All posts in Socialism

U.N. to debut plan for world socialism in June–time for US to exit?

United Nations

United Nations (Photo credit: Ashitakka)

Via: The Examiner

The United Nations is holding its’ “Conference on Sustainable Development” in Rio de Janero, Brazil, over three separate sessions in June, to which organizers, led by UN Conference Secretary-General of Rio+20, Sha Zukang [who 'really doesn't like Americans'], expect 193 attendees from governments, the private sector, NGOs and other stakeholders, according to the Sarah de Sainte Croix March 20, 2012 article in The Rio Times.

The stated themes of this colossal conference, which is structured around a 204-page report titled, “Working Towards a Balanced and Inclusive Green Economy, A United Nations System-Wide Perspective,” are “the green economy in the context of sustainable development and poverty eradication,” … [by and through] … “the institutional framework for sustainable development,” according to George Russell’s excellent and quoted-filled FOXNews article today. More specifically, the debates will cover a … ‘breathtaking array of carbon taxes, transfers of trillions of dollars from wealthy countries to poor ones, and new spending programs to guarantee that populations around the world are protected–from the effects of the very programs the world organization wants to implement.

According to Russell, the Obama Administration officials have supported this “agenda,” which is designed to ‘make dramatic and enormously expensive changes in the way that the world does nearly everything—or, as one of the documents puts it, “a fundamental shift in the way we think and act.” According to U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, proposals on how the “challenges can and must be addressed,” include: –’More than $2.1 trillion a year in wealth transfers from rich countries to poorer ones, in the name of fostering “green infrastructure … climate adaptation … other green economy” measures.’ –’New carbon taxes for industrialized countries [amounting to] about $250 billion a year, or 0.6 percent of [US] GDP by 2020.

Other environmental taxes are mentioned, but not specified.’ –’Further unspecified price hikes … derived from agriculture, fisheries, forestry, or other kinds of land and water use [industries], all of which would be radically reorganized–[to] “contribute to a more level playing field between established, ‘brown’ technologies and newer, greener ones.”‘ — ‘Major global social spending programs, including a “social protection floor” and “social safety nets” for the world’s most vulnerable social groups for reasons of “equity.”’ –’Even more social benefits for those displaced by [this] green economy revolution—such as those put out of work in undesirable fossil fuel industries.

The benefits, called “investments,” would include “access to nutritious food, health services, education, training and retraining, and unemployment benefits.”‘ –’A guarantee that if those sweeping benefits weren’t enough, more would be granted … “Any adverse effects of changes in prices of goods and services, vital to the welfare of vulnerable groups, must be compensated for and new livelihood opportunities provided.”‘

“Transforming the global economy will require action locally (e.g., through land use planning), at the national level (e.g., through energy-use regulations) and at the international level (e.g., through technology diffusion),” the document says. It involves “profound changes in economic systems, in resource efficiency, in the composition of global demand, in production and consumption patterns and a major transformation in public policy-making.”

It will also require “a serious rethinking of lifestyles in developed countries.” This ‘UN guidebook for global social engineering,’ was prepared by the Geneva-based United Nations Environmental Management Group (UNEMG), a consortium of 36 U.N. agencies, development banks and environmental bureaucracies–all of which rely on the contributions, from tax collecting nations for their very existence–not a single entity engaged in the production of goods or services, producing a profit and owning singular wealth. This UN doctrine seems to directly channel Marx and Engel’s scribe of 1848, “The Communist Manifesto,” wherein its’ organizational and operational structure appears to largely be a paraphrasical equivalent to the 10 short-term demands Marx prescribed in section II., “Proletarians and Communists.”

However, instead of the UN overthrowing the capitalist system, it simply wants to tie it to a leash and be subject to the UN … [a] ‘dictatorship of the proletariat,’ to redistribute wealth around the world to “magically elevate the poverty class to the middle class. The United States, arguably the most fertile and favorable ground for such a massive experiment, has already spent $15 [T]rillion in taxpayer treasure over the past 47 years attempting to circumvent market forces and eliminate poverty–with no affect.

Additionally, study after study has revealed the UN to have grown into an impossibly dysfunctional gargantuan, having negligent management skills, metrics and accountability, and a source of financially wasteful pandering–second only to the U.S. General Services Administration. Actually, as this directly smacks of the long-discussed “UN Agenda 21,” America must treat this audacity of the United Nations as a wake up call, and say “[last] check please”–then hit the UN exit doors without delay.

