Is America Really On Its Way To Becoming Another European Style Socialist State?

Posted on November 14, 2012


Yesterday I said I would challenge an opinion commonly held by conservatives. It is probably safe to say that  there is a consensus among conservatives that the goal of the progressives for decades has  been to move the United States in the direction of becoming a European style socialist state. Certainly before the elections last week, many conservative bloggers used their platform to warn about these intentions and after the elections the cry has gone up a couple of octaves. The evidence of their intentions is clear. I certainly would not deny it. However, this old man, condemned to observe from the outside looking in, is telling you today, that in spite of their best efforts over the last fifty or more years, and in spite of the strides that Obama administration has made in moving the country in that direction, I am saying that it is not going to happen. It can not happen, in my opinion. And, furthermore, I believe that whoever is at the top of the progressive/statist food chain know very well that it is not going to happen and yet it is clear to everyone paying attention that Obama and friends are going to push even harder in that direction.

So, what is the old man talking about? I think it is quite simple. We are not going to become another European style socialist state because simply the United States of America is  BROKE! The European countries didn’t develop their socialist states when they were broke. They couldn’t have! Now that many of them are broke, the end is in sight. The economies of many European countries are crawling at a growth rate of a fraction of 1%. The United States is not much better off. Our national debt is over sixteen trillion dollars on its way to 21 trillion in a few years. Our government is already borrowing [sorry, my dollar sign / four key is acting up again] forty-one percent of everything they spend and that borrowing percentage will only increase in the coming years. Our Federal Reserve has been apply Quantitative Easing (QE) for the last four years. QE is a euphemism for creating money out of thin air. Some of my purist friends will be quick to say that QE is not the same as printing money. QE is the buying of assets by the Fed. That is true. But, the Fed does not have money of its own. They have to create the money to buy those assets out of thin air with a few keystrokes on their computer keyboard. What assets is the Fed buying? Well, they have been buying up our government’s bonds from the market place; both our short-term and our long-term bonds. They do this to drive the interest rates on our bonds down so that we can continue to service our monster debt. The Fed, for the last few years has bought about 70% of  our new bond offerings. The US now owes a large part of their national debt to the Federal Reserve. The Fed has also been buy mortgage backed securities from Fanny and Freddie and some banks. Trillions of dollars of this funny money are piling up in the excess reserve accounts of the major banks. The debt crisis is real! The debt time bomb is ticking! This should have been the one and only issue in this past election. It wasn’t. The progressives, the Democrats succeeded in making this election about side issues. It was not a referendum, on the performance of President Obama.

Friends, the debt time bomb is going to explode. They policies of this administration are going to make sure  that will happen. No one can say with any certainty when it will happen. It may be in five years or it may not happen for ten or fifteen years but it will happen. The worlds monetary system is broke and it can not now, with the results of this election, be fixed. The chances of fixing it  hadRomney won were very small at best. Yet, this administration seems hell-bent on having the debt bomb explode sooner rather than later. Why? We must be asking that question and we must find the answer.

Join me in a  review of what has happened in America since 2008. Let’s start before the bursting of the housing / financial bubble burst. Much of America was already tired of George Bush. They were tired of his prolonged wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and they were tired of his profligate spending. But, the economy…the economy was booming. If you were to inter into your search engine ” Bureau of Labor Statistics, Workforce participation Rate”, you would see a graph that shows the workforce participation starting to decline when the Tech.Com bubble burst early in the first term of Bush. But, after the so-called Bush tax cuts kicked-in, the rate leveled until the housing bubble broke.  Not one of our best economic minds in Washington predicted the housing bubble crisis. Within weeks of the crash, some of them were on television claiming the American economy was stronger than ever and was only going to get better. They were wrong! so,  let’s move on to the  electons of 2008. It does not matter that Bush was not at fault for what happened; it happened on his watch and so he gets the blame. That is the way it works in American politics. The Republican Party could have put up the prince of Peace as their candidate and the Democrats could have put up a derilict from skidrow as their candidate and the Democratic candidate was going to win! That was a given. The Democratic Party machinery and deep pocket supporters like George Soros are PUMPED! They know exactly who they want to be our next president. They want the dar left leaning, former Fist lady, Hillary Clinton. This is going to be a watershed election. America is going to have their firs woman president. But, something happened on the way to the forum, didn’t it? A unkown first term Senator from Chicago, who happened to be black and happen to be a radical black and a Marxist, decided to throw his hat into th e ring even though his only claim to fame was voting “present”. This nobody was going to challenge the Party’s chosen horse, Hillary Clinton. Well, these things happen. People do enter political races they know they can’t win just to get name recognition for running seriously in the future. But, the people running Senator Obama’s campaign were very experienced operatives from the Chicago Democrat machine. Candidate Obama won Iowa. It was a new ballgame. The Democratic party machinery and people like Soros think their prayers have finally been answered. What could possibly be better. Both of the candidates were extreme leftists. America was either going to have its first woman president or their first black president. This election was going to be truly historic. Eventually the big bucks switched to Obama and he won.

