U.S. Must Stop Marxism, Reject Democrat Candidates

By Eddie Howell

Democrat politicians want unrestricted abortion, a disarmed population, racial strife, high taxes, gender confusion, and restrictions on speech. They want socialism-communism. They are working for open borders and against our national sovereignty. They are working toward a world communist government. The climate change hoax/fraud is a device to move our country toward socialism, and scare people into accepting increased government power, high taxes, and loss of freedom. The Democratic Party is a Marxist hotbed of corruption and anti-Americanism.

There are plenty of communists and socialists in our federal, state, and local governments, and if the leftists win power, communists will control our government. Trevor Loudon has done and continues, to do extensive research on the topic of leftists in government in the U.S. According to Loudon:

The problem is that for more than 50 years U.S. radicals, many of them allied to hostile foreign powers, have been systematically infiltrating sympathizers and "useful idiots" into the U.S. House of Representatives and the Senate. There are now large voting blocs in both houses, who, whether they are conscious of it or not, are effectively an enemy "Fifth Column" in the heart of the U.S. Government.
... Until this problem is confronted and dealt with, the very survival of the West is gravely endangered. [1]

The historical record is clear: Marxism has produced the murders of over 100 million people by their own governments in the 20th century. Socialist countries today are continuing barbaric practices, including murdering of citizens for protesting or for political purposes. This is happening in China and Venezuela as well as other places. Socialist-communist countries are tyrannical and fear-driven.

Among Millennials, many of whom have received indoctrination in dumbed-down college curricula taught by dumbed-down instructors, there is a tragic lack of historical knowledge about what socialism and communism have produced.  According to research by the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation, the following were among their recent findings:

   * Although forty million people died because of Mao Zedong, forty percent of Millennials have never heard of him.
   * One-fifth of Millennials do not know that Joseph Stalin killed more than 30 million people.
   * One-third of Millennials believe that George W. Bush killed more people than Joseph Stalin.

In China, there is relentless persecution of Christians, Falun Gong practitioners, Muslims, and various ethnic groups, even to the point of involuntary killing to harvest human organs for sale.

Sen. Bernie Sanders

In Cuba, among other repressive measures, "desirable" tourist areas and beaches are walled off from the common people and racism is rampant.

In North Korea, people are repressed, often to the point of starvation, and political killings are common.

In Venezuela, Marxism has led to a failed state. What was once the richest nation in South America is now a hell-hole of squalor.

In California, Marxists are steadily destroying their beautiful and attractive state, with unhealthy, filthy conditions prevailing in major cities, high taxes, seemingly endless debt, and preferential treatment of illegal immigrants over citizens, even protecting criminals through "sanctuary" policies.

Mike Bloomberg
former NYC Mayor

American socialist and communist organizations work closely together and with many Democrat politicians. In our country, organized socialism and communism are essentially the same, functioning virtually as one. [2]

All Marxists have the goal of overthrowing capitalism and establishing a socialist-communist society with an all-powerful government and no rights for its citizens. The main incentive for people under this type of regime would be to make one's situation better by gaining more power over others.

There is no rational economic theory underlying Marxism, and a planned economy doesn't work because the planners do not know how to plan. It's arbitrary and based on nothing, unlike a self-regulating free-market economy, which has done more than any other type to bring prosperity to millions of people.

Former Vice President
Joe Biden

Marxist leaders have no interest in material prosperity other than their own. If they gained power in America, they would likely soon have a plan to forcibly and violently stop capitalism and seize control of industries, whether or not officially taking title to them immediately.

Violence would continue in order to crush dissent and to get rid of the regime's enemies, real or imagined. Marxism has been shown to be a violent, murderous, and lawless system in which the most clever criminals are soon in charge, representing the elite cabal. This would be the New World Order.

Since most people would soon desire to have back their lost freedoms, the authorities would crush any effective dissent by means of the secret police, who would have the authority to execute dissidents on the spot or send them to prison. If they were well known, there would likely be a show trial, with forced confession, followed by execution.

Members of the hated middle class, and others not in power, who expressed ideas concerning their rights, would be harshly suppressed and punished. There soon would be no middle class as such, only mid-level enforcers of the rulers' wishes.

Current American socialist and communist leaders are Stalinist-Leninists or Maoists. Lenin said, "The goal of socialism is communism." Their ultimate goals are to establish a worldwide communist government, and finally destroy the human race.

"If you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face forever." -- George Orwell, 1984.

In past decades, there could be reasonable differences of opinion between the political parties on political issues. Today, a vote for a Democrat is a vote for communism.

