A number of videos and comments on Youtube and elsewhere have compared the personality cult surrounding Barack Obama with Adolph Hitler, drawing parallels among other things with the way that thuggish supporters have tried to silence Obama’s opponents, the way people like the Black Panthers - in a manner similar to Hitler’s Brownshirts - tried to stop people voting, and the way the media has been manipulated in his favor, just as it was in Hitler’s day.

There have been further parallels drawn with the way Obama has got support from leading businessmen like George Soros, Warren Buffett, the owners of Google and Youtube among others, while Hitler too had support from top industrialists - like steel tycoons Alfred Krupp and Fritz Thyssen - who contributed huge amounts to Hitler’s funds and mistakenly believed that they could make Hitler dance to their tune.

Some have also drawn parallels between Obama and other charismatic leaders who led their followers to oblivion, including David Koresh of the Branch Davidian and Jim Jones of the Jonestown mass suicide. Saddam Hussein is another that springs to mind.

One thing that all these people had in common, apart from being the center of charismatic personality cults, was that they all became recklessly suicidal when things began to go wrong, and took as many people down with them as they could.

This is a prospect that I find even more disturbing than talk of Obama’s socialist leanings and his connection with unsavory people like Jeremiah Wright and terrorists like Bill Ayres.

What led to the downfall of these charismatic leaders and their followers was the idolatry surrounding them and the huge weight of expectations that rested on them.

The pressures of such idolatry and expectations can unhinge even the most well balanced and well-intentioned people. But most if not all of these people were not exactly well balanced, however persuasive they might have been with their followers.

Most if not all suffered problems of self esteem following traumatic childhoods, like Obama’s father abandoning his family, and being moved around from place to place as a child and not being able to settle.

A common result of such childhood trauma and the low self esteem it generates is a deep-seated need for approval and acclamation, and in this Obama has probably exceeded his wildest dreams. He has become an idol to millions and millions.

One of the big dangers is that the objects of such idolatry begin to believe their own hype. Even if they don’t, they almost inevitably begin to lose touch with reality.

It’s what killed Elvis Presley in the end. He became an object of worship and he couldn’t cope with it. He was after all just a simple country boy and this idolatry pushed him increasingly into a world in which he no longer had any idea of where reality began or ended.

Nobody can cope with the pressure of such idolatry, and nobody can cope with the kind of expectations Obama’s followers have heaped upon his shoulders. Like the expectations of the woman who expected Obama to pay her mortgage and her gas bills.

Now she was not alone in this. It is obvious that there are many, many people who believe that Obama is going to be the answer to all their problems. And the sad, the tragic thing is, he is not.

In a way the whole situation reminds me of the time in 1960 when the Congo region of Africa gained its independence from Belgium. The people of the Congo thought this was going to be the end of hunger and the start of prosperity for all. People teemed into the city from the countryside carrying buckets and baskets and anything else they could find to hold all the good things they expected to be given as a result of national independence. And of course they were sadly disappointed.

The totally unrealistic expectations surrounding Obama are not too far removed from the expectations ifrom the the Congo during that time, and it these unrealistic expectations that have led to some vomit-inducing hymns of praise for a man who has proved nothing so far except that he is a very skillful talker and a great manipulator of people, just as Hitler was.

Now one can understand and sympathize to some extent with the fact that to many people he represents a triumph over racism, even though some might argue that there has been reverse racism with the vast majority of black Americans voting for him even though he was the least qualified of all the candidates.

But the feelings of many Obama supporters have gone far beyond the realms of sanity or reality. For many people Obama has become a cult figure, and the history of cult figures shows they are extremely vulnerable to self-destruction.

In the past, when expectations have exceeded the reality of what is possible, the tendency has been for those in power to take reckless measures, and this is one of the dangers we face with Obama. Added to this is the fact that with no experience of government, he has no solid foundation on which to base any decisions.

I suspect that Obama may already be increasingly disturbed by the idolatry and expectations surrounding him. I wouldn’t be surprised if he holds many of his followers in contempt for the impossible things they expect of him, a man with no real training or experience to govern the most powerful nation in the world.

But there are many signs that Obama actually believes in his own hype, and that is the most frightening thing of all.

Yet Another Barack Obama Baloney Alert!

Barack Obama had the Audacity Of Mendacity to pimp this brazen lie today. Lucky for him, his ears don’t grow every time he lies:

“Let’s be clear who John McCain is fighting for — he’s not fighting for Joe the Plumber, he’s fighting for Joe the Hedge Fund Manager,”

Increasingly arrogant because he knows his personal PR team in the main stream media won’t call him on any filthy lie he tells, Obama has once again not only lied in America’s face, but done it without a hint of conscience….a habit he has mastered, because it is becoming increasingly apparent that he has no soul.

Well I was just wondering then, Barack, since we are “being clear here”: If John McCain is fighting for Joe The Hedge Fund Manager, how come Joe The Hedge fund Manager has given you so much money?

Before you scrub the net, Barack, there are pages upon pages dating all the way to last year, that discuss how much Wall Street and Hedge Fund Managers are in love with you. Now why is that?

In fact, as I was researching this latest lie of yours, I could hardly keep up with all the links and all the names…..and all the money! Gratefully, the fast and efficient American Thinker got ahead of this issue in September.

Let’s keep one thing in mind. As even the liberal New York Times has stated:

Barack Obama is the candidate of the hedge funds because of the outsized support these titans of mismanagement have heaped upon him.

George Soros-hedge fund pioneer and titan-was early in his support. As emperor of a range of 527 groups, he has wielded his influence to help his largest political investment to date: Barack Obama.

But it’s not just the master of economic manipulation George Soros who loves Barack Obama. No sir. As if April 2008:

Many of the top 10 managers on Alpha magazine’s mind-blowing 2007 rich list, which was released last week, have put money on Obama, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, which tracks campaign contributions. They have each given the maximum donation allowed: $2,300. (Let’s face it, this is pocket lint to these guys.)

Obama’s hedge fund contributors include managers:

John Griffin, the founder of Blue Ridge Capital, who made $625 million in 2007, according to Alpha. Griffin is backing Obama after initially supporting Mitt Romney.

Kenneth Griffin (no relation) of Citadel Investment Group in Chicago, who earned $1.5 billion. He contributed to the Obama campaign after the senator went to his office last year.

Stephen Mandel Jr. of Lone Pine Capital, who took home $710 million last year.

And, of course, George Soros, who earned almost $3 billion last year. It is no surprise that Soros, a Democratic stalwart, is backing Obama. Soros campaigned against President Bush in 2004, and Moveon.org, which Soros has plied with tens of millions of dollars, endorsed Obama in February.

Well now wait. If you were a very very rich hedge fund manager and you wanted to give WAY more money to your special candidate, you would have to be……..a……bundler. That’s a person who puts the hammer on employees and other people dependent upon him or her –and collects up large sums via small donations. That way they don’t look like lobbyists but they get all the “credit” for the “Bundle”–and the greasy political recipient gets to call all those donations gifts from “the little guy”. Sound familiar? As a matter of fact, some of them actually are lobbyists, but I digress.

