Skip to comments.Obama Turns To Income inequality, Changes Subject From ObamaCare Disaster
Posted on 01/07/2014 3:33:25 AM PST by LD Jackson
If there is one thing President Obama is good at, it is changing the subject from what we should really be discussing. Since October 2013, he has been beset by all manner of troubling press about the disastrous roll out of his signature health care reform law. To say it has been a disaster and a train wreck is the ultimate of understatements. But, as we witnessed in the presidential election of 2012, Obama is adept at getting the press and certain segments of the American people to focus on issues that he prefers, effectively changing the subject from his terrible record as President. Such is the case now, as he is starting a push to turn the attention of the American people to the tragic issue of income inequality.
Fox News - The Obama administration has set the stage for a push that could rekindle cries of class warfare -- calling for renewed long-term unemployment benefits, a minimum wage increase and a campaign against what Democrats call "income inequality."You have to give President Obama credit. He knows exactly how he has managed to progress this far. He knows what has been successful for him as he furthered his political career and agenda and he has no problem swiveling from the issues at hand, changing the subject to economic and income inequality, populist themes that helped him win the White House.
Ahead of his multi-week, holiday vacation in Hawaii, President Obama pushed Congress to move forward on extending federal unemployment benefits that weren't included in the budget deal Senate Democrats and House Republicans struck to fund the federal government for the next two years. The White House has scheduled an East Room event on Tuesday in which the president will appear with people who lost that insurance.
Before the break, Obama called on Congress to follow the lead of 14 states that hiked their minimum wages and do the same for the federal wage.
"We know that there are airport workers, and fast-food workers, and nurse assistants, and retail salespeople who work their tails off and are still living at or barely above poverty," the president said during a Dec. 4 speech in Washington. "And that's why it's well past the time to raise a minimum wage that in real terms right now is below where it was when Harry Truman was in office."
The president went on to suggest that economic inequality, brought on partially by the current federal minimum wage, is a drag on the American way of life.
"The combined trends of increased inequality and decreasing mobility pose a fundamental threat to the American dream, our way of life and what we stand for around the globe," the president said in the December speech.
What he is preaching to the choir comprised of his adoring media is standard liberal fare. He wants equality of outcome, not equality of opportunity. He wants the American people who are still looking for a job to be dependent on the federal government for unemployment benefits, extended to the point of almost never-ending. What point is there in looking for a job when you know the federal government is going to have your back and send you a check?
I know the employment situation is not good in America. Regardless of what the unemployment rate currently sits at, it is not easy to find a job. For the federal government to be responsible for paying the unemployed, however, is ludicrous. Federal unemployment insurance was never designed to be long-term replacement for real income and that is exactly what the liberals in Washington have turned it in to.
President Obama and his liberal friends are banking on the American people turning their attention away from the failures of the Obama administration and back to the flawed idea that everyone should receive equal outcome, instead of equal opportunity. They want to convince the American people to rely on the federal government to control that outcome. The American people need to understand one crucial detail of this push. If we allow the federal government to control the outcome, it will necessarily require us to relinquish even more control of our lives to Washington. Are we willing to do that, all for the sake of fairness?
I would remind anyone who happens to read this little essay that America was not founded on fairness of outcome. Rather, it was founded on fairness and equality of opportunity. What we do with that opportunity should be up to us, not a government in Washington that has its own best interests in heart. Again, I ask. Are we willing to allow that, all for the sake of fairness? Only we can decide the answer to that question.
The correct response: “Obama is as wrong about income inequality as he was and is wrong about Obamacare.”
And then talk about the evils of Obamacare.
From the commie playbook: when in trouble, sound off with class warfare.
Obamacare steals from the middle class and gives to dem victim groups. Isn’t that the liberal dream?
We cannot let this Obamacare fiasco die. If there is a Congress Critter up for reelection in your state, put the word out about his/her position on Obamacare BEFORE it was law.
My rep is Congressman Bridenstine. Bast rep I’ve ever had. It’s as if I were the congressman, his voting is so close to the way I would vote. Might be 100%.
“If there is one thing President Obama is good at, it is changing the subject from what we should really be discussing.”....
Yes indeed. Remember Fast and Furious, NSA, IRS, Benghazi, and of course odumbocare? Certainly there are more. He does certainly have a way of changing the subject.
I wish we could change “presidents”
it’s not going to work this time- he didn’t shift the bills until after the next election (only some of them and they are coming up next fall)
this one is hitting too many pocketbooks too hard, plus the dysfunction will be felt by everyone who needs to see a doctor or worse
I think it's more accurate to say that Obamacare takes a huge pile of money and sets it on fire. It's completely wasted. The Dem victim groups will all remain victims. They will continue to suffer from poor health for the same reasons that they suffered from poor health before Obamacare.
