousands of dollars from unions to organize workers, and its agenda mirrors labor’s.
De Blasio is on the same page. He has vowed to impose a moratorium on co-locating charter schools within public schools and has even recommended charging them rent — a potentially crippling financial blow to the charters.
De Blasio’s most startling alignment with ACORN came on the Atlantic Yards redevelopment project in Downtown Brooklyn, which originally drew protests from local residents.
De Blasio, who lives in neighboring Park Slope, initially was skeptical. But he came on board in 2006 after being convinced by ACORN — an early supporter of the complex — that there would be a huge payoff in affordable housing units.
The first tower isn’t scheduled to open until next year.

New Obama slogan has long ties to Marxism, socialism

by Victor Morton

The Obama campaign apparently didn’t look backwards into history when selecting its new campaign slogan, “Forward” — a word with a long and rich association with European Marxism.
Many Communist and radical publications and entities throughout the 19th and 20th centuries had the name “Forward!” or its foreign cognates. Wikipedia has an entire section called “Forward (generic name of socialist publications).”
“The name Forward carries a special meaning in socialist political terminology. It has been frequently used as a name for socialist, communist and other left-wing newspapers and publications,” the online encyclopedia explains.
The slogan “Forward!” reflected the conviction of European Marxists and radicals that their movements reflected the march of history, which would move forward past capitalism and into socialism and communism.
The Obama campaign released its new campaign slogan Monday in a 7-minute video. The title card has simply the word “Forward” with the “O” having the familiar Obama logo from 2008. It will be played at rallies this weekend that mark the Obama re-election campaign’s official beginning.
There have been at least two radical-left publications named “Vorwaerts” (the German word for “Forward”). One was the daily newspaper of the Social Democratic Party of Germany whose writers included Friedrich Engels and Leon Trotsky. It still publishes as the organ of Germany’s SDP, though that party has changed considerably since World War II. Another was the 1844 biweekly reader of the Communist League. Karl Marx, Engels and Mikhail Bakunin are among the names associated with that publication.
East Germany named its Army soccer club ASK Vorwaerts Berlin (later FC Vorwaerts Frankfort).
Vladimir Lenin founded the publication “Vpered” (the Russian word for “forward”) in 1905. Soviet propaganda film-maker Dziga Vertov made a documentary whose title is sometimes translated as “Forward, Soviet” (though also and more literally as “Stride, Soviet”).
Conservative critics of the Obama administration have noted numerous ties to radicalism and socialists throughout Mr. Obama’s history, from his first political campaign being launched from the living room of two former Weather Underground members, to appointing as green jobs czar Van Jones, a self-described communist.

Read more: New Obama slogan has long ties to Marxism, socialism – Washington Times http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/inside-politics/2012/apr/30/new-obama-slogan-has-long-ties-marxism-socialism/#.UHDPmXBzLtY.facebook#ixzz28eS2zYL6
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

THIS MAN IS SICK -Obama In Virginia Speech: “We Don’t Believe that Anybody’s Entitled to Success in this Country”

Really, Mr. President?

So, when Obama says, “we don’t believe that anybody” (meaning “not just anybody”) is entitled to success, does he then believe that only a few specific individuals are entitled to success?

It would naturally follow to then ask, “and who might that be?”

When balanced on the fact that Obama does seem to think that certain individuals are entitled to redistribution, which is taking property from one in order to give to another, then Obama’s meaning becomes just a bit clearer, ergo, “you don’t have an entitlement to success, but you do have an entitlement to the fruits of other people’s success, and the government is going to facilitate that.”
But what, then, does entitle specifically mean, just to make sure?

According to Merriam Webster “entitled,” Obama’s specific usage in this case, would be definition #2, which means the following:

To furnish with proper grounds for seeking or claiming something

So, in the clear meaning of “entitle,” Obama is stating that he doesn’t believe that anybody should be furnished with proper grounds for seeking or claiming success. But isn’t that what being an America and living in America’s free market system means? Are we not naturally entitled to success, by our own creator under Natural Law, if we desire to seek it? Or is it that Obama is saying that Government will not entitle” just anybody” to success?

Don’t laugh.

At first glance, Obama’s words on this subject seem odd, on second glance they could be construed as stating the obvious, but when measured on the scales of Obama’s goals and his past performance, his words take on what could be an insidious Freudian slip–telling us what he actually believes without meaning to.

Here is the rest of what Obama said, which lends a bit of clarity:

We believe in a country where hard work pays off and responsibilities are rewarded and everybody is getting a fair shot and everybody’s doing their fair share. And everybody’s paying by the same rules.

The key words here are “responsibilities rewarded”–and what in the hell does that mean, by the way?

“Getting a fair shot”–it’s what our system is all about, but what Obama means here is, “Getting a fair shot with the government’s help,” which also means aiding some while forgetting about the ones who are deemed unworthy of aid.

“Everybody’s doing their fair share?” Now, who determines that?

“Everybody’s playing by the same rules” –rules according to who? We already have laws in place and regulations, so who comes up with even more rules governing an individual’s right to success?