I apologize for the length of this post, my friends, but please bear with me.

We could talk about many things from Obama’s first term in office. But, let’s take a look at his foreign policy. Particularly, let’s look at his policies on the Middle East. Obama is sworn into office and the payoff to Hillary is that she becomes the Secretary of State. Very early on, the State Department brings a number of young Arabs form countries in Northern Africa to attend a program where they are taught how to use social networking technology to organize protests against their tyrant governments. The Arab Spring is born. Meanwhile the president made is tour to Cairo and offered the hand of friendship to the Muslim world. Obama promises that there will be a new era of US relations with that part of the world. We know by Mr. Obama’s middle name and by the books that “someone” wrote about him that he has an affinity for the religion of Islam. Soon America’s foreign policy in the Middle East takes a 180  degree turn. Long time ally Mubarak in Egypt has to go. The old syphilitic Gadaffi who had behaved himself since Ronald Reagan put the fear of Allah in him had to go. It was immediately obvious to conservatives that the idealistic young people who started the protests were not going to win the day. It was obvious that the Muslim Brotherhood and other radical Islamic group were going to take control. We were right. The Arab Spring spread to Syria. A civil war has raged there for months. Over 36,000 people have died. And, recently we learned from the information leaking out about the Benghazi fiasco that our government has been trying to buy back the huge Gadaffi cash of arms which had fallen into the hands of al Qaeda groups and other radical Islamic groups. It is becoming clear that the Obama administration was funneling those arms through Turkey to be delivered to some of the rebel groups that are trying to get rid of Syrian president Assad. So, what had been a reasonably stable Middle East for forty years is now totally destabilized. Why!

Now, I want to ask you, dear readers, a question. Do any of you buy into the story that Barack Obama is a very smart man? I am sorry but I have yet to see any evidence that would support that Obama is very smart. When he goes off script, he has a hard time talking in complete sentences. Barack Obama is not very smart. He is, however, a very capable actor. He is playing the role of a smart man, in my opinion.  So, my next question is this. Do you really believe that Barack Obama planed for this complex change in foreign policy in the Middle East all by himself? And, if not, then who?

I know this post is way too long but I am almost done. Please watch this short video of an interview with retired General Wesley Clark. I snatched from the Spellchek blog. Please listen very closely. The interview took place in 2007 but the General is talking about a meeting that took place before our war with Iraq was announced.

So, now it should be evident that the destabilization of seven Middle East countries, wich we are watch unfold right now,  was planned long before Barack Obama took office. Barack Obama is working off of a script that was written no sooner than 2002 and maybe much sooner. So, I ask you to ask yourself some questions:

  • Who, inside or outside of government, makes these kinds of long-term plans and how is it that they survives from one administration to another or possibly  over various administrations?
  • What is the objective of this destabilization of the Middle East?
  • How does this plan benefit the United States?

The last two questions are important because there are other countries that have a strategic interest in that region. Russia needs a stable Syria. They want to move their oil and other things through Turkey and through Syria to Syria¡s deep water ports. China, of course, needs a stable Middle East to insure their energy needs. So, one last question. Do these strategic planners for the United States believe that Russia and China are just going to sit on the sidelines and let the US screw up their strategic interests? Is there something bigger going on that we can’t see?

I thank you, dear readers, for your patients with me today. I promise to try to be more efficient in the future.

Well, now you know what I’m thinking. What are your thoughts?

About these ads