If you like what you have read, please use the free “Subscribe” button to the right of Mr. Klein’s photo in the upper left corner of the page–so that you don’t miss a signal article. “Stay informed to stay ahead!” Please visit our facebook page and become a friend at 

www.facebook.com/flamariner You can also follow us on Twitter at www.Twitter.com/JeffreyKlein2 Continue reading on Examiner.com U.N. to debut plan for world socialism in June–time for US to exit? – National Political Buzz | Examiner.com http://www.examiner.com/article/un-to-debut-plan-for-world-socialism-at-rio-20-conference-time-for-us-to-exit#ixzz1sk4YtasJ

Enhanced by Zemanta

Reagan Vs. Obama – Social Economics 101

I posted this clip to help promote the informative documentary film “I WANT YOUR MONEY” Buy the full documentary athttp://www.IWantYourMoney.net. If you like this short clip, you will love the full length documentary. It features great in-depth interviews with economic experts and knowledgeable political figures including:
Mike Huckabee
Stephen Moore
Michael Reagan
William Voegeli
Star Parker
Kenneth Blackwell
Edwin Meese lll
Thad McCotter
Newt Gingrich
Lee Edwards
Pete Wilson
Steve Forbes
Gary Bauer
Kate Obenshain
Chris Edwards
David M. McIntosh
Lila Rose
John Stossel
Allen Icet
Rob Schaaf
John Stossel
Tom McClintock
Andrew Breitbart
George Runner
Alison Fraser

Enhanced by Zemanta

Gingrich in 2009: We need a must-carry law on health insurance

Via: Hot Air

Morgen and John at Verum Serum dug up this nugget, and not from 15 years ago when the Heritage Foundation had its brief and ill-advised fling with individual health-insurance mandates at the federal level. This comes from a May 2009 conference call hosted by Newt Gingrich on the subject of health-care reform as ObamaCare had just begun its tortured path through Congress. In this clip, Gingrich specifically calls for individual “must carry” mandates, and even notes that the insurance companies agreed that such a law would make “must issue” a better deal for them:

The most relevant part comes at the 28-second mark in this clip:

The real foundation, the most important part of this, is individual rights, responsibilities, and expectations of behavior. … We believe that there should be must-carry, that everybody should have health insurance, or if you’re an absolute libertarian, we would allow you to post a bond, but we would not allow people to be “free riders” failing to insure themselves and then showing up in the emergency room with no means of payment.  If you have must carry, then the insurance companies have told us that we can have must-issue, and you will therefore have a system in which you don’t have to worry about cherry-picking and maneuvering. … This is the kind of general model we will be advocating.

Frankly, that sounds like what Mitt Romney argued in Massachusetts, and it’s almost exactly what Barack Obama argued when pushing ObamaCare.  The only exception would have come for “absolute libertarians,” and in 2008, put the price of that bond at $100,000 – $150,000 — far out of the reach of most Americans.   This makes sense, of course, because the wealthy are quite unlikely to be “free riders” anyway, but the mechanism that Gingrich backed even as ObamaCare was rolling out is essentially the same as Congress passed less than a year later, and it would have trapped the entire middle and working classes.

Gingrich has since said he was wrong about the individual mandate, and challenges Romney to do the same on the campaign trail — even though he told NBC in May of last year that he wouldn’t use the mandate against Romney because of his previous support.  But his admissions of error tend to leave people with the impression that he repented of this a few years earlier, when Gingrich had backed forms of a mandate up until getting into the race (see above link).  Morgen sums up:

Not only did Gingrich make the “conservative” argument for the mandate in dealing with the free rider problem, he also advanced a favorite argument of the left. Which is that the only way insurers could be required to offer coverage to everyone regardless of their health status (“must issue”), was to require everyone to carry insurance. This was ultimately the argument which convinced none other than Barack Obama, who remember, opposed an individual mandate during the Democrat primary campaign in 2008.

Romney is arguably even more compromised on ObamaCare than Gingrich, but it’s a much closer call in my opinion than some seem to believe.

I think either man would act to rescind ObamaCare if elected; the pressure from Republicans would be too much to bear, and in any case, the past two election cycles have proven the mandates to be politically toxic.  But if one is looking for daylight between the two on this topic, they’d be hard pressed to find it.