Now why is it that hedge fund lobbyists bundlers have raised more than twice as much money for Barack Obama than for John McCain? I mean, John McCain is the one looking out for Joe The Hedge Fund Bundler right?

Right.

[July 2008 figures below]

New figures show the Illinois senator and presumptive Democratic presidential nominee has drawn $822,375 in campaign contributions from employees of hedge funds, compared to $348,300 for his Republican rival, Arizona Sen. John McCain.

The figures, compiled for Reuters by the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonpartisan campaign finance research group, reflect mounting concern over the rising cost of health care and other domestic issues where several hedge fund managers said Mr. Obama had an edge over Mr. McCain.
….snip….

[Now for the bundlers as of July 2008]

Employees at $20 billion hedge fund Citadel Investment Group, run by Kenneth Griffin, rank as Mr. Obama’s top hedge fund backers, donating $185,300 to their home-state senator so far.

Employees at New York-based Taconic Capital Advisors donated $42,650 to Mr. Obama and $500 to Mr. McCain, while employees at D.E. Shaw & Co, also headquartered in New York, gave $41,915 to Mr. Obama and nothing to Mr. McCain.

Now why is it that Barack Obama fancies that John McCain is looking out for Joe The Hedge Fund Manager when Joe The Hedge Fund Manager keeps giving more of his money to Barack Obama? Must be because Joe The Hedgefund Manager always gives more money to the guy who is going to screw him, right?

Right. Well that’s not what THEY think:

“People are clearly looking to gain influence with the candidates down the line and are making their bets accordingly,” said a hedge fund manager in Chicago who declined to be identified so he could speak candidly.

Well, I guess they must just be financial masochists then. Because, according to Barack Obama, it’s John McCain who is looking out for them, right?

Right. So then why is it that Hedge Fund “Heavies” have been hosting some very lucrative fundraising bashes for Barack Obama?

The first was co-hosted by George Soros, the financier and former hedge fund manager, and Paul Tudor Jones, who runs the giant hedge fund Tudor Investment Corporation. That event, held in Mr. Jones’s $25 million waterfront mansion — which Vanity Fair’s Nina Munk has described as a “a cross between Tara and a national monument” — collected $2,300 from each of the approximately 300 attendees, the Greenwich Time reported.

Wow, nice digs, Mr. Jones! Way better than the digs Tony Rezko finagled for Barack, but Barack wants one just like yours.

Now wasn’t that sweet of Mr. Jones? I mean how many hedge fund managers would host a bash like that for Barack Obama, who “Isn’t looking out for him”? I mean, one would think that, since John McCain is the one looking out for him, he would have hosted that bash for John McCain, right?

Right.

So, Barack, are you sure you don’t want to withdraw that lie you told mistake you made regarding exactly who is looking out for Joe The Hedgefund Manager?

Oh and one more question, Barack. Where there any plumbers at these parties? Just wondering.

…………….

From my blog, Uppity Woman.

Obama tells a future Comrade that his pie is about to be raided.

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

All for the Glorious Cause, Comrades! All for the Glorious Cause!

lf you plan to benefit heavily from Barack Obama’s so-called “tax cuts,” you will have to be part of the population that doesn’t pay any taxes at all.

The rest of you will be paying more.

The Fair Housing Act and Community Reinvestment Act have already found a way to redistribute your income and tax money by ensuring by force that home loans went to people with virtually no ability to pay at all, bringing Fannie Mae down and subsequently Wall Street. This move also sucked down any investments you made through sacrifice and personal responsibility. But when it comes to Barack Obama, personal responsibility, paying your own mortgage and bills and making sacrifices to save and shore up against your own future is not a respectable way to live.

Under Barack Obama’s “Plan” you are truly screwed if you are working at taking responsibility for your own behaviors. His “tax cut” plan is the next leg to killing the middle class, while he pretends he cares so much for them. His tax cut has nothing whatsoever to do with middle class “working families” and everything to do with expanding the welfare state and redistributing the income of those same “working families”. “Working families” are already paying to bail out Fannie Mae’s redistribution of assets to Non Working Families. Now comes the next forced step for you involuntary Comrades.

No wonder every previously dead Anti-American party in our country is feeling refreshed. Obama’s plan for “tax credits” is more Socialist talk for transferring of money from taxpayers to non-taxpayers.

Like good little socialists, you will work and then you will share your money with people who don’t earn as much as you do - faster than you can say Karl Marx.

It doesn’t matter that you worked your way through college for years to get a better job. It doesn’t matter if you work two jobs. It doesn’t matter if you bust your ass in overtime. It doesn’t matter if you don’t buy things you can’t afford and you live within your means. It doesn’t matter if you sacrifice one thing for another. Your reward will not match the rewards of others who may do none of these things. It’s as simple as that. When Barack obama says he is going to “cut taxes” for 95% of America, he really means he is also going to give money away to more than a third of America–people who pay no taxes at all.

There are millions of immigrants in America who left their countries to get away from governments like the one Barack Obama has planned.

The Wall Street Journal has it nailed today.

One of Barack Obama’s most potent campaign claims is that he’ll cut taxes for no less than 95% of “working families.” He’s even promising to cut taxes enough that the government’s tax share of GDP will be no more than 18.2% — which is lower than it is today.

It’s a clever pitch, because it lets him pose as a middle-class tax cutter while disguising that he’s also proposing one of the largest tax increases ever on the other 5%. But how does he conjure this miracle, especially since more than a third of all Americans already pay no income taxes at all? There are several sleights of hand, but the most creative is to redefine the meaning of “tax cut.”

For the Obama Democrats, a tax cut is no longer letting you keep more of what you earn. In their lexicon, a tax cut includes tens of billions of dollars in government handouts that are disguised by the phrase “tax credit.”Mr. Obama is proposing to create or expand no fewer than seven such credits for individuals:

- A $500 tax credit ($1,000 a couple) to “make work pay” that phases out at income of $75,000 for individuals and $150,000 per couple.

- A $4,000 tax credit for college tuition.

- A 10% mortgage interest tax credit (on top of the existing mortgage interest deduction and other housing subsidies).

- A “savings” tax credit of 50% up to $1,000.

- An expansion of the earned-income tax credit that would allow single workers to receive as much as $555 a year, up from $175 now, and give these workers up to $1,110 if they are paying child support.

- A child care credit of 50% up to $6,000 of expenses a year.

- A “clean car” tax credit of up to $7,000 on the purchase of certain vehicles.

Here’s the political catch. All but the clean car credit would be “refundable,” which is Washington-speak for the fact that you can receive these checks even if you have no income-tax liability. In other words, they are an income transfer — a federal check — from taxpayers to nontaxpayers. Once upon a time we called this “welfare,” or in George McGovern’s 1972 campaign a “Demogrant.” Mr. Obama’s genius is to call it a tax cut.