The only ones to benefit directly from Obamacare will be Dem cronies, like Moochelle's Princeton classmate who works for the firm that was paid gazillions to produce the website disaster.
I do agree that it's a liberal dream. For the rest of us, having DMV in charge of delivering health care is a nightmare.
Good ... let him bring that up. It’s become worse under his watch.
George Hussein Onyango Obama,
Senator Barack Obama's long lost
brother was tracked down living in
a hut on the outskirts of Nairobi
There they go changing the language again.
They are treating the symptom of poor economic fundamentals.
We need to get out in front of this ‘income inequality’ BS.
As far as the media is concerned that's not difficult to do; they're happy to oblige.
He and the communists are trying but America is focused on his biggest failure... OBAMACARE DEATH MATCH 2014!
Bambi is following de Blasio’s model, worked well in NYC, elsewhere?
The correct response:
Anyone claiming to worry about income inequality needs to explain why the DC area nearly double the median income of the rest of the nation.
When this country is bankrupt it will hit both the makers and the takers.
How much do you suppose he can increase income equality with this new campaign?
What's truly pathetic is that no one seems to gret that Obamacare (like all of the dipshit's other policies) will increase income inequality, by stealing a disproportionate amount of income from working people to pay for liberal parasites, and exhorbitantly higher out-of-pocket deductibles.
You can be certain that there will be no discussion of the economic value of typical minimum wage jobs. Working at the counter at McDonalds is not a skill that provides much value in our economy.
Working at McDonalds can, however, teach good work skills that will help a person advance.
I will say this: Obama is likely to drive the American economy to the point where minimum wage jobs are the norm, rather than a starting point. Under Obama, there will be no other jobs to which you can advance.
With so many people effected and so many getting screwed by this fiasco, it’s not going to die.
He’s promoting equality because he’s a muslim communist piece of shit!
Oh, don’t forget skimming off the “cream” in the middle of the process.
That’s what liberals/socialists/communists always do.
Sheeperals see that as a positive outcome in their “eschatology”. It took me a while to realize that this was one of the underlying assumptions behind sheeperals’ viewpoint on crashing the American economy, but
they really do believe it will be a better situation when
“we’re all in the same boat”.
And they DESPISE “preppers” because they are planning on not being in that boat with everyone else.
I’m solidly on board with Obama on this one. I think everyone should be allowed to stay at an entertainer’s McMansion in Hawaii. I’m eagerly awaiting my invitation.
Another reason to change the subject, a multi-million dollar three week vacation in Hawaii and an extended stay for the “little woman” who will be returning on AF1. Just how many hours has that bonus ride logged while Obama has been in office?
He and the OTHER communists
all items where he can be sure the Pubbies will fold like a three-dollar card table.
Most of American today is not as gullible or as communist as nyc has become but yes... some idiots will continue to be idiots until their idiocy takes their lives.
Yes, when it comes to obama... there are a few things that are just understood as fact:
1) obama is a communist
2) obama is a kenyan
3) obama is a fagot
4) obama is a muslim
Not #4. Obama has no religion, other than that entirely bogus “Black Liberation Theology” communist crap he studied under Jeremiah Wright for 20+ years.
SEAN HANNITY: But Reverend Jeremiah Wright is not backing down and has not for years and in his strong stance on the teaching of black liberation theology is nothing new. He had the same things to say last spring when he appeared on "Hannity & Colmes:"
WRIGHT: If you're not going to talk about theology in context, if you're not going to talk about liberation theology that came out of the '60s, systematized black liberation theology that started with Jim Cone in 1968 and the writings of Cone and the writings of Dwight Hopkins and the writings of womynist theologians and Asian theologians and Hispanic theologians, then you can't talk about the black value system.
HANNITY: But I'm a reverend
WRIGHT: Do you know liberation theology, sir?
Obama's Church: Gospel of Hate
Kathy Shaidle, FrontPageMag.com
Monday, April 07, 2008
In March of 2007, FOX News host Sean Hannity had engaged Obamas pastor in a heated interview about his Churchs teachings. For many viewers, the ensuing shouting match was their first exposure to "Black Liberation Theology"...
Like the pro-communist Liberation Theology that swept Central America in the 1980s and was repeatedly condemned by Pope John Paul II, Black Liberation Theology combines warmed-over 1960s vintage Marxism with carefully distorted biblical passages. However, in contrast to traditional Marxism, it emphasizes race rather than class. The Christian notion of "salvation" in the afterlife is superseded by "liberation" on earth, courtesy of the establishment of a socialist utopia.