* * * * *

[1] Trevor Loudon, The Enemies Within: Communists, Socialists, and Progressives in the U.S. Congress, 2013. Las Vegas: Pacific Freedom Foundation, a Nevada Not for Profit Corporation,
Kindle ebook Location 209. I read this is in Kindle format without page numbers

[2] Ibid. See at Location 263 and many other places in the book. The Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) works closely with the Communist Party USA (CPUSA) and many members of Congress.

Photos: Some of the remaining Democratic presidential candidates. (Link)

The American Royals’ Lavish Lifestyle

As Mel Brooks says in one of his movies, “It’s good to be the king!”

His Royal Majesty Barack Obama for all his “concern” for the poor and demonization of the rich believes himself entitled to every privilege of royalty. Even though he himself is rich, it is pointed out that even he couldn’t afford the luxuries he enjoys. But with the help of the American taxpayers and the printing press, he can. Michele Bachmann (interviewed at CPAC) summarizes his extravagance:

I’m not sure every statement is 100 per cent mathematically accurate, but it illustrates quite correctly the level of personal service the Obamas feel they should, and routinely do, receive, including frequent and very expensive vacations.

Meanwhile, Vice President Joe Biden has enjoyed some similar luxuries, his hotel tabs for one night each in London and Paris in February, for himself and a very substantial entourage, totaling over a million dollars.

As reported by the Daily Mail U.K., (citing prices reported by The Weekly Standard)

Paris may be known as the City of Light, but that title certainly doesn’t mean that visitors are light on spending as Vice President Joe Biden’s one day trip cost taxpayers more than half a million dollars.

When Mr Biden and his hefty entourage stayed in Paris for an evening in early February and it cost $585,000.50 for that single night.

The Vice President likely rented out more than 100 rooms in the Hotel Intercontinental Paris Le Grand, though they must not have gotten a group discount rate.…

For some reason, the pound must be at a better level than the euro as his hotel bill for one night at the Hyatt Regency in London was only $459,388.65, more than $100,000 less than his night in Paris.

The article reports that the VP and his group used 136 rooms in London and a similar number in Paris. (See photos at the Mail website). Five-star accommodations, of course.

Seems he narrowly beat the sequester, or might have needed to cut this expense by 10 per cent!

[Biden story via Liberty Crier]

 Photo: President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden look toward the guests in the First Lady's box at the State of the Union address in the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., Feb. 12, 2013. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza). (No. 14 in gallery).

Related articles

• Pitching in
• Cost Of One Night In Paris ? $907,000 If You Are Joe Biden

Obama Unbound (Part 1)

Dreamstime.com

“In questions of power, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution.” – Thomas Jefferson

If President Barack Obama is reelected, he will be in office four more years without having to worry about another election, and hence even less accountable to the American people than he has been thus far. The mainstream media will cover for him, slant things his way, rarely criticize him, and generally be his obedient servants. He won’t have to worry much about the truth being published, and even when it is he won’t be much affected.

So what would be the prospects for America in an Obama second term? We haven’t fared too well during his first term. Most of the “change” we’ve seen has left us “hoping” for something to reverse many of the changes. Perhaps the Supreme Court will strike down Obamacare, but there is no guarantee. If they do, a second Obama term would likely see an effort to introduce single-payer insurance, especially if Democrats are somehow able to retain the Senate majority and regain the House majority. Only a GOP filibuster would stand in their way.

In all probability, we would see several more Solyndra-type debacles with billions of dollars wasted in grants, loan guarantees, and subsidies to enterprises that are doomed to failure from the start for lack of market. All to satisfy the enviro-fascists, who are willing to sacrifice economic recovery for ill-fated “green” programs that won’t work. Oh, and Mr. Obama might get another crack at cap and trade, though at the moment it seems the global warming scare is being more widely seen as the fraud and hoax that it is.

The Food Stamp president would further expand the poverty rolls, create even more government-dependent families and do a great deal toward allowing the illegal immigrants to receive social services, unionize, and vote (Democratic, of course.)

The Buffet Rule states that no millionaire should be taxed at a rate less than 30 per cent. This would likely be heavily propagandized as a great necessity, using typical Marxist/Alinsky techniques of class warfare, claiming that failure to enact the Buffet Rule is the grossest injustice ever, and economic inequality is the main problem (except for the “God-awful recession we inherited,” as Vice President Joe Biden recently described it). Apparently the Bush Administration was so bad, its ill effects can never really be overcome. Not true, but it may take generations to undo Obama’s damage to our liberty, let alone our economy.