The Tax Foundation estimates that under the Obama plan 63 million Americans, or 44% of all tax filers, would have no income tax liability and most of those would get a check from the IRS each year. The Heritage Foundation’s Center for Data Analysis estimates that by 2011, under the Obama plan, an additional 10 million filers would pay zero taxes while cashing checks from the IRS.

The total annual expenditures on refundable “tax credits” would rise over the next 10 years by $647 billion to $1.054 trillion, according to the Tax Policy Center. This means that the tax-credit welfare state would soon cost four times actual cash welfare.By redefining such income payments as “tax credits,” the Obama campaign also redefines them away as a tax share of GDP. Presto, the federal tax burden looks much smaller than it really is.

Yes, you have read correctly, folks. The welfare state will quadruple, Comrade. A person who pays NO tax whatsoever will be getting all these “Tax refunds” in the name of “Fairness”. They will get a refund check from the IRS consisting of money they never even paid. In other words, it’s the next step in Obama’s plans for The Glorious Cause - Socialism.

Please be sure to go here and read about the rest of the impact of this pathetic Socialist’s Plans for you, suckers. Want to beat the system. Work part time and stay home and watch TV the rest of the time. If you calculate it right, you will get all those tax “refunds” and earn as much as you do now–for doing nothing. Your government will take care of you, Comrade!

From my blog, “Uppity Woman“

Everyone here has heard most of the elements of the post presented below. Some have even talked about the theory presented therein. Before you get bored and skip some of the rehashing, remember this. NoQuarter attracts more new viewers these days than Oberburp has in the past year. The new visitors deserve full qualification of facts, people and events before they can digest theories. This is a long post, but one worth reading.

Therefore I suggest that the following article, written by a kindergarten teacher, should be read by us and shared with anyone who is light Obama or center fence. There are two things amazing I find about people who will dedicate their lives to teaching five year old kids. One. They have to find a smile, every Monday through Friday Morning, before they greet the kids. Two. They get to hear the greatest questions about subjects we quit questioning.

One last thing. This kindergarten teacher is a man who joined me, and a lot of other people, to create the June 19th Seneca160 project, honoring Hillary. I am not discussing her now. I just want you to take in Shtu’s thinking. Get off the minute-by-minute news for a moment and provoke some thought. You might just find a way to create convincing posts, on your own blogs, that will move some votes.

NQ is The blog of bloggers.

- Eastan McNeal

Now. For Shtuey’s Piece

At the outset I must thank Ms Placed Democrat’s Renaissancelady 48 and Eastan McNeal at No Quarter for their exhaustive research, love of country, and wise counsel.

How did we get here? How is it that “subprime mortgages” have brought us to the brink of economic collapse? Most people believe it is due to the predatory lending practices of financial institutions. That is the lie you have been sold. The truth is far more insidious. We are in fact on the brink of economic disaster because of the people who have sent Barack Obama.

In order to understand how this happened we must begin with Saul Alinsky , the radical socialist who, after spending a great deal of time with the Al Capone crime family in Chicago, realized that the same shakedown tactics used by the mob to extort business, and control politicians, could be used by activists to shakedown banks and political institutions to advance a socialist agenda.

These were tactics utilized by groups like ACORN, in an effort to lobby the government to pass laws that forced lending institutions to issue mortgages to low income/”at risk” borrowers who often had no way of paying the money back.

But ACORN members probably did not lobby for these laws to bring down our economy, at least not knowingly. I believe that, apart from the leaders at the top, rank and file ACORN members legitimately believed they were fighting for low-income housing. But ACORN’s backers were simply using Alinsky’s method (never reveal your real agenda) to serve their own purposes.

Who are these people? You know the names of two of them: Bill Ayers and Barack Obama. I suspect that they are more front men than anything else, though who knows who Ayers was with while he was in hiding?

Where did ACORN get the funds to engage in the widespread lobbying (read extortion) that allowed them to shakedown lenders and politicians?

From the money diverted to them by Bill Ayers and Barack Obama, via the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, and the Woods Fund, as well as with your tax dollars allocated by Congressional Democrats; the same Congressional Democrats that have received hundreds of thousands of dollars from Freddie and Fannie in the form of campaign contributions; the same Congressional Democrats that ignored Republican calls for the regulating and reform of Freddie and Fannie — the institutions that took subprime mortgages, bundled them, and infected financial institutions worldwide … all in the name of granting minorities and low income families access to housing (always the trouble begins with the most honorable of intentions, or at least it is made to seem so), but with the Leftists’ hidden purpose of initiating a worldwide economic collapse.

All of it was accomplished with ACORN as the muscle.

The root of the problem lies with the Community Reinvestment Act. The CRA was passed in 1977 and, according to Thomas J. DiLorenzo,

“compels banks to make loans to low-income borrowers and in what the supporters of the Act call “communities of color” that they might not otherwise make based on purely economic criteria.”

DiLorenzo goes on to explain:

The original lobbyists for the CRA were the hardcore leftists who supported the Carter administration and were often rewarded for their support with government grants and programs like the CRA that they benefited from. These included various “neighborhood organizations,” as they like to call themselves, such as “ACORN” (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now). These organizations claim that over

$1 trillion in CRA loans have been made, although no one seems to know the magnitude with much certainty.

A U.S. Senate Banking Committee staffer told me about ten years ago that at least $100 billion in such loans had been made in the first twenty years of the Act.

So-called “community groups” like ACORN benefit themselves from the CRA through a process that sounds like legalized extortion. The CRA is enforced by four federal government bureaucracies: the Fed, the Comptroller of the Currency, the Office of Thrift Supervision, and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. The law is set up so that any bank merger, branch expansion, or new branch creation can be postponed or prohibited by any of these four bureaucracies if a CRA “protest” is issued by a “community group.” This can cost banks great sums of money, and the “community groups” understand this perfectly well.

It is their leverage. They use this leverage to get the banks to give them millions of dollars as well as promising to make a certain amount of bad loans in their communities.

A man named Bruce Marks became quite notorious during the last decade for pressuring banks to earmark literally billions of dollars to his organization, the “Neighborhood Assistance Corporation of America.” He once boasted to the New York Times that he had “won” loan commitments totaling $3.8 billion from Bank of America, First Union Corporation, and the Fleet Financial Group. And that is just one “community group” operating in one city – Boston.

Banks have been placed in a Catch 22 situation by the CRA: If they comply, they know they will have to suffer from more loan defaults. If they don’t comply, they face financial penalties and, worse yet, their business plans for mergers, branch expansions, etc. can be blocked by CRA protesters, which can cost a large corporation like Bank of America billions of dollars. Like most businesses, they have largely buckled under and have surrendered to their bureaucratic masters.

Consequently, banks in every community in America have been forced to hold a portfolio of bad loans, euphemistically referred to as “subprime” loans. In order to compensate themselves for the added risk of extending these loans, many lenders have increased the lending fees associated with mortgage loans. This is simply an indirect way of doing what banks always do – and what they must do to remain solvent: charging effectively higher rates of interest on riskier loans.