Enhanced by Zemanta

VIDEO EXPOSING HOW ‘OCCUPY WALL STREET’ WAS ORGANIZED FROM DAY ONE BY SEIU/ACORN FRONT – THE WORKING FAMILY PARTY, AND HOW THEY ALL TIE TO THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION, DNC, DEMOCRATIC SOCIALISTS OF AMERICA, TIDES AND GEORGE SOROS

The Blaze

Breakdown of the Connections Between The Working Family Party, SEIU, ACORN, The New Party, The DNC, Democratic Socialists of America, Tides, George Soros and The Obama Administration:

  • The Working Families Party was established in the 90s by key members of the the socialist organizations The New Party, ACORN, SEIU, and a coalition of other labor unions and community organizations.

Video Exposing How Occupy Wall Street Was Organized From Day One by SEIU / ACORN Front   The Working Family Party, and How They All Tie to the Obama Administration, DNC, Democratic Socialists of America, Tides and George Soros

  • Patrick Gaspard, the current executive director of the DNC, former director of Obama’s Office of Political Affairs, was an organizer for the New Party, the executive vice president of the SEIU Local 1199, political director for Bertha Lewis (the former president of ACORN) and a co-chair of the Working Families Party.

Video Exposing How Occupy Wall Street Was Organized From Day One by SEIU / ACORN Front   The Working Family Party, and How They All Tie to the Obama Administration, DNC, Democratic Socialists of America, Tides and George Soros

  • The New Party is a socialist political coalition co-founded in 1992 by academic and political activist Joel Rogers.
  • The first strategic meetings to plan the New Party were held in Joel Rogers’ Madison, Wisconsin home; Wade Rathke, ACORN and SEIU founder and Gerry Hudson from Democratic Socialists of America and SEIU were in attendance at those meetings.

Video Exposing How Occupy Wall Street Was Organized From Day One by SEIU / ACORN Front   The Working Family Party, and How They All Tie to the Obama Administration, DNC, Democratic Socialists of America, Tides and George Soros

  • The New Party’s influential Chicago chapter began to formed in January 1995. Its members consisted mainly of individuals from ACORN, SEIU and the Democratic Socialists of America. Obama attended a New Party function and received their endorsement in 1995.

Video Exposing How Occupy Wall Street Was Organized From Day One by SEIU / ACORN Front   The Working Family Party, and How They All Tie to the Obama Administration, DNC, Democratic Socialists of America, Tides and George Soros

  • In 1994, a New Party newspaper listed more than 100 activists “who are building the NP;” some names among the list of 100 were Noam Chomsky, Frances Fox Piven, Wade Rathke, Cornel West, Jon Barton of SEIU, Maude Hurd of ACORN and Margaret Shelleda of SEIU.

Video Exposing How Occupy Wall Street Was Organized From Day One by SEIU / ACORN Front   The Working Family Party, and How They All Tie to the Obama Administration, DNC, Democratic Socialists of America, Tides and George Soros

  • Gerry Hudson, SEIU Executive Vice President and original New Party member, serves on the board of the Apollo Alliance organized by Joel Rogers’ group COWS Center on Wisconsin Strategy. The Alliance is a project of the Tides Center. Harry Reid credited the Apollo Alliance with helping to write the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.
  • George Soros’ Open Society Institute is a major source of money behind the Apollo Alliance and the Tides Foundation.

Of course, SEIU laid out the plans for Occupy Wall Street Months ago, as brought to you by the Blaze in this exclusive video:

Back to The Blaze »

COMMENTS (416)

2 3 … 12 Next »

  • AMPLEFORTH

    Posted on October 7, 2011 at 8:42amThis protest is going to go nowhere. Why? It’s

Enhanced by Zemanta

Soros, Piven and SEIU Working to Destroy Americas Financial System to Create Revolution

Their own words from there own lips! There is NO denying what it is they want!! These people are ALL THROUGHOUT this administration!

Thatcher’s Last Stand Against Socialism

Margaret Thatcher’s last House of Commons Speech on November 22, 1990.

You can read the transcript here: http://www.margaretthatcher.org/speeches/displaydocument.asp?docid=108256

Enhanced by Zemanta

The former Speaker buys into the OWS world view

Update: New video added

By Marla Gillaspie

Time:  In Monday Londonderry press availability, former Speaker responds to Romney’s demand he return Freddic Mac cash by invoking Bay Stater’s Bain windfall.

Gingrich: “If Governor Romney would like to give back all the money he’s earned from bankrupting companies and laying off employees over his years at Bain, then I would be glad to then listen to him. And I will bet you $10, not $10,000, that he won’t take the offer.”