Obama, unfettered by electoral concerns, and already on record as having favored infanticide, may try to promote the killing of newborn babies because of their cost and carbon footprint. HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius recently testified that more contraception would be an economic cost-saver.

Gay marriage figures to be even more of an in-your-face demand than ever, with Obama probably “pivoting” to a full endorsement of it in a second term. That would surprise basically no one.

Religious liberty would suffer further, with attempts to make it a “hate crime” to preach or advocate against homosexuality or Islam, as it already is in much of Europe. You can contrast Europe and other Western countries with America and see the still-great contrast between the U.S., which has the First Amendment (still sort of intact) and the others, which have no First Amendment guarantees, but still claim to be part of the “Free World.” And they are, in the sense that totalitarianism has not yet resorted to death camps, and it’s still possible to have a relatively pleasant life as long as you don’t say or do anything that someone might find offensive. In America, the First Amendment is under attack and needs special efforts at protecting it. A new Obama Administration would make progress toward finishing it off.

These are a few of the doubtful prospects under an Obama second term. Maybe he would do a lot of positive things, but I wish someone could show me even one beneficial policy he has got enacted in his presidency thus far. It is a sick joke for Democrats to accuse Romney of being “out of touch” compared to Obama, who daily displays his disdain for the Constitution and the American people. He is a special interest in himself, constantly grasping for more power and more money.

I like Rick Santorum and hope he will be the GOP nominee. But any of the four remaining GOP candidates, or whatever dark horse may emerge from the convention, would be greatly preferable to another four years of Obama as president.

Socialist dictatorship should not be our fate.

Stay tuned.

Related articles

• Obama Pushing "Buffett Rule" Tax (inquisitr.com)
• Why the Liberals made up the 'Republican War on Women' (examiner.com)

Campaign of Desperation? Obama’s War on the U.S. Chamber of Commerce

President Barack Obama and his people are engaged in a fairly strong effort to discredit the United States Chamber of Commerce by accusing them of spending foreign money in the current election campaigns. This has brought vehement denials from the Chamber and other groups the White House has been aiming at with similar accusations.

If you were wondering whether Obama is anti-business, this should be the clincher in that debate. (See my recent article). Now, of course, “Big Business” is the bad guy, more or less in the same category, rhetorically speaking, as “Wall Street,” just greedy fat cats who will stoop to anything to promote their agenda.

As reported by Politifact,
Here's what the president said at a rally on Oct. 7, 2010, on behalf of Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley:

“Just this week, we learned that one of the largest groups paying for these ads regularly takes in money from foreign corporations. So groups that receive foreign money are spending huge sums to influence American elections. And they won't tell you where the money (for) their ads comes from.”

On ABC's This Week on Oct. 10, 2010, George Will connected the dots: “Well, he won't tell us who he's talking about. He's talking about the Chamber of Commerce, which does indeed receive dues from foreign entities that are associated with American business, just as the AFL-CIO receives dues from foreign entities associated with it. And -- and the shock and awe that we're supposed to feel from this is somewhat selective.” ….

…[N]o one has offered any evidence that the Chamber of Commerce is not complying with that law [i.e., the law requiring that foreign funds be segregated.] [1]

Karl Rove rightly points out that Obama’s statements are not in keeping with a President’s proper behavior, as reported by Fox News:

“Have these people no shame? Does the president of the United States have such little regard for the office that he holds that he goes out there and makes these kind of baseless charges against his political enemies?” Rove said. “This is just beyond the pale. How dare the president do this.” …. [2]

Soon-to-depart Presidential adviser David Axelrod believes it’s OK for government officials to hurl charges and claim that the ones accused must prove they are not guilty. The Hill blogger Walter Alarkon writes:

Axelrod was pressed by CBS’s Bob Schieffer on Sunday for evidence that the foreign campaign contributions benefiting the GOP is more than “peanuts.”

“Do you have any evidence that it’s not, Bob?” Axelrod said on “Face the Nation.” “The fact is that the Chamber has asserted that, but they won’t release any information about where their campaign money is coming from. And that’s at the core of the problem.” ….

“Don’t accuse those who are playing by the rules of somehow doing something that is unethical or illegal,” [Former Republican National Committee Chairman Ed] Gillespie said on “Face the Nation.”