But this is discriminatory!, complained the “community organizations.” Thus, if one browses the ACORN web site, one can read of their boasts of having “predatory lending laws” passed in numerous states which outlaw such fees, prohibiting banks from protecting themselves from the added risk involved in making forced loans to “subprime” borrowers.

According to the Consumer Rights League :

• ACORN leveraged the Community Reinvestment Act in order to attack lenders’ reputations and secure financial resources for itself; it has also endorsed loans offered by companies that fund ACORN operations
• ACORN’s decades of lobbying and publicity seeking have contributed to the current housing crisis by lowering lending standards
• Despite raking in a troubling 40 percent of its revenue from taxpayers over the last three years, ACORN Housing Corporation’s actions range from controversial to borderline illegal:
  • AHC has worked to obtain mortgages for undocumented workers
  • AHC relies on undocumented income, “under the table” money that may not be reported to the Internal Revenue Service
  • ACORN’s “financial justice” operations attack lenders for “exotic” loans, but AHC has recommended ten-year interest-only loans (which deny equity to the buyer) and reverse mortgages (which can be detrimental to senior citizens)
  • AHC may have violated federal law by failing to maintain a proper distinction between its tax-exempt housing work and the aggressive political activities of ACORN.

CRL goes on to report:

To understand the current subprime credit mess is to glimpse a world in which a politically active organization with a non-profit housing arm reaps millions of dollars through “rent seeking” or manipulation of favorable laws. ACORN and its non-profit housing arm have taken in millions of taxpayer and corporate dollars by abusing a three-decade-old law intended to help the poor obtain housing. For decades, the activist organization known as ACORN has grabbed headlines—and cash—by attacking mortgage lenders in the name of citizens’ rights. Considerably less attention has been paid to the amount of taxpayer money that funds ACORN Housing Corporation (AHC) and to the financial rewards ACORN has amassed.

But from whom did ACORN learn these Alinsky tactics? In part, from Barack Obama.

As I said earlier, I believe rank and file ACORN members legitimately believe they are lobbying for minority and low income housing, unknowingly advancing a larger agenda to destroy our economic and financial institutions. But how has the cabal managed to infect the credit market worldwide? Let’s ask Penny Pritzker,

Barack Obama’s campaign finance chair.

It is now well documented that Pritzker was one of the driving forces behind the subprime mortgage fiasco, unleashing toxic loans into the market like a financial Typhoid Mary. Her bank, Superior, was the first to go under, and yet she made millions.

From Dennis Bernstein’s report:

Though Superior Bank collapsed years before the current sub-prime turmoil that is rocking the world’s financial markets – and pushing those millions of homeowners toward foreclosure – some banking experts say the Pritzkers and Superior hold a special place in the history of the sub-prime fiasco.

“The [sub-prime] financial engineering that created the Wall Street meltdown was developed by the Pritzkers and Ernst and Young, working with Merrill Lynch to sell bonds securitized by sub-prime mortgages,” Timothy J. Anderson, a whistleblower on financial and bank fraud, told me in an interview.

“The sub-prime mortgages,” Anderson said, “were provided to Merrill Lynch, by a nation-wide Pritzker origination system, using Superior as the cash cow, with many millions in FDIC insured deposits. Superior’s owners were to sub-prime lending, what Michael Milken was to junk bonds.”

In other words, if you traced today’s sub-prime crisis back to its origins, you would come upon the role of the Pritzkers and Superior Bank of Chicago.

Only a fool would believe that it is a coincidence that a man who helped train ACORN in the use of Alinsky tactics, and with Bill Ayers helped fund ACORN, selected the originator of the subprime mortgage vehicle that is destroying our economy to be his campaign finance chair.

But what was the lightbulb moment?

What was the missing piece of the puzzle?

It didn’t start falling into place for me until John McCain announced his mortgage rescue plan at the second Presidential debate.

Inspired by Hillary Clinton’s editorial in the Wall Street Journal, McCain is advancing what is essentially FDR’s Home Owners Loan Corporation idea that kept millions of Americans in their homes. It is a proven plan for success.

But Obama rejects it. Not only does he reject it, but Obama does so based on conservative talking points, namely that McCain’s plan would reward institutions’ unethical practices; practices that banks were forced to adopt because of ACORN’s coercive lobbying efforts, the passage of the CRA, and a mortgage vehicle essentially invented by his campaign finance chair. But in this rejection Obama strays from his usual modus operandi.

As we saw in the primaries, when the opposition issues a plan, Obama waits a few days and then announces the same plan. The media praise him and everyone genuflects. The most notable example of this was when Senator Clinton advocated a multibillion dollar stimulus package in the spring. One week later Obama released a virtually identical plan. Not so this time.

Not only has Obama rejected a plan originally put forward by a Democratic President, he has offered no solution of his own.

Why? Because Barack Obama needs economic turmoil to get into office.

It is the one thing that has opened any polling advantage for Obama in the election. And once in office the nationalization of our banking system will be easily executed. Treasury Secretary Paulson is already laying the groundwork by advocating the government purchase of bank stock.

Once in control of America’s financial institutions, it would be very easy, under the guise of halting the current economic crisis, to completely nationalize American banks and begin a widespread socialist wealth redistribution program which has been part of the Ayers/Obama agenda since the Chicago Annenberg Challenge. Crazy? Here’s what Ayers said at an education forum in Venezuela, in the presence of Hugo Chavez:

“the political educational reforms under way here in Venezuela under the leadership of President Chavez.

“We share the belief that education is the motor-force of revolution. . . .”

“Teaching invites transformations, it urges revolutions large and small. La educacion es revolution.”

Read what Jon Markman has to say on the ramifications of Obama’s economic and tax policies. And take a look at a recent survey of CEOs.

These people are very concerned with job creation.

They require a President whose policies will allow them, in a weakened economy, to generate the jobs that will put Americans back to work, and drive the economic engine forward. Not only do they feel that McCain’s policies will allow them to generate those jobs, they overwhelmingly fear an Obama presidency. CEOs know what any fool should know; government does not create jobs (the lie that Obama tells us), companies and corporations create jobs; in a capitalist society.

And consider what is happening between Great Britain and Iceland. Interesting that British banks, that ended up being bought up by Iceland, secretly held ACORN assets. It’s a new world order after all. Eastan McNeal goes on to explain:

The first step toward ensuring that the goal of everyone equally owning everything is to first make sure that nobody owns anything. The only path to a functioning socialist democracy is through a temporary trip through a communist demise. In other words, every corporation and entrepreneur must be eliminated and their personal empires destroyed and turned over to the single payer-payee government larges before the collective wealth of the world can be redistributed and shared equally with and for all.

Obama is using home foreclosures, job loss, and economic collapse as a means of gaining power for himself and his backers; the most prominent, and the one who stands to gain the most, George Soros, makes money in part by destablizing foreign currencies as he did in Thailand in 1997.