Okay, Mainstream Media, we know what you’re going to say, and maybe it was just another silly off the teleprompter gaffe, but then again, maybe it wasn’t.

Michelle Obama: Touts The Communist Line: ‘No One Gets Where They Are on Their Own’

by Penny Starr
(CNSNews.com) – In a campaign speech on Thursday in Fredricksburg, Va., first lady Michelle Obama said that “no one gets where they are on their own” because there is a village of people “lifting us up,” including teachers and janitors.
In her speech about the Obama family’s values, Mrs. Obama said, “We learned that the truth matters, so you don’t take shortcuts, you don’t game the system, you don’t play by your own set of rules. And we learned that no one gets where they are on their own; that each of us has a community of people who are lifting us up — from the teachers who inspire us to the janitors who keep our schools clean.”

Mrs. Obama spoke at the University of Mary Washington, telling the crowd that she and the president learned about citizenship and service from their parents.

“And we were taught to treat everyone with value, and everyone with respect,” she said. “We learned about citizenship and service, that we’re all part of something bigger than ourselves; that with our freedoms come obligations, and with our blessings come a duty to give back to others who have less.

“See, these are the values that make Barack such an extraordinary husband and partner to me, but more importantly, such a phenomenal father to our girls,” Obama said.

Mrs. Obama said the president is “struggling” along with the American people and that progress has been made over the past four years.

“But what I know for sure, what I can tell you that your president is doing since the day he took office: Barack has been fighting for us,” Mrs. Obama said. “He has been struggling with us.”

“And together, slowly but surely, we have been pulling ourselves out of the hole that we started in,” the first lady said. “For three-and-a-half years, we’ve been moving forward and making progress, and we’re beginning to see that change we all can believe in. That I know for sure.”

As president, Barack Obama gets a $400,000 a year salary and a $50,000 non-taxable expense account for official purposes. When he leaves office, his pension will be $191,300 a year.

According to their tax returns for 2011, the Obamas had an adjusted gross income of $789,674, which was down from $1,728,096 in 2010. Their family income topped $5.5 million in 2009, according to CNN.

The White House, where the president lives, has 132 rooms, 32 bathrooms, a movie theater, tennis court, jogging track and putting greens.

OBAMA’S COMMUNIST EPA KILLS 220 BILLION IN INVESTMENTS AT PEBBLE MINE

EVERYDAY LISA JACKSON SHUTS DOWN ANOTHER LARGE BUSINESS IN HER EFFORT TO DESTROY AMERICA

The Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) preemptive assessment of the Pebble Mine in Alaska could have a “chilling effect” on $220 billion in investments, according to the Brattle Group, an economic and financial consulting firm.

In May, the EPA released its watershed assessment of large-scale mining by Pebble LP at Bristol Bay, which could be one of the largest copper and gold mines in the world, and expressed concerns over impact the mine would have on local salmon habitats and surrounding wetlands.

Under the Clean Water Act, operations that dump “dredge or fill materials” into wetlands, rivers, lakes, or streams are required to obtain a Section 404 permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The EPA can revoke this permit if there are “unacceptable adverse impacts on municipal water supplies, shellfish beds and fishery areas, wildlife, or recreational areas.”

However, the watershed assessment did not evaluate any actual plans for the Pebble Mine, as none have been put forward, instead it evaluates a hypothetical mine. Independent scientists have also expressed concerns over this approach and have said the assessment was rushed.

“It has a chilling effect over all these kinds of investments. Everybody in every project knows that there’s a process, and it’s a challenge, a serious one, to comply with that process,” Dan McGroarty, president of the nonpartisan American Resources Policy Network, told The Daily Caller News Foundation.

“To be stopped before the process begins and subject it to a hypothetical is a new wrinkle, and that can chill capital, that can chill investment, and the jobs, in this particular economy, that we want to see,” he continued. “It’s going to have a very negative effect on the manufacturing process in the U.S.”

The EPA has never blocked a mining project after a preliminary watershed assessment was completed, and companies behind the Pebble mining project worry that doing so would make it easier for environmental groups to stop other projects.

“The EPA is flexing its administrative muscle and seeing how far forward it can reach and how far after the fact can it reach,” said McGroarty.

Congressional Republicans criticized the EPA’s tactis and California Republican Rep. Darrell Issa called the actions “unprecedented and legally questionable.”

“EPA’s assertion of pre-emptive veto power appears to undermine the permitting process as outlined by Congress when it passed the [Clean Water Act],” Issa wrote in letter.

This is not the first time the EPA has looked to test the limits of its Section 404 authority. In June, a federal court ruled against the EPA’s use of Section 404 to revoke a permit for Mingo Logan Coal Company in West Virginia — four years after the permit had originally been issued the Army Corps of Engineers.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/08/16/epa-actions-at-mine-could-hurt-220-billion-in-investments/#ixzz23zhxsjz4

Obama’s Cloward and Priven Plan

HELP US KEEP YOU BETTER INFORMED ABOUT THE TRICKS OF THE RADICAL PROGRESSIVE REVOLUTION PLEASE DONATE ANY AMOUNT YOU CAN