Catholics for Marx [Liberation Theology]
By Fr. Robert Sirico
FrontPageMagazine.com | Thursday, June 03, 2004
In the days when the Superpowers were locked in a Cold War, Latin America seethed with revolution, and millions lived behind an iron curtain, a group of theologians concocted a novel idea within the history of Christianity. They proposed to combine the teachings of Jesus with the teachings of Marx as a way of justifying violent revolution to overthrow the economics of capitalism.
The Gospels were re-rendered not as doctrine impacting on the human soul but rather as windows into the historical dialectic of class struggle. These "liberation theologians" saw every biblical criticism of the rich as a mandate to expropriate the expropriating owners of capital, and every expression of compassion for the poor as a call for an uprising by the proletarian class of peasants and workers.
The Real Story Behind Rev. Wright's Controversial Black Liberation Theology Doctrine
Monday , May 5, 2008
[special Friday night edition--original airdate May 2, 2008]
(some key excerpts)
["(Jose) Diaz-Balart is the son of Rafael Diaz-Balart y Guitierrez (a former Cuban politician). He has three bothers, Rafael Diaz-Balart (a banker), Mario Diaz-Balart (a US Congressman) and Lincoln Diaz-Balart (also a US Congressman). His aunt, Mirta Diaz-Balart, was Fidel Castro's first wife."
JOSE DIAZ-BALART, TELEMUNDO NETWORK: "Liberation theology in Nicaragua in the mid-1980's was a pro-Sandinista, pro-Marxist, anti-U.S., anti-Catholic Church movement. That's it. No ifs, ands, or buts. His church apparently supported, in the mid-'80s in Nicaragua, groups that supported the Sandinista dictatorships and that were opposed to the Contras whose reason for being was calling for elections. That's all I know. I was there.
I saw the churches in Nicaragua that he spoke of, and the churches were churches that talked about the need for violent revolution and I remember clearly one of the major churches in Managua where the Jesus Christ on the altar was not Jesus Christ, he was a Sandinista soldier, and the priests talked about the corruption of the West, talked about the need for revolution everywhere, and talked about 'the evil empire' which was the United States of America."
REV. BOB SCHENCK, NATIONAL CLERGY COUNCIL: "it's based in Marxism. At the core of his [Wright's] theology is really an anti-Christian understanding of God, and as part of a long history of individuals who actually advocate using violence in overthrowing those they perceive to be oppressing them, even acts of murder have been defended by followers of liberation theology. That's very, very dangerous."
SCHENCK: "I was actually the only person escorted to Dr. Wright. He asked to see me, and I simply welcomed him to Washington, and then I said Dr. Wright, I want to bring you a warning: your embrace of Marxist liberation theology. It is contrary to the Gospel, and you need, sir, to abandon it. And at that he dropped the handshake and made it clear that he was not in the mood to dialogue on that point."
Source: The Real Story Behind Rev. Wright's Controversial Black Liberation Theology Doctrine:
Jay Richards | February 2, 2010
The presence of Marxism in liberation theology is well-known, at least to seminarians who are critical readers. Practically every seminarian reads Gustavo Gutierrezs Theology of Liberation at some point, but most laypeople find it hard to believe that there could have been (and continues to be) a widespread attempt to hybridize Christian theology and Marxism.
Marxist regimes obviously benefitted from the spread of liberation theology in the churches. Still, I was not aware of any connections between liberation theology and communist clandestine organizations until now.
A new article by Robert D. Chapman in the International Journal of Intelligence and Counterintelligence begins to connect some dots. In The Church in Revolution, Chapman, a retired operations officer in the Clandestine Services Division of the Central Intelligence Agency, argues that the KGB infiltrated the Russian Orthodox Church through Metropolitan Nikodim, the Russian Orthodoxys second-ranking prelate. Nikodim was a proponent of liberation theology. Nikodim was active in the otherwise-Protestant World Council of Churches. And the WCC, of course, became an actively left-wing organization during the last half of the 20th century.
Chapman also details the growth of liberation theology in Latin Americaand the Vaticans struggles with itand the growth of black liberation theology in the United States. Prominent proponents of the latter include James Cone and Rev. Jeremiah Wright.
The arguments of liberation theologians should be challenged on their merits. The source of an argument, after all, doesnt establish its truth or falsity. Still, its interesting to learn that liberation theology may have been, at least in part, a project of the KGB.
Unfortunately, this isnt just history. Chapman concludes ominously:
"the Theology of Liberation doctrine is one of the most enduring and powerful to emerge from the KGBs headquarters. The doctrine asks the poor and downtrodden to revolt and form a Communist government, not in the name of Marx or Lenin, but in continuing the work of Jesus Christ, a revolutionary who opposed economic and social discrimination.