Watch the video above.

Congressman Tom Tancredo wrote on Dec. 4, 2011 regarding Newt’s history as the Speaker of the House:

As a former college professor, did he lead a battle to curtail federal involvement in higher education? No. Energy policy? No – to this day he still supports ethanol subsides, has endorsed cap and trade, and did that awful video on global warming with Nancy Pelosi.

Did his brief, five-year tenure as speaker of the House leave a lasting legacy on any policy front? It certainly did not result in reduced federal budgets. This is one reason why, when he called to congratulate me on my election in 1998 and ask me for my support in his quest for another term as speaker, I had to swallow hard and say “no.” Of course, I wasn’t the only hold out. The fact that Republicans lost seats in every election and federal budgets increased dramatically during his speakership caused a majority of the Republicans in the House to refuse to commit to him. So it turns out there is something that stands out about Gingrich in my mind. I cannot think of another time in American history when a speaker was tossed out by his own caucus.

OK, let’s try a different approach. When you hear the name “Gingrich,” what great policy innovation comes to mind? Amnesty for illegal immigrants?

No, I mean an innovation that conservatives can celebrate. DING! Time’s up.

 


Here’s Brit Hume on Newt’s attack today on capitalism.

KRAUTHAMMER: Newt’s attack on Romney “What you’d expect from a socialist”

Enhanced by Zemanta

Communist Hugo Chavez in middle class appeal

Hugo Chávez, President since 1999.

Hugo Chavez

Venezuela President Hugo Chavez in middle class appeal

The Venezuelan President, Hugo Chavez, says he wants to open up his socialist political project to the middle classes and private sector.Mr Chavez said his government had to convince Venezuela’s middle classes they were needed.Speaking by telephone on state television, he said he was entering a more reflective period of his life.Mr Chavez recently underwent cancer treatment in Cuba, but plans to stand for re-election next year.

The Venezuelan leader made his comments a day after he celebrated his 57th birthday, when – appearing in yellow rather than his characteristic red shirt – he told a rally of cheering supporters that he was in no mood to leave office in the near future.

In Friday’s telephone interview, Mr Chavez said the treatment to remove a tumour had led him to radically change his life towards a “more diverse, more reflective and multi-faceted” period.

He told his supporters to eliminate divisions and dogma, and end what he called the abuse of symbols such as the term “socialist”.

“Why do we have to always have to wear a red shirt?” said Mr Chavez. “And the same goes for the word ‘socialism’.”

The president cited the example of a mayor in the governing party who inaugurated a “Socialist Avenue”, which Mr Chavez described as “stupid”.

“We need to reflect and introduce changes in our discourse and in our actions.”

Cuban lessons
Mr Chavez, who came to power in 1999, said the private sector and the middle classes were “vital” to his political project.

He said it was a shame that attempts to be more inclusive of these groups in society had been criticised by some in official circles in Venezuela.

“Raul Castro is leading a process of self-criticism,” said Mr Chavez, hinting that Venezuela could learn from the reforms being undertaken by the president of Cuba, who has made some concessions to the private sector since taking over from Fidel Castro in 2006.

Mr Chavez said his government needed to correct the perception that small businesses would be taken over by the state.

“We have to make sure no-one believes that,” he said. “We have to convince them about our real project, that we need this sector and that we want to acknowledge their contribution.”

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-14351508

Chavez reaches out to Venezuela middle class

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez has made an abrupt political shift, urging his socialist movement to reach out to the middle class and small business owners.

Chavez, who is undergoing cancer treatment, appeared to be taking a more moderate stance to try to expand his support ahead of the presidential election in late 2012.

In a telephone call broadcast on state television on Friday he said his party should seek to recapture middle class support.

Such support has waned over the years amid the government’s expropriations of businesses, farmland and residential buildings, as well as expanding price controls viewed by many as a threat to the economy.

“We can’t give away the middle class to the bourgeoisie,” Chavez said, referring to the opposition.

The president also said his government has no plans to expropriate small businesses, adding: “We have to open ourselves up to those sectors, the private productive sector.”

Tense relations

Chavez has had tense relations with the country’s business leaders during his more than 12 years in office.

He has accused business leaders of defending capitalism, identifying them as obstacles to his socialist movement.

Meanwhile, he has nationalised or expropriated big businesses in industries ranging from telecommunications to construction.

“We have to reflect … and introduce changes in our stances and in our actions,” Chavez said, urging supporters to eradicate what he called political evils, “for example, sectarianism and dogmatism”.