Obama wants to win the White House on the back of your suffering while George Soros stands to make a killing.

The end result? A socialist takeover of financial institutions to effect a redistribution of wealth in any mode they please.

Do you trust a man who bought a $1.3 million mansion, with the help of a convicted felon, to equally redistribute the world’s wealth?

Would you trust a man who gained his party’s nomination through voter suppression and intimidation, and who voted to continue a regime of warrantless wire tapping, to preserve democracy?

No, me neither. That’s not leadership. That’s not change we can believe in.

Oh, and check out the freshman Senator from Illinois promising that ACORN will help him set his presidential agenda (and read Larry Johnson’s post on Sunday, “Barack Worked For ACORN, Promises to Do So Again.”

There is only one sure thing standing in the way of a leftist takeover of our financial institutions, and possibly the ending of democracy as we know it;

electing John McCain President of the United States on November 4th.

Speaking of Obama and ACORN, it’s about time the McCain campaign spoke up about what we’ve been saying for months:

Click here to visit Shtuey’s blog and read this post WITH links. NQ regulars know where the links go. New visitors, visit Shtu and come back and comment with us.

We already discussed American Thinker’s most revealing article, “How Allies of George Soros Helped Bring Down Wachovia Bank“.

The piece provided us with some very revealing information on the Sandlers of Wachovia fame — who cashed out before the mortgage crises, – as well as their ties to George Soros, Moveon, the Obama campaign and the “New” Democratic Socialist Party.

This is such a large happy intertwined family attempting to control America politically and financially that it warrants an organizational chart. Fortunately, Muckety was kind enough to warn us provide a chart way back in January 2008.

Afer you peruse the organizational and financial love-fest below and read about this big happy family, you should click on this link. Then you can click on each of of the name boxes on the chart and learn more about these people who are attempting to control the United States of America. It will certainly help you to understand why Barack Obama is their guy. It’s just one big Family Picnic aimed at capitalism, Comrades!

As I have said before, I DO hope if the FBI is serious about this Wall Street situation, they are following George Soros and his friends 24/7. I would have liked to think they were following these people around long before now, but hey, I’m not that optimistic. The economy has tanked coincidentally just in time for Barack Obama to declare himself a savior.

Hope and Change. Indeed. It will be interesting to see how much Obama scrambles to see to it that the Trillion Dollar “rescue” Bill gets passed. While he appeared not just a little detached during the entire process, he seemed very agitated yesterday when that bill failed and that wasn’t my imagination. Socialism. So close to the Goal! Damn them!

Here is what Muckety published about these people back in JANUARY 2008.

Two California groups, Vote Hope and PowerPac.org, are drawing national attention, and boisterous complaints from opponents, for their support of Barack Obama’s run for the presidency.

Both are operating outside the Obama campaign as 527 organizations, taking advantage of tax-code provisions that exempt them from federal spending limits. And both were founded by Steve Phillips, former president of the San Francisco School Board and son-in-law of billionaire banker Herb Sandler.

Sandler is one of the lucky ones who cashed out before the mortgage crisis. Wachovia bought Sandler’s company, Golden West Financial, for $25.5 billion in October 2006. Forbes estimated his personal worth that year at $1.2 billion.

Like his son-in-law, Sandler is an active contributor to Democratic causes. He gave $2.5 million to Moveon.org in 2004, and has contributed more than $100,000 to the Democratic Senate and congressional committees in recent years.

He is also a backer of the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank headed by John Podesta, Bill Clinton’s former chief of staff.

The Sandler Family Supporting Foundation has supported medical research, with an emphasis on asthma. It also pledged $15 million to Human Rights Watch in 2005.

Sandler also founded a nonprofit journalism organization called ProPublica, which promises to produce “truly important stories with moral force.” ProPublica, based in Manhattan, is run by former Wall Street Journal managing editor Paul Steiger.

Slate’s media writer, Jack Shafer, has cast a cynical eye on the venture, suggesting that most self-made billionaires don’t give away pots of money without expecting some control over the results.
“If I were an editorial writer,” Shafer wrote in October, “I’d call upon Herbert Sandler to provide ProPublica with 10 years of funding ($100 million), and then resign from his post as the organization’s chairman so he’ll never be tempted to bollix up what might turn out to be a good thing.”

Vote Hope and PowerPac.org, meanwhile, are definitely partisan. PowerPac is running TV spots in California, where it is hiring organizers to get out the vote for the Feb. 5 primary. Phillips has said that he hopes to raise $2 million for Vote Hope.

The Obama campaign on Friday released a letter sent to Phillips on Dec. 28, urging that Vote Hope be disbanded. Phillips declined.

Don’t forget to click here and then click on each one of the boxes in the chart above so that you can get even more flavor out of it. Afer all, it’s not nice to avoid learning who is trying to take over your country’s econonomy, is it?

Here’s a tale of Wachovia as told by American Thinker entitled How Allies of George Soros Helped Bring Down Wachovia Bank.

Interesting title, hey? Especially considering I hope to God that the FBI is following George Soros around right now 24/7.

Now I am not usually given to block quoting and posting an entire piece, but these are interesting times time is also of the essence, and I just don’t want to take the chance that you won’t read the whole thing. I somehow think the author will understand this, considering the importance of this article to the American public with respect to the currently sunken Wachovia Bank.

Let me know if you smell any Socialism or Marxism here ok? And Oops! Look! There’s George Soros’ name again! And more than a few other names and organizations you will now recognize too! Take your time, but whatever you do, read it all:

How Allies Of George Soros Helped Bring Down Wachovia Bank

Wachovia Bank, a major institution, has seen its stock plummet and its continued viability called into question, as the nation’s financial crisis muddles forward. [Update: shortly after publication of this article, Citigroup agreed to purchase Wachovia's banking operations in a deal facilitated by the FDIC.]

Largely ignored in this crisis is the key role played by Herbert and Marion Sandler, founders of Golden West Financial (GDW), one of the largest savings and loans in the nation. Wachovia purchased GDW for $24 billion dollars in 2006. This was one of the worst merger and acquisition deals of all time for the buyer, and remarkably excellent timing on the part of the seller. In essence, Wachovia bought a financial time bomb ticking away, one that exploded this year, bringing down yet another former financial titan and further wrecking Wall Street. [Update: see this commentary from Bloomberg on the role of GDW in the fall of Wachovia.]

How did this transpire and who are the Sandlers?