A friend of mine, a head of Catholic social services in my area and formerly a priest, is a liberation theologian. He has made a number of humanitarian trips to Central America and told me, liberation theology is alive and well. The same can be said of its sibling in the United States [ie, Black Liberation Theology]."
I respectfully disagree. He is all that you say but he was born a muslim and he was raised a muslim and his alliances are with islam. He does worship himself above allah however. Mo did too.
He merely sucks up to them. Communists don't believe in religion of any kind. They mock and ridicule it, at least privately amongst themselves. They fancy themselves "intellectuals".
There's a book by David Horowitz that describes the love affair between the communist left and radical Islam titled "Unholy Alliance".
Unholy Alliance: Radical Islam and the American Left
by David Horowitz
Amazon Book Review:
"Vastly Illuminating!" September 25, 2004
By Kat Bakhu
"I had long wondered why people on the Left had the propensity to speak more positively about people who would slit their throats than they do about their own country, which affords them more freedom and opportunity than anywhere else. David Horowitz has answered that question thoroughly and convincingly in his Unholy Alliance. Where I felt bewildered and confused, I now feel crystal clear. Unholy Alliance is such a great book.
It begins with the leftist movements at the beginning of the 20th Century, and works its way up to the present day, exploring the anti-American attitude of these movements in detail. Horowitz shows that the enemies of the US back then are largely the same group today, operating under the same misperceptions, making the same mistakes, and pursuing the same impossible utopia.
Individual chapters are included on the Patriot Act (I was persuaded that it is a GOOD thing); the democratic flip-flop on Iraq once G.W. Bush implemented what they agreed with Clinton needed to be done; the driving components of the current anti-war movement; as well as chapters on individual personalities who are major spokespeople of the Left. Horowitz covers a lot of ground, and he covers it concisely and clearly. Unholy Alliance is richly informative without ever being boring or plodding.
This book is so illuminating that I simply cannot do justice to it here. I love people who reason so clearly that they help me get my own reasoning clear. Horowitz is just that type of person! In the terrain of mindless clichés (no-blood-for-oil, etc.), he is a breath of real fresh air."
Unholy Alliance: Radical Islam and the American Left -by David Horowitz
Not all dissent is equal, and Americans whose actions are calculated to give aide and comfort to the butchers who murdered 3,000 innocent people on September 11, 2001 are not patriotic at all... they are, in fact, quite the opposite.
$18.00 from David Horowitz's website, FrontPageMag.com:
(click on 'Bookstore' near the top of the page)
What the hell is wrong with inequality???
There is INEQUALITY in EVERYTHING from sports to beauty.
Inequality exists because it's normal. If EVERYTHING were EQUAL reality would dry up and die.
Income inequality has as much validity as the race card.
It's played by those looking to hide the truth.
If Republicans would ask for those sensible solutions, it would be immensely popular. Problem is, elitists want the cheap labor and profits and dems want the cheap votes.
Feb 26, 2008
"Barack Obama received at least some instruction in the Islamic faith of his father and went with him to the mosque, but the importance of this experience is vastly overstated by conservative commentators who seek to portray Obama as a Muslim of sorts. Radical anti-Americanism, rather than Islam, was the reigning faith in the Dunham household. ...
Barack Obama is a clever fellow who imbibed hatred of America with his mother's milk, but worked his way up the elite ladder of education and career. He shares the resentment of Muslims against the encroachment of American culture, although not their religion. He has the empathetic skill set of an anthropologist who lives with his subjects, learns their language, and elicits their hopes and fears while remaining at emotional distance. That is, he is the political equivalent of a sociopath. The difference is that he is practicing not on a primitive tribe but on the population of the United States.
There is nothing mysterious about Obama's methods. "A demagogue tries to sound as stupid as his audience so that they will think they are as clever as he is," wrote Karl Krauss. Americans are the world's biggest suckers, and laugh at this weakness in their popular culture. Listening to Obama speak, Sinclair Lewis' cynical tent-revivalist Elmer Gantry comes to mind, or, even better, Tyrone Power's portrayal of a carnival mentalist in the 1947 film noire Nightmare Alley. The latter is available for instant viewing at Netflix, and highly recommended as an antidote to having felt uplifted by an Obama speech. ..."
Article: Obama's women reveal his secret
“My muslim faith”... I didn’t say it... he did.
Just him sucking up to them. At heart he’s a typical elitist pseudo-intellectual Marxist who scorns religion of any type.
He also claims he’s a Christian, and that obviously isn’t true. Black Liberation Theology is NOT recognized by the Church as legit. In fact, it’s been repeatedly condemned.