January 8, 2011
The December 2010 The Schwarz Report had an article by David A. Noebel entitled “A Communist Rally in Washington, D.C.” which had more Communists in attendance than are found in Moscow’s Red Square! We all saw the rally called “One Nation Working Together” on October 2, 2010 sponsored by the Tides Center. Glenn Beck on Fox has mentioned it often. It receives millions of dollars from George Soros, which it passes on to progressive causes such as the Center for American Progress, which Communist Van Jones calls home. It also supports Media Matters for America “dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media.” The primary message of the rally was a call for “economic equality” or “social justice.” Both expressions drip with socialist/communist implications. The Rev. Al Sharpton was one of the rally’s key figures. He defined social justice and its goals plainly: “We won’t have true ‘social justice’ until everyone is equal in everybody’s house.
David goes on to say to bring about a society wherein everyone is equal with everyone else would require “haves” and give or transfer it to the “have-nots.” He called this the “shakedown socialism”- to transform society you shake down the wealthy by taking their wealth and spreading it amongst the rest of society. Of course, Sharpton and his cohort Jesse Jackson have been “shaking” down corporations for many years so they’ve become experts at that trade. This is how these two leeches make a living. When I read Sharpton’s statement, my mind raced to John T. Flynn and his 1949 book, The Road to Socialism, America’s Creeping Revolution” that I referred to in Part 1 and Part 2. Once again, the correlation of what happened in England during that time period today would be comical if it wasn’t so frightening.
By page 48 of Flynn’s book, reality was beginning to set in for the “working man” who had been coddled with the shallow delusion that somehow all the blessed services he wanted could be paid for by soaking the rich. Up until April 6, 1949, the Socialists were getting all the favorable publicity in America about how great things were in Britain. Where a Socialist seat in Parliament was contested, they had won every by-election since 1945. Does this sound a bit like the November 2008 election in the U.S. where the Democrats took over both chambers and the presidency? As explained in Part 1, all the earlier unsustainable entitlements in the U.S. that have bankrupted this country were created under Democrat presidents.
In Britain, they were being fed a pleasant stream of propaganda about the increased production and the brighter outlook when the Labor Party was in control. In the U.S. Barack Obama was spewing out similar propaganda and how much better things would be if voters would just vote for the Democrats.
NO LONGER THE FIRST BLACK PRESIDENT?
Recently on a conservative radio talk show, the subject was Barack’s eligibility to be president because he’s never produced his original birth certificate. A caller to the program said he knew a nurse who may have the answer. She said when a woman goes to the delivery room, they may not know who the father is but they always know the race of the mother and that is what goes on the birth certificate. Of course, Barack’s mother was white so if he produced his birth certificate, he could no longer be considered the first black president. Think about that possibility for a while – but I digress.
The Chancellor finally admitted England had taxed many of the rich to extinction and could get no more eggs out of that (golden) goose and he went on to say the workers must then begin carrying the heavy burden of taxes. England could borrow no more and no more could be collected out of existing national income, which was going to have to be increased meaning higher taxes and the only way this could be done was by producing more and this meant that the workers must work more to produce more. What we’ve been producing since the election of Barack Obama are government jobs and Democrat voters for 2012. Most government workers are paper pushers. They do not create jobs. It’s ironic, but Glenn Beck was suggesting the same thing on his T.V. program during the holidays. We must turn the entrepreneurs loose with fewer regulations and lower taxes to create enterprises that produce jobs. The Chancellor said the great war on the rich, seemingly, had been won. They could be soaked no further. The same goes for America.
By continually wanting to tax the “rich,” those with that mindset are breaking the 10th commandment, “Thou shalt not covet.” The GOP was wise when they got President Obama to concede on his wanting to raise the taxes on those making $250,000. I wonder if the Democrats ever heard the old adage: “We can’t have our cake and eat it too.” The Chancellor made similar warnings in England. In addition, it was revealed that food prices in England were going to rise significantly because the government had been subsidizing farmers. While the people may have been paying less for its food, the government was making up the difference. What was the first bill President Obama signed upon returning from his Christmas/holiday vacation in Hawaii with “old” friends? He signed the “Food Safety” bill. Strict and costly governmental regulations on farmers will drive up the cost that will be passed on to consumers. Whether subsidies will continue for farmers in the U.S. is unknown; however, the Department of Agriculture is just one of 16 Cabinet-level departments without constitutional authority.