Herbert and Marion Sandler, a New York lawyer and Wall Street analyst respectively, bought a small California thrift in 1963 and built it into GDW — one of the largest thrifts in the nation. The company’s business was built on adjustable rate mortgages (ARMs). These were mortgages offered at low “teaser” rates that ratcheted upward as interest rates increased. They were often sold aggressively to unsophisticated home buyers who did not comprehend the vast financial risks … or who assumed that housing prices would rise high enough to provide a profit. … They were targets for lenders peddling mortgages that should have been stamped with a skull and crossbones, …

This book of business is the core reason for Wachovia’s current difficulties

The Sandlers knew their business far better than any other [since] they the founders and major owners [and] famously ran the company as a husband and wife team. …

So why did they happen to cash out at precisely the right time? Did they see the handwriting on the wall, realizing the massive risks inherent in the mortgages they originated throughout one of the most overheated real estate markets in the nation’s history? They are not talking, but when smart people cash in some of their chips, it’s rarely a good time to bet against them. Nevertheless, Wachovia bet 24 billion dollars and lost big time.

The collapse was primarily caused by the GDW purchase, which became an albatross around Wachovia’s neck. … “Wachovia found itself in ARM’s Way” was the headline of a recent Wall Street Journal article. A huge percentage of these Wachovia ARMs were made to deep subprime borrowers with very poor credit scores. Most of these were “inherited from its ill-timed acquisition of Golden West” at the end of the housing boom in 2006.

The Sandlers have started to invest their billions of dollars politically, in the manner of George Soros, sugar daddy of many far-left wing groups and an early and prominent supporter of Presidential candidate Barack Obama. Soros has developed an empire of so-called 527 groups, putatively independent political activists groups that have influence within the Democratic Party. These 527 groups include the Center for American Progress, MoveOn.Org, Human Rights Watch, Media Matters. …

[The set] includes the International Crisis Group, whose foreign policy staff is likely to contain the embryonic future of the State Department in an Obama Administration . Eli Pariser, who heads MoveOn.Org, boasts about his group’s role in the Democratic Party:

“Now it’s our party: we bought it, we own it, and we are going to take it back.”

They have already done so, in large measure.

The top four donors to these 527 groups in the last Presidential election cycle (2004) were Soros, Peter Lewis of Progressive Insurance, Steven Bing, and Herbert and Marion Sandler . Collectively they gave 78 million dollars to left-leaning 527 groups. That was just in 2004. They have become much more ambitious over the last few years.

Soros, Lewis, and the Sandlers form a core group of billionaire activists and Democrat partisans who have formed a group called The Democracy Alliance. They realized that they could magnify their power by working in unison and tapping other wealthy donors … (the superb Boston Globe article “Follow the money” is a good primer on how money and 527 groups have come together to have a huge impact on politics in America).

The Democracy Alliance is a major avenue to help them … [Its] roster … consists of a list of billionaires and mere multi-millionaires who collectively hope to give upwards of 500 million dollars each year to further promote a left-wing agenda. A partial roster of the Democracy Alliance membership can be found here.

[...]

The Sandlers certainly know quite a bit about leverage from their savings and loan days.

Among the beneficiaries of their largesse: Air America, ACORN (a group that has very close and long lasting ties to Barack Obama and has a long history of engaging in voter fraud. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (basically a private detective group focused on the private faults and foibles of Republicans), Media Matters, a media watchdog group that engages in harsh partisan attacks …). The list goes on and on

They are not merely out to elect Democrats, but to also permanently realign U.S. politics and shift our society and culture. …

[A step the Sandlers have taken on their own is to] start ProPublica with a 10 million dollar donation [to be replenished] annually. [ProPublica] will engage in investigative journalism and will provide its “findings” to larger media outlets for greater impact at no cost. American Thinker was among the first outlets to express wariness over ProPublica and the approach it would take given the ideology of its founding couple. Even Jane Mayer of the New Yorker described the Sandlers as hard-core partisans. Other publications shared our concern. … Investor’s Business Daily commented in an editorial:

Could a couple of left-wing billionaires really be sincere about creating a “nonpartisan,” “non-ideological” center for investigative reporting? Or is the pair just paying more to drive the media agenda further left?

One problem: The Sandlers fund both leftist causes and the Democratic Party. In fact, they rank in the top tier of donors. In 2004 they gave MoveOn.org $2.5 million, or as much money as their philanthropic ally, George Soros.

Along with Soros and billionaire Peter Lewis, the Sandlers fund some of the most important players of what is now known as the “progressive” left. In 2003, the three together funded about a third of the Center for American Progress think tank. …

[I]f this enterprise were called a “progressive” nonprofit, as other projects are, it wouldn’t be news. But given the chairmanship of Herbert Sandler, and Steiger’s claim that ProPublica will be run according to the “strictest standards of journalistic impartiality and fairness,” there’s reason to wonder if this isn’t a new bid to drive the political agenda leftward under media disguise.

“We will look hard at the critical functions of business and government, the two biggest centers of power, in areas ranging from product safety to securities fraud, from flaws in our system of criminal justice to practices that undermine fair elections,” its Web site says.

I would be very surprised indeed if the malfeasance of ACORN will ever be investigated by Publica, for its undermining of fair elections.

Unsurprisingly, though, ProPublica has already shown that agenda-driven journalism is its founding principle. One of its first pieces of “investigative journalism” was an attack on the oil and gas industry for developing the Marcellus Shale (a vast natural gas reservoir located in northeast America). ProPublica reported that developing this domestic energy source would damage the environment. …

The New York Sun took ProPublica to task for the accuracy of its reporting … :

Geology.com reports on a study earlier this year by a geology professor at the State University of New York at Fredonia, Gary Lash, who found that the Marcellus Shale may contain more than 500 trillion cubic feet of natural gas.

If 10% of that is recoverable, it could supply America’s natural gas needs for two years and would have a “wellhead value” of $1 trillion, according to Geology.com. In other words, by the time the story is over, upstate New York will end up looking not like Appalachia but like Dallas or Dubai.

The national security consequences would also be considerable. Every unit of energy that comes from upstate New York is a unit that doesn’t have to come from Iran or Venezuela or Saudi Arabia or some other nation hostile to America and known for spawning or supporting terrorists.

[E]nvironmental risks … are surmountable. … “The Barnett Shale,” that natural gas field has been mined without any ill effects on the metropolitan area of Dallas Fort-Worth, which sits atop it. Not only have there been no ill effects, there have been remarkable benefits in … prosperity, growth, and increased tax revenues.

Maybe the Sandlers are helping their political ally George Soros, a hedge fund manager who runs an offshore fund whose investors may well include some of the world’s wealthiest and most anti-American petrocats. Shielded from scrutiny by offshore operations, the names of Soros’s investors are a closely-guarded secret. But perhaps more than a few of them would look askance at expedited development of our own energy resources. We would be less dependent on petrodollar rich abroad, and the price of oil and gas would weaken, should domestic energy resources like the Marcellus Shale be developed.

While the Sandlers personally made 2.4 billion dollars on the 24 billion dollar sale of Golden West Financial to Wachovia, [current and former] employees … and shareholders of Wachovia, including those who have invested their retirement money and children’s college funds in Wachovia stock and bonds, are not doing nearly so well. Communities where Wachovia has branches that may be closed as a cost-saving measure will also suffer. But worst hurt of all will be the homeowners who were sold mortgages that they should have never been offered, by a lender far more sophisticated than they were.

