Barack Hussin Obama's Socialistic Dictatorial Tendancy

Obama Has Dictatorial Tendencies

Friday, 13 Apr 2012 06:14 PM
By Lev Navrozov

I left “Soviet Russia” with my family at the first opportunity, for we felt that the creeping “half-dictatorship” under which we lived was a precursor of the full-blown, cruel dictatorship it used to be during Stalin’s times.

We lived through those horrific forebodings, and felt unbelievably lucky to have escaped from that hell into the paradise that was the United States.

But after living in this country for 40 years, we cannot escape the feeling that even in this unique democracy, President Obama’s dictatorial tendencies reveal themselves in a slow, step-by-step process of chipping away at people’s inalienable rights granted to them by the U.S. Constitution.

For example, Obama is out to abolish the right of American citizens to own guns. The Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution states, “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

In Russia, before Vladimir Putin came to power a month ago, mass pro-democracy forces came out to protest against the government’s fraud favoring Putin’s party victory.

The prevailing criticism of the Russian people in the West was that the Russian protesters were weak, indecisive, disunited, and could not fight for their freedom. Others were saying that they now have enough freedom — they can travel all over the world, open up businesses, and trade with foreign countries.

More than that — they enjoy freedom of speech, can criticize the government, and can form political parties.

There was only one thing not mentioned. The Russian people are unarmed.

They have no right to bear arms — to defend themselves and fight for their democratic rights. How can they fight against Putin’s heavily armed militia and the army? With kitchen knives?

Even that would be considered a crime! Not a single Western country came to support their fight as they did in other countries.

I am saying this in connection with Obama’s latest unconstitutional move to take away the right of American citizens to own guns. That probably will be the first thing on his agenda — to institute gun control — if he gets re-elected. To disarm the country.

If he succeeds, will his dictatorial appetite be satisfied?

I doubt it. Obama once said he wouldn’t mind being a one-term president. Now, in a recent television interview, he said he desperately needs to be elected to a second term.

During his trip to South Korea, Obama found foreign support from Dmitri Medvedev, his new Russian “friend,” who promised to help Obama get re-elected in exchange for the American technology Russia needs.

Unable to suppress his ambitions, President Obama issued stern language to the Supreme Court of the United States regarding his healthcare law, expressing confidence that “Obamacare” would not be overturned by the nation’s highest court.

On Monday, April 2 at a White House press conference, Obama said: “I am confident this [law] will be upheld because it should be upheld,” (a familiar threat found in the erstwhile Soviet press). Obama went on to say that overturning the law that he had signed would be an “unprecedented and extraordinary step,” comparing the court’s possible rejection of his law to “judicial activism.”

President Obama reminded everyone that the Supreme Court justices were “unelected,” while the law was passed by a democratically elected Congress.

It remains to be seen how the Supreme Court will rule on the matter, but the ruling is bound to have a significant impact on Obama’s chances for re-election — and ultimately his dictatorial tendencies.

Lev Navrozov is a journalist, author, and columnist who is a winner of the Albert Einstein Prize for outstanding intellectual achievements.

Karl Marx Preached "Fairness" Too


According to Nina Olsen, the National Taxpayer Advocate for the IRS who heads a staff of 2,000, the American tax system is “a huge convoluted mess.” Despite efforts to determine its length, it is variously estimated to be between 65,000 and 70,000 pages. “We looked at how many changes in the tax law (that) had occurred in the last year alone,” said Olsen, “it was something like 579 changes.” No one can keep up with that volume of changes, not even Ms. Olsen’s office.

As this is being written, President Obama is dominating the news cycle with his message of tax “fairness”, attacking men like Mitt Romney, the presumptive Republican candidate, for being wealthy and citing men like Warren Buffett and other millionaires and multi-millionaires who say they should pay more. It is a longtime populist, progressive message and it is a false message.

Chris Edwards who studies tax policy at the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank, says, “What happens when you raise taxes for higher-income people; they reduce their productive activities—like working and investing and starting businesses—and they increase their unproductive activities—like tax avoidance and tax evasion. So governments really shoot themselves in the food if they raise rates too much.”

If it were not for “taxation without representation” Americans might still be “subjects” of the British Empire because, as any school child can tell you, the Revolution was fought over this issue and was kicked off in earnest by the Boston Tea Party when a tax on tea enraged the citizens of that time. There were, in fact, some ten other tea parties in the colonies.

The United States has the dubious honor of having the highest tax rate on corporations in the world. And some people still cannot understand why U.S. corporations are shipping jobs overseas and foreign corporations are reluctant to set up U.S. headquarters here.

In a recent opinion in The Wall Street Journal, Amity Shales, a former WSJ reporter and now the director of a George W. Bush Institute project on national economic growth, wrote that “The trouble is that lawmakers (especially at the federal level) insist on discussing tax reform in terms of fairness. Tax competition earns a mention from time to time, but only a mention.” She pointed out, as have others, that “states with no income tax grow faster than those with high income taxes.”

By framing the tax debate in terms of fairness and attacking Mitt Romney’s wealth, President Obama is pandering to his greatest constituency—the stupid among us. He was elected on the basis of a lot of gauzy, vague promises of hope and change, and with the adoring support of the mainstream media.

Obama’s problem is not about fairness or taxes. His problem is 13.9 million unemployed Americans, not counting those who are not looking for work or those working part-time jobs just to make ends meet. As a recent commentary on pointed out, “The number of unemployed Americans is larger than the entire population of Greece.”