And then the Chancellor got down to where the rubber meets the road. After announcing the awful truth to the farm members that there would be no additional subsidies and to the industrial members that prices would have to be increased there also would be no further social security until the workers produced more to pay for it. The majority in its House of Commons was petrified with horror and moaned as the statement that a nation must pay for what it gets. Nevertheless the speech given by the Chancellor was courageous and the Conservatives cheered because he was now saying what they had been saying for years. Will our conservative leaders in Washington, D.C. walk the talk they promised during the 2010 election cycle? My recommendation in case they may be interested: Last in First Out until the budget is balanced (LIFO) and we are out of debt. Translation: The last unconstitutional programs created are the first to go and continue working up the ladder bearing in mind that the Department of State, Justice, Defense and Treasury are Constitutional and justifiable. 
Francis Williams in his book “Socialist Britain” was an ardent apologist of the British Labor Party but he conceded that “national planning” involved so much government power which “brings with it such an extension of controls which may, if great care is not exercised, eat away small liberties, even though they leave the big ones untouched. He freely admitted there is a danger in planned societies against “which they need constantly to be on their guard” and he confesses his fear “that the Labor government (in England) has not always been as watchful as they have been.”
Once again, does this sound familiar? Union members in factories made so many demands over the years that long-established companies up and left for a more favorable climate overseas or in Mexico all the while the promised pensions kept getting bigger and simply became unsustainable so the unions have been crafty in creating new unions so they could increase their once dwindling membership. For example, it has been only a couple generations ago that we could find three generations under one roof. But now when the elderly need help, the state pays a family member to take care of them and they are unionizing. Because the unions were so prominent in getting Barack Obama elected president, they are now looking for pay back from the president and one of the most frequent visitors to the President’s office is Andy Stern, Service Employees International Union (SEIU) president. Workers once in the government were considered “public servants” but soon they were organized and became unionized. Then along came 9-11 and President Bush’s Homeland Security and now all the TSA workers are unionized – all this to assure Barack Obama’s re-election in 2012.
In England in the 40s, Flynn writes, “They had ‘cradle to grave’ assurance and the greatest boast was in the social services. Parents were given $16 at birth and $80 for a Christian burial. Now, I’m uncertain what Flynn meant in his book when he said $16 at birth but I know in Australia when a child is born the parents are given a few bucks every month until they reach a certain age. Services in England began before birth with pre-natal care and covered medical care, hospitalization, old-age retirement payments, unemployment insurance, allowance for widows, and for families in need.
In the U.S. the “social services” have been expanded after the birth of a child to home visitations. This “home invasion” program is found on page 838 of the lengthy Obamacare bill in Section 1904. While sounding pretty innocuous, the purpose is to “improve the well-being, health and development of children by enabling the establishment and expansion of high quality programs providing voluntary home visitation for families expecting children” but the State of Oregon has been doing that before the Obamacare bill passed. In fact, federal stimulus funds were given to a nursery in Salem, Oregon early in 2010 that provides services to high-risk families with children who are six weeks to five years old. What’s “voluntary” today will be mandated tomorrow.
To illustrate how totally incompetent Britain’s misleaders were, Flynn tells how the “ministry of housing” planned to produce jobs and said there would be 250,000 houses built in the year 1947 to house the houseless. The government went on with the plan of purchasing brick, cement, plumbing, nails, plaster and all sorts of things for the job and the factories went to work. All of this was well until it was discovered that lumber could not be supplied for more than 60,000 houses. In the meantime, all other materials were being furiously produced and not enough labor for the jobs and the program flopped.
Does this sound like Fannie and Freddie promising homes for people who could not afford them and are now either repossessed or underwater meaning the current value of the house is below the yet unpaid mortgage and a 7/14/2010 AP article said 1,300 inmates in the “Big House” claimed homebuyer tax credits. Those fraudulent claims came to more than $9 million. Senator Barney Frank, where are you? The Department of Housing and Urban Development is another one of those 16 unconstitutional departments in our government that should be shut down because as several examples above, it has created more problems than it has solved.
Subscribe to the NewsWithViews Daily News Alerts!
Yes, folks, the “planned economy” of the socialists is immeasurably less productive than the free market. No cadre of central planners, no matter how enlightened, can possibly make better market decisions than individual consumers. And yet, many Americans still seem to trust the government to make them secure in their retirement, put “safe” food in their tummies, provide health care and child care for their children, and education. The recent New York snowstorm was a case in point. The “planners” didn’t trust the private sector to supply what would be needed in case of a severe snowstorm. They claimed the city workers would be more reliable. What did these city workers do? They called in “sick.” Now the private sector may have also been overwhelmed but they’d keep on working at clearing the streets just as those who work for power companies work in cold weather to restore power.
� 2011 Betty Freauf - All Rights Reserved