And here I thought that Democrat partisans were supposed to protect the little people.

So far as I know, the Sandlers have not offered to reinvest any of their gains into Wachovia to help it recover. It appears to be far more fun taking those ill-begotten billions and use them to fund an ever-expanding “left-wing conspiracy.”

Keep an eye on the Sandlers if Barack Obama becomes President … they know about leverage.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

From my blog, Uppity Woman.

Obama’s most questionable tie is to a leftist organization called ACORN. His connection to this group begins with a woman named Madeleine Talbot. She embraced Obama and taught him the ropes. He remained a part of this group’s training cadre. Obama taught leadership conferences for the group while working for Miner, Barnhill & Galland. His connections don’t end there. Obama actively sought and received the endorsement by ACORN for his local campaigns. He has now done the same in his bid for the USA presidency.

According to its web site ACORN (an acronym for Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now), is the nation’s largest community organization of low- and moderate-income families, working together for social justice and stronger communities. At first glance, this organization seems to be benign. This is not true since it uses very aggressive tactics to get its work done.

Some recent reports about their activities include the following things. They have disrupted and blocked activities within the Chicago City Council during living wage discussions. In Baltimore, MD, they burst into the scene of a private law dinner. They bussed four loads of protesters to the site of a mayor’s house, where they spewed profanities at the mayor and his family. And these are just the ones we know about. Their thuggery is over the line by far.

These are not their only questionable actions. In the past they have been tied to illegal voter registration in at least three states. These three states are Washington, Missouri, and North Carolina.

In Missouri, the voter fraud case was tied to at least one campaign, the senate campaign of Claire McCaskill.

In 2004, the Washington state Secretary of State described ACORN’s illegal activity as the “largest case of voter fraud in the state’s history”.

They were fined $25,000 and promised to instruct their paid canvassers on the state election requirements. In 2005, according to the complaint filed with Mecklenberg County, North Carolina, the voter fraud involved the registration of homeless people. ACORN agrees they break the law but said “no one told us”. In 2006, in Kansas City, MO, five low-level operatives were charged with voter fraud. Four pleaded guilty, with the fifth person released because it came out that an ACORN worker had stolen her identity.

This is just the first layer of radicalism. According to Sol Stern’s 2003 City Journal article, “ACORN’s Nutty Regime for Cities,” this group is the key modern successor of the 1960 ’s “New Left” with a 1960’s-bred agenda of anti-capitalism to match. While ACORN still uses the old tactics of the National Welfare Reform Organization to get things done, the targets and strategy have changed. They prefer to fly under the radar, taken their tactics to liberal urban areas like Chicago and now here in Kansas. Their national goals are municipal “living” wage laws, targeting big companies like Costco, rolling back welfare reform, and regulating banks.

ACORN drives companies like Costco from urban areas that actually need jobs. Their opposition to welfare reform tends to keep the people in poverty in these areas, while causing family breakdown. The worst of their tactics is the regulation of banks. They protest “predatory lending,” putting pressure on banks to make large donations to them to finance their “non-partisan motor voter drives.” Stern says that these tactics tend to be “undisguised authoritarian socialism.”

Don’t let its tactics fool you though. According to Kurtz, “ACORN is a savvy and exceedingly effective player.” They prefer to take over the system from within rather than overthrowing the system from without. Stern calls this a political version of the Invasion of the Body Snatchers. In Chicago, where the largest organization exists, an ACORN member won a seat on the Board of Alderman as candidate of the leftist New Party.

Obama in his pre-law days was a community organizer. He was supposed to teach the residents to press for improvements in places like their parks which were eyesores back in his day. Part of Obama’s employment was to organize demonstrations, much in the same way groups like ACORN do. Some of Obama’s claims, in his book Dreams from My Father, about his actions to remove asbestos are false. It was actually a woman named Hazel Johnson who discovered the asbestos problem and who led the removal efforts.

Once again, Madeleine Talbot, Obama’s ACORN mentor, reappears on our radar screens. It turns out Talbot was in some sense responsible for the attempted unsuccessful coup of the Chicago City Council meeting on the living wage issue in 1997. Two hundred ACORN supporters were present. While the actions did disrupt the meeting, six members were arrested that night, charged with “mob action and disorderly conduct.” Among those six was Talbot, Obama’s ACORN mentor.

Does it mean Obama used these tactics? I highly doubt it since he would have been above those tactics in order to protect his political future. He wouldn’t have wanted to break the law with such aggressive behavior. I do believe by this time Obama was well aware of their tactics and understood them, maybe even teaching them in his leadership conferences.

It seems that in reality that Obama is ACORN’s way to overthrow the system from the inside. This jives with his words such as “I am for hope and change, I am for a new Washington, D.C.” While Axelrod coined the term “Hope and Change,” ACORN is fully behind Obama’s opportunity to overthrow our government, if you will, from the inside. They are not alone in their quest for this because it seems that the Service Employee’s International Union is one of ACORN’s strange bedfellows.

The extent of his ties is often dismissed. They are however covered in another article found in the journal Social Policy entitled “Case Study: Chicago - The Barack Obama Campaign” by Tom Foulkes. In this article, Foulkes claims that ACORN specifically sought out Obama’s representation in the “motor voter case,” remembering him from his pre-law days and his work with Talbot. He also trained many of the new volunteers and employees in Leadership Training Conferences even as he was working as a law professional.

This is only the beginning of his continued use and cooperation on the part of ACORN. Obama used them as volunteer “thugs” for his first bid for the Illinois state senate in 1996 and again in his failed 2000 bid for Congress. Obama doesn’t forget his old friends, many of his newly trained volunteers, and used them again in his 2004 successful bid for the United States Senate. By this time ACORN and Obama were like old friends.

ACORN as well as other groups were the recipients of foundation money from both the Woods Fund and Joyce Foundation. Why is this important? Obama sat on both boards. Through his board positions, he was able to assist in the funneling of many millions of dollars in grant money to various ultra-liberal organizations like Chicago’s ACORN. It may not be illegal but it gives me pause.

It would be illegal for Obama to funnel money to his main “get out the vote” volunteers in his position on those boards. So it would seem, at least on the exterior, that ACORN probably did observe the “rule of law” in its non-partisan efforts. It claims that its get-out-the-vote drives are segregated from its political arm. I am certain that much grant money has been received from these two foundations. And I am left with a nagging question. Where does ACORN get the money for its never-empty war chest? Could it be they receive funding from someone like George Soros, who has poured millions into presidential campaigns like Obama and even Howard Dean, according to a blog piece at No Quarter, “Hitler and the New Democratic Party.”

According to Kurtz in his NRO article, while these questions about funding and partisanship are important, what is more troubling are Obama’s ties to ACORN, “arguably the most politically, radical, large-scale activist group in this country.” ACORN sneaked its first political insider on the Board of Alderman in Chicago as a “New Party” candidate elected to that board. As ACORN has managed to sneak its operatives within the system legally through elections, one would think that Obama is able to do the same. Why do we know this? Because Obama has trained many of their current leaders.