The onerous, insane growth of the regulation industry at all levels of government is crushing the economy. “The U.S. national debt has increased by more than four trillion dollars since Barack Obama took office” and, with the aid of a Democrat-controlled Congress for the first two years of his term, he increased the national debt more than all the presidents combined from Washington to Clinton.

Believing that taxing rich people will close the gap is unbelievably stupid. As a Wall Street Journal editorial pointed out on April 10th, “The Obama Treasury’s own numbers confirm that the tax (on the wealthy) would raise at most $5 billion a year—or less than 0.5% of the $1.2 trillion fiscal 2012 budget deficit and over the next decade a mere 0.1% of the $45-43 trillion the federal government will spend.”

There is an alternative. It’s called the “Fair Tax” and you can learn more about it by visiting the website of the National Taxpayers Union.

By bleeding jobs through an insane tax system, a federal tax code filled with loopholes that even the IRS cannot keep up with, the highest corporate tax in the world, an idiotic immigration policy toward illegal aliens, and a burden on the fortunate few that still have jobs the United States is digging itself into financial collapse.

The federal government is broke. The states are broke. And with the advent of $4 and $5 gas pump prices—thanks to Obama’s anti-energy policies—the rest of us are getting more broke.

President Obama’s blather about “fairness” is straight out of Karl Marx’s “Das Kapital” and the Communist Manifesto with their emphasis the redistribution of wealth and the end of private property.

'60s leftist Angela Davis sees election as victory for those who believe
Published: 04/06/2012 at 10:05 PM

Longtime Communist Party USA member Angela Davis, the 1960s radical who twice was the party’s nominee for vice president, is calling Barack Obama a black radical, raising objections from her fellow travelers.

Davis, who also was associated with the Black Panther Party and was acquitted of murder charges in 1970, said the Obama election was a “victory, not of an individual, but of … people who refused to believe that it was impossible to elect a person, a black person, who identified with the black radical tradition.”

She said it was good to see people “dancing in the streets” over Obama.

The comments were reported by Glen Ford of the Black Agenda Report, who declared: “Angela Davis Has Lost Her Mind Over Obama.”

“The ‘delusional effect’ that swept black America with the advent of the first black president has warped and weakened the mental powers of some of our most revered icons – and it has been painful to behold,” he wrote. “Earlier this month, Angela Davis diminished herself as a scholar and thinker in a gush of nonsense about the corporate executive in the White House.”

He explained Davis’ comments came at a conference on Empowering Women of Color at Berkeley, held in March.

“Angela Davis was saying that Barack Obama is a man who identifies with the black radical tradition. She said it casually, as if black radicalism and Obama were not antithetical terms; as if everything he has written, said and done in national politics has not been a repudiation of the black radical traditions; as if his rejection of his former minister, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, was not a thorough disavowal of the black radical tradition.”

Wright, the Chicago pastor under whom Obama was taught for 20 years, famously shouted, “God d— America!” to his congregation.

At All Voices, a commentary said Davis’ statements were “met with shock.”

“Angela Davis is an elder icon among many black radicals,” the commentary said. “She was for a long time a member of the Communist Party and was also in the Black Panthers. She was even once charged with murder though her only connection to the killing was the purchase of some guns involved. … However now it seems she is a well-behaved Obama supporter!

“As Ford points out Obama has not the slightest desire to belong to the black radical tradition. In fact, Obama in a national broadcast said ‘there is no black America … only the United States of America,” All Voices said.

“Rush Limbaugh and other right wing talk show hosts should be able to have fun and get some mileage from Davis’s comments – Imagine even a former Black Panther and long time Communist says that Obama is a black radical.”

Ford said, “Angela Davis, who retired as a professor of the history of human consciousness, in 2008, seems not to be conscious of the fact that she is repudiating herself, her history, her comrades – all in a foolish attempt to artificially graft a totally unworthy Barack Obama onto the black radical tradition – a place he not only does not belong, but most profoundly does not want to be.”

Davis became part of the establishment in California by taking a job as acting assistant professor at UCLA in the 1960s. The regents tried to fire her for her participation in the Communist Party but were stopped by a lawsuit. Later they succeeded in removing her from the post because of statement such as that the regents “killed, brutalized (and) murdered” demonstrators.

She was tried because she bought some of the guns used when Jonathan Jackson, on Aug. 7, 1970, took control of a California courtroom. The judge, one of the jurors, the prosecutor and three black men were killed in the resulting gunfight.

Ultimately, she was acquitted of charges.

About the time the Soviet Union collapsed, Davis became a member of the Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism, a reformist wing of the Communist Party USA. She recently has been speaking at Occupy Wall Street protests in Philadelphia and Washington Square in New York City.

U.S. Jamaican Embassy Honors Stalin Propagandist

Posted by David Paulin
Apr 2nd, 2012

In a ceremony befitting President Obama’s vision of a repentant postmodern America, a section of the U.S. Embassy in Kingston, Jamaica has been named after a propagandist for Stalinist Russia and darling of the international left – the controversial African-American stage actor and social activist Paul Robeson.

The Embassy’s Information Resource Center that boasts housing “the definitive collection of Americana” in Jamaica is now named the “Paul Robeson Information Resource Center.” During the renaming ceremony, U.S. Ambassador to Jamaica Pamela E. Bridgewater called Robeson a patriotic American.

Her remarks surely pleased Jamaica’s left-leaning government and its many anti-American elites. They regard Robeson as a kindred spirit — a famous ideologue of the old left who blazed a trail for them: stalwart members of today’s postmodern left. In recent years, they have pushed for slave reparations from Britain, promoted a chummy relationship with Cuba, and proven problematic partners in the war on Islamic-inspired terrorism.