Gillespie added that it was “an unbelievable mentality” for Axelrod to assert charges about foreign contributions without backing them up [3]

As Fox News has noted:
“David Axelrod is either woefully uninformed or willfully deceptive and dishonest,” Gillespie said. [4]

Not even AP, usually a reliable helper for Obama, is ready to go along with these reckless accusations:

The Obama administration and its allies are going all out against the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and GOP-leaning groups, accusing them of using foreign money to help finance political ads. Trouble is, they're providing no evidence …

“I challenge the Chamber of Commerce to tell us how much of the money they're investing is from foreign sources,” Biden said during a fundraiser for Democratic Rep. Chris Carney in Scranton. “I challenge them, if I'm wrong I will stand corrected. But show me, show me.” …. [5]

The AP article quotes a Chamber official as saying that no money from foreign sources is used for political purposes. [6] Also:

Bruce Josten, the chamber's top lobbyist, was even more pointed: “We are seeing an attempt to demonize specific groups and distract Americans from a failed economic agenda,” he said in a statement. [7]

Various published reports have said that the Chamber has spent $25 million for political advertising, and expects to spend $50 million more this election cycle. This is what has Obama’s forces worried, because most of that money will be in support of GOP-leaning causes. As the reader can see, there are several things the Republicans find objectionable about the president’s war on the U.S. Chamber of Commerce:

1. It makes a serious charge while offering no evidence.
2. It assumes guilt until innocence is proven.
3. It ignores the fact that unions and other Democratic-supporting organizations also receive foreign money and engage in political spending, but no one thus far has questioned their compliance with the law governing foreign funds.
4. It is seen as an attack on business and portrays Obama as anti-business.
5. It contributes to what businesses perceive as a hostile environment, one that discourages business expansion and hiring, through high taxes, over-regulation, and the federal government’s generally hostile attitude.
6. It is a lie and a cheap campaign trick perpetrated by people who ought to act better.

This charge could very well backfire, and open the Democrats up for more scrutiny. Remember Clinton‘s “Chinagate”? Also, voters these days are quite capable of seeing through such phoniness.

No one should be shocked or surprised at such a ridiculous charge. But, neither should anyone be ignorant of the fact that it is unsupported and hypocritical.

[1] “President Barack Obama says foreign money coming in to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce may be helping to fund attack ads,” 10/11/2010, Politifact. According to the website, “PolitiFact is a project of the St. Petersburg Times to help you find the truth in politics.”

[2] “Rove, Gillespie Slam Obama for Spreading ‘Baseless Lie’ Over Foreign Contributions,” 10/10/10, Fox News.

[3] Walter Alarkon, “Axelrod: Chamber must prove foreign money accusations false,” 10/10/10, Blog Briefing Room, The Hill.

[4] “Rove, Gillespie Slam Obama for Spreading ‘Baseless Lie’ Over Foreign Contributions,” See [2].

[5] Jim Kuhnhenn, Associated Press, “SPIN METER: Foreign money in politics? Not proven,” 10/11/2010, via Yahoo! News.

[6] and [7] Ibid.

Photo: Dreamstime.com

Wise Sayings of the Political Elite

Vice-President Joe Biden, defending the $787 billion stimulus package:
“We’re going to go bankrupt as a nation,” Biden warned…. “People, when I say that,
look at me and say, ‘What are you talking about, Joe? You’re telling me we have to go spend money to keep from going bankrupt?’” he said. “The answer is yes.”[1]

If spending is the way to avoid bankruptcy, then health care and cap and trade should keep us in the black forever. Sure, this ineffective stimulus is keeping us back from the edge of collapse … how’s that again?

Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL)
“When we asked questions of the white male nominees of a Republican president, we were basically trying to find out whether -- to make sure that they would go far enough in understanding the plight of minorities, because clearly that was not in their DNA.” [2]

Isn’t the senator a white male? I guess he knows his own nature, but that’s quite a claim, knowing the DNA of all white male court nominees. Some scientist, eh?

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg
“Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of. So that Roe was going to be then set up for Medicaid funding for abortion.” [3]

This is a surprising and even shocking comment. What populations is it that “we don’t want to have too many of?” Those who might use Medicaid? Who is the “we”? So Roe v. Wade is a eugenics tool? Speaking of eugenics, that’s what we’ll see after Obama’s health care plan is implemented, if it passes. That’s what rationed care produces.


[1] Quoted at http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/07/16/biden-challenges-critics-stimulus-gop-turf/
[2] Quoted at http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_071509/content/01125109.guest.html
[3] Quoted at http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/damianthompson/100002972/what-the-hell-did-ruth-bader-ginsburg-mean-when-she-linked-abortion-and-eugenics/


Photos: Dick Durbin, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Joe Biden, from the internet.