The LA Times returned to that same Chicago neighborhood where Obama worked as a community organizer to take a look at the same neighborhood. What they found was a real disappointment. They found one of those parks that Obama “helped” restore to its natural beauty is now overrun by drug dealers and thugs again. It seems nothing changed for very long in the old Obama stomping grounds.

The best finish to this article is Stanley Kurtz’s own words. “The community organizer may generate feel-good moments and best selling books, but I suspect that a Costco as the seed bed of a larger shopping complex would have done far more to save the neighborhood where Obama worked to organize in the progressive fashion.” Unfortunately, Chicago ACORN is blocking that effort.

References:

National Review
ACORN
BillJames.org
Seattle Times
No Quarter
NLPC.org

Many have asked, where has Nancy Pelosi been? As a figurehead in government, a representative of women at large, a benefactor of funding from organizations like Emily’s list, why has she not taken a stand to defend not only Hillary Clinton, but more importantly, the advancement of women in our society.

When asked about sexism and the demeaning assaults against Hillary Clinton by the media, her retort, paraphrased, was she was too busy being Speaker of the House. Wrong!!!

Follow the Money

Enter George Soros, Felix Rohatyn, and Joseph Onek.

Let us connect the dots. In February, 2007, Nancy Pelosi hired Joseph Onek as her Chief Counsel. Mr. Onek is also a chief policy advisor for the Open Society Institute, funded by none other than George Soros.

You may be curious about Felix Rohatyn. Mr. Rohatyn is a not only a major financial backer of Nancy Pelosi but he is one of her top economics advisors.

The Obama Connection

Mr. Obama has called for the formation of a National Infrastructure Investment Bank (NIRB). This is a derivative of the Rohatyn-Rudman National Investment Corporation (NIC) first proposed in 2005.

Essentially, Mr. Obama is a surrogate for a private investment model controlled by George Soros and those that subscribe to his world monetary monopoly model. The NIRB is nothing more than a fascist economic model.

Be Careful

Ms. Pelosi would have us believe her job is so demanding her inability to not only perceive but to understand the sexism, media bias, and misogyny was not within her realm. Do not be fooled! She is in bed with the enemy. FOLLOW THE MONEY!!!!!

I am affiliated with I Own My Vote.

What went wrong?

The representative process of the Democratic Presidential Preference began with the Iowa caucuses and ended with the Montana and South Dakota primaries. Much has been said about the inherent flaws in a process that is not uniform, much of which is very valid and deserves corrective measures.

It is evident that much of the electorate and, in kind, many of our elected officials, do not have a firm grasp of the nominating process: a process that begins at the convention - no sooner and no later. Calls by Democratic Party leaders to have the “nomination” determined on a specific date, has no relevance. Calls to have Super Delegates declare their endorsement before the nominating process begins short-circuits the democratic process.

More importantly, however, we have seen and we know, that our Democracy is in dire need of change. A significant portion of the electorate realizes that our Democracy is at a crossroads: the path we choose today will determine our future with a sense of urgency most generations rarely experience. There is no small reason so many are polarized and refuse to support the “presumptive” Democratic Presidential nominee. The process has been far from normal - if fact, many say it has been undemocratic: Barack Obama was selected, not elected.

We could, and rightfully so, point to a number of factors that lead many to this conclusion:

• Suppression of millions of votes (Florida & Michigan)
• Fraudulent practices in states where caucuses were held
• Media bias
• Discriminatory practices that were allowed to reign free without repudiation

However, there is a much more insidious and covert force working here: George Soros.

The George Soros Factor

George Soros began pouring millions into election finance reform. His millions effectively contributed to the passage of the McCain-Feingold law. While placing a cap on soft-money, it allowed 527’s to secure unlimited donations thereby using these organizations to promote their agenda and support candidates that subscribed to them or message against those that did not.

Soros began a concerted effort to yield influence by acquiring and significantly funding 527s like MoveOn, ACT, Media Matters, and the Center for American Progress. He was a primary backer of the failed Howard Dean Presidential candidacy in 2004. With Howard Dean’s ascension to Democratic Party leader, George Soros was able to yield, through his wealth and in conjunction with the Democratic Alliance, a little known “billionaire’s club”, significant power and influence to alter the make-up of the Democratic Party.

Soros and Nazi Germany

Not known to many, George Soros was the “adopted grandson” of an official in the Nazi government. A 1998 interview with Steve Kroft on “60-Minutes”, Soros explains his upbringing in Nazi Germany and furthermore indicates no sense of “guilt” or remorse for what he not only observed but for that in which he participated.

At the age of 14 he was exposed to the mass shipment of Jews to concentration camps and participated in the looting of personal property. His “formative” years were shaped by the policies of a fascist government; a government whose leader was propelled to the forefront of the national psyche by a phenomenon known as the “Cult of Personality”.

Obama: The Cult of Personality

The Obama campaign is reminiscent of elements of Nazi Germany. For instance, the quid pro quo exchange of volunteerism for “organizational training” offered by the Obama campaign is nothing more than a covert form of assimilation. His campaign’s manipulation of the democratic process, suppression of votes, the infringement on our democratic principles (including free speech), manipulation of the press, and countless other tactics have colluded to expunge the legitimate nominee for the Democratic Presidential candidacy in favor of an illegitimate one.

The briefly paraded but profoundly disturbing “Obama Seal” is yet another indication of the “person” becoming more important than the Party and the United States of America. The arrogance and bold exhibit of ego in using a symbol of our Country for personal gain is indicative of the phenomenon of the “Cult of Personality”. Furthermore, the blind following of his supporters, to discount these assaults on our Democracy, is yet another indicator of this cancerous blight.

Implications for our Democracy

Our Democracy is at stake: period. Many discount the massive outcry to the potential obliteration of our Democratic principles as a fad of “disgruntled Hillary Clinton supporters”. But we are the enlightened.: make no doubt about it.

We have seen the injustices to our Democratic process. To gain this insight, however, it takes a true leader to reveal them. Hillary Clinton has done that. We are enamored not only by her and the issues she represents but because she has gone through this process, to show us the truth.

We are acting. What each of does in the voting booth November 4th, 2008, is, we believe, sacred, personal, and the core of our Democracy. However, we must combat this “Cult of Personality”. We must protect the principles that our forefathers died for to form this new form of government: government for the people by the people. A Democracy with is uniquely American.

We cannot allow George Soros, Howard Dean, Barack Obama, and associated cohorts the deny the will of 18 million voters. George Soros, more than any other American, is the greatest threat to our Democracy. While we point the finger to Barack Obama, Howard Dean, David Axelrod, et. al, we need to hold accountable George Soros and his cronies that have manipulated our Democracy to their benefit.

Make no doubt about it: money talks. George Soros has a sacrificial lamb in Barack Obama. It may be a blessing in disguise he does not know it.

______________

Add your name today at the “I Own My Vote” site.