Showing posts with label president. Show all posts
Showing posts with label president. Show all posts

Friday, March 16, 2012

"The Road We've Traveled": Just Another Complete Coincidence?

President Obama's re-election committee recently released a 17-minute video called, "The Road We've Traveled."



The title is a bit curious, isn't it?  It sounds completely innocuous but why "The Road We've Traveled"?  The title doesn't convey success nor does it imply a sense that the President has overcome obstacles.

Stuart Chase
Out of sheer coincidence, supposed coiner of the term New Deal, Stuart Chase, wrote a book in 1942 called "The Road We Are Traveling."  Or is it a coincidence? Read on an you be the judge.  Is this a path toward greater freedom for mankind or is it the road to a new serfdom?

The Road We Are Traveling was sponsored by The Twentieth Century Fund, since renamed The Century Foundation.  According to their web site, they support "progressive ideas that advance security, opportunity, and equality."  They claim to be non-partisan, but also freely admit, "we are not neutral."  One of the trustees is John Podesta who is founder of the Center for American Progress, who was also President Bill Clinton's Chief of Staff, and was also co-chairman of the Obama Administration transition team.  But I'm sure that's all a coincidence, too.


In the book, Chase outlines how the world in 1942 is changing from a system based on "free enterprise" into a new, unknown system that he calls "X".  Here is an excerpt from pages 94 to 97.  One might go so far as to call this a "fundamental transformation."

(click a page to enlarge the original)


In war and peace, boom and depression, the march toward centralized, collective controls has continued. Planning has often been identified with socialism. Yet orthodox socialists themselves are far from pleased with the collectivism practiced in Russia, Germany, Italy, Japan, Spain, and they look with grave suspicion on the New Deal. Something has appeared which nobody anticipated, nobody wanted and nobody really understands. Mr. James Burnham has called it the "managerial revolution," in the first intelligent attempt to understand it which I have seen. Many more studies will be needed before the mystery is cleared up. We have something called "X," which is displacing the system of free enterprise, all over the world. If we do not know yet what to call it, we can at least describe its major characteristics. They include, in most countries: 


Free Enterprise into "X"
  • The underwriting of employment by the government, either through armaments or public works. (see American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009)
  • The underwriting of social security by the government--old-age pensions, mother's pensions, unemployment insurance and the like.
  • The underwriting of food, housing and medical care, by the government. The United States is already experimenting with providing the essentials. Other nations are far along the road. (in 1942, the United States had passed Social Security, but had not passed the "Great Society" welfare and Medicare legislation of the Johnson Administration) 
  • The use of the deficit spending techniques to finance these underwritings. The annually balanced budget has lost its old-time sanctity. (all of President Obama's budgets have had nearly trillion-dollar annual deficits.  The United States Senate has passed no budget in over 1,000 days)
  • The abandonment of gold in favor of managed currencies. (see "FDR Ends Gold Standard in 1933" and "Nixon Ends Bretton Woods International Monetary System")
  • The control or foreign trade by the government, with increasing emphasis on bilateral agreements and barter deals.
  • The control of natural resources, with increasing emphasis on self-sufficiency.
  • The control or energy sources--hydroelectric power, coal, petroleum, natural gas.
  • The control of transportation--railway, highway, airway, waterway.
  • The control of agricultural production. (see "Family-farm advocates say new child farm-labor rules would destroy farms' generational structure")
  • The control of labor organizations, often to the point of prohibiting strikes.
  • The enlistment of young men and women in youth corps devoted to health, discipline, community service and ideologies consistent with those of the authorities. The CCC camps have just inaugurated military drill.
  • Heavy taxation, with special emphasis on the estates and incomes of the rich.
  • Not much "taking over" of property or industries in the old socialistic sense. The formula appears to be control without ownership. It is interesting to recall that the same formula is used by the great corporations in depriving stockholders of power.
  • The state control of communications and propaganda.
These characteristics are incipient in some countries, full-blown in others. If you check off those which are observable in the United States in 1942; in Britain, in Germany, in Mexico, in Japan, in Sweden, in Russia, a comparison of checkmarks will show some amazing parallels. Is the whole list good or bad? That is a meaningless question. Some items point strongly to community survival, which is perhaps the most fundamental good there is. Some are clearly contrary to the liberal democratic ideal. Most of them are anathema to the doctrines of Adam Smith. Good or bad, there they are, in the middle of the stage.


Study this list and think hard about it. At first reading, most Americans will not recognize it as something which applies to them. Yet there is not an item on the list which is not applicable in some degree to the United States. We have no official propaganda bureau yet, but the FCC controls radio broadcasting. Further, it is not a war list, though the war has increased the impact. These items are referents for "X," the new structure which is being molded, and for which there is as yet no name. Names are thrown around--"socialism," "state capitalism," "fascism,"-but they mean nothing, and only lead to confusion.


See also ...


  • And another, "The Road We Really Traveled" starring Barack Obama

Tuesday, August 4, 2009

An Honest Health Care Debate?: Are We Really THIS #*&@ Stupid?

Like many Americans, yes, I'm interested in real, sensible, practical health-care reform--you know, the type that makes sense, reduces costs, and improves care. However, I just have to shake my head when I see the blatant manipulation (they're not technically lies) coming from our so-called "leaders" in Washington.

Here's a little snippet that caught my eye about a month ago in a Washington Post article:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/01/AR2009070100950.html

"In the stage-managed event, questions for Obama came from a live audience selected by the White House and the college, and from Internet questions chosen by the administration's new-media team. Of the seven questions the president answered, four were selected by his staff from videos submitted to the White House Web site or from those responding to a request for 'tweets.'

"The president called randomly on three audience members. All turned out to be members of groups with close ties to his administration: the Service Employees International Union, Health Care for America Now, and Organizing for America, which is a part of the Democratic National Committee. White House officials said that was a coincidence."

If this really was "a coincidence," I would suggest that the President buy himself a lottery ticket! His luck is truly phenomenal!

The Serivce Employees International Union (SEIU)? I've heard of them. As reported in the L.A. Times and the Chicago Tribune, didn't the SEIU spend $60 million to elect the President and now have unprecedented access to the White House? The SEIU is also #9 on the list of the largest political contributors to some of our lofty, ethical elected officials (97% from only one political party--you guess which).

I'm not familiar with Health Care for America Now. That sounds like a non-partisan group interested in prudent health-care reforms, right? Let's see what I can find out about them from their web site.
http://healthcareforamericanow.org/about-us/members/

Hmm, well let's see. There's ACORN, the AFL-CIO (#31 on the top politcal donors list), American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (#2 on the list), Americans United for Change (hey, isn't their former president, Brad Woodhouse, now the communications director for the Democratic National Commitee (DNC)?). Wow, and I haven't even made it out of the 'A's yet.

Again, I wasn't familiar with the name Organizing for America until I again searched the web. Oh yeah, this was the organization that then-candidate Obama formed when he was seeking the White House. The site helped organize his campaign in different states, mobilize his volunteers, and they maintain huge E-mail list. I scroll down the page. Wait a second, is this site managed by the DNC--the same DNC where Brad Woodhouse now works but used to be with Americans United for Change? Wow, another stunning "coincidence"!

And people thought Richard Nixon was tricky. Apparently President Obama excelled in his previous role as a "community organizer." These groups are well coordinated from the top, but they are also more inbred than some crazy dog breeds.

This so-called "national debate on health care" is a complete SHAM. This is a complete SHAME!!!