The president, whose signature red shirts have long been a symbol of his socialist movement, also suggested his allies ought to be more moderate in their wardrobes.

“Why do we have to go around all the time wearing a red shirt?” he asked.

Chavez, who in the past has scolded some aides for not wearing the red often associated with leftist movements, chose a yellow shirt when he addressed supporters at his 57th birthday party on Thursday.

Offering a similar message to his broadcast on state television, he said: “We have to keep advancing toward other sectors, of the middle class. The undecided, let them come with us.”

Cancer treatment

A poll released last week said Chavez’s public approval rating remains at 50 per cent and has not significantly varied since his cancer diagnosis.

Chavez underwent surgery in Cuba on June 20 to remove a cancerous tumour.

He has not said what type of cancer he has been diagnosed with or specified where exactly it was located, saying only that it was in his pelvic region.

He underwent his first phase of chemotherapy in Cuba last week and said the treatment aims to ensure that no malignant cells reappear.

Chavez is pivoting to try to shore up support, Angel Alvarez, director of the Institute of Political Studies at the Central University of Venezuela, said.

“In this electoral context, the government needs to become more moderate because all the polls show the government no longer has the middle class,” Alvarez told the AP news agency in a phone interview.

Chavez’s support declined as the economy contracted during the past two years and has remained significantly lower than the 63 per cent of the votes he got in his re-election in 2006.

The economy has begun growing again, expanding at an annual rate of 4.5 per cent in the first quarter.

Alvarez said he doubted Chavez’s moderation will last because it goes against his “most important political asset, which is his fiery speech”.

“That’s his drama as a candidate,” Alvarez said. “It’s like an internal struggle between becoming more moderate and more radical.”

‘Examine ourselves’

Chavez said his movement should “examine ourselves, starting with the leadership … I myself, and the leadership of the party”.

He denied that being more open toward small businesses would represent giving in to the wealthy elite, citing the example of Cuba and the economic changes begun by President Raul Castro’s government.

“If Cuba after 60 years of revolution is making those revisions … I doubt it’s betraying socialism,” he said.

He urged his allies to read the Cuban state newspaper Granma every day to see how Fidel Castro and other leaders are engaged in self-criticism. “Fidel isn’t there frozen, no,” Chavez said.

His call for change extended to one of his main political slogans.

It used to be “Socialist fatherland or death,” and was repeated by soldiers in the military under Chavez.

But on Thursday night, he proposed to do away with “death” and instead say: “Socialist fatherland and victory”.

On Friday, he made another revision and suggested: “Independence and socialist fatherland”.

http://english.aljazeera.net//news/ameri…19360.html

Enhanced by Zemanta

Honduras journalist slain, 17th in past two years

Honduran journalist Luz Marina Paz was shot dead by gunmen Tuesday along with a mechanic traveling with her, police said, in the latest in a series of attacks targeting news media.

She was killed in an attack outside the capital and became the 17th journalist killed in the Central American nation since a 2009 coup.

She had worked for Radio Globo, linked to ousted president Manuel Zelaya, before joining the Cadena Hondurena de Noticias or CHN broadcaster.

José Manuel Zelaya Rosales, President of Hondu...

Image via Wikipedia

Last year, 11 journalists were killed in the country – one of the most violent in the world – and where public safety has deteriorated since the June 29, 2009 military-backed coup.

Honduras has become a transit point for cocaine from South America heading into the United States. Drug gangs are better armed than the police, and have cash to bribe law enforcement and politicians.

By the end of 2011 Honduras is likely to have the highest murder rate in the world – 86 per 100,000 inhabitants, according to the Violence Observatory in Tegucigalpa, a UN-backed monitor. On average there have been 20 violent deaths a day in 2011, 85 percent of them caused by shootings.

A 2010 report by the New York-based Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) found “an alarming pattern of impunity” in Honduras as shown by the “inability or unwillingness” of authorities “to take obvious steps to investigate the crimes and arrest the perpetrators.”

Enhanced by Zemanta

Bachmann: Newt Gengrich “the frugal socialist”

Caution: Foul language.

Let The S*** Hit The Fan And The Bodies Hit The Floor

Beck Doesn’t Hold Back in Gingrich Interview: Tough Questions on Mandates, Big Gov’t, & Global Warming

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/beck-doesnt-hold-back-in-gingrich-interview-t…

Enhanced by Zemanta