Obamanomics: Naive, Or Intentionally Destructive?

According to such law, a company in bankruptcy must pay its debts to its “secured creditors” before it pays its unsecured creditors. Not only that, in most cases, secured creditors can demand to be paid in full.

In the case of Chrysler, several of the institutions to which it owes money are banks that accepted government bail-out funds last year and earlier this year. Those banks are now enslaved to whatever President Obama and the U.S. Treasury Department tell them to do. So when Obama tells, say, “bank X” to “accept twenty-eight cents on the dollar as payment of the debt Chrysler owes you,” well, those banks are obliged to obey Obama, whether or not it makes financial sense to do so, and whether or not bankruptcy law allows that bank to demand more.

But the private sector economy got in the way of Obama’s plans to save the world, because some of Chrysler’s secured creditors are hedge funds, that, unlike the “bailed-out banks,“ are NOT under Obama’s control. Several of the hedge fund managers involved in the situation did what they are permitted to do under bankruptcy law, and demanded more than the meager “pennies on the dollar” loan repayment that President Obama was ordering them to accept.

And this is when dear leader Obama moved in to “tirade mode.” Lashing out at the hedge fund “hold outs,” he succumbed to name-calling and insults, claiming that the “greedy” hedge fund managers were standing in the way of saving Chrysler.

Was it his naivety that prevented him from seeing the obvious - - that the hedge funds, and those Americans who had invested their personal money in those funds - - were the very thing that has kept Chrysler afloat in the first place? And is he so naïve to think that he will, to use his terms, “get credit flowing in America again,” while using his office to ruthlessly steamroll over the top of contracts, accounting rules, legal precedents, and law itself? Does he really think that he will “save” the U.S. economy and get banks lending again and get people with money to invest in new businesses and begin producing new employment opportunities, by denying legal rights to investors?

President Obama has now demonstrated to the world’s investors that rules and laws don’t matter - - his personal and political preferences are what matter, and he will get his way, even if investors are denied their rights and damaged in the process.

If Obama’s objectve is to weaken the U.S., so as to make a “more fair world,” he’s well on his way to achieving that goal. Yet if Obama actually wants something other than a weaker U.S., then his naivety is something America cannot afford.

According to such law, a company in bankruptcy must pay its debts to its “secured creditors” before it pays its unsecured creditors. Not only that, in most cases, secured creditors can demand to be paid in full.

In the case of Chrysler, several of the institutions to which it owes money are banks that accepted government bail-out funds last year and earlier this year. Those banks are now enslaved to whatever President Obama and the U.S. Treasury Department tell them to do. So when Obama tells, say, “bank X” to “accept twenty-eight cents on the dollar as payment of the debt Chrysler owes you,” well, those banks are obliged to obey Obama, whether or not it makes financial sense to do so, and whether or not bankruptcy law allows that bank to demand more.

But the private sector economy got in the way of Obama’s plans to save the world, because some of Chrysler’s secured creditors are hedge funds, that, unlike the “bailed-out banks,“ are NOT under Obama’s control. Several of the hedge fund managers involved in the situation did what they are permitted to do under bankruptcy law, and demanded more than the meager “pennies on the dollar” loan repayment that President Obama was ordering them to accept.

And this is when dear leader Obama moved in to “tirade mode.” Lashing out at the hedge fund “hold outs,” he succumbed to name-calling and insults, claiming that the “greedy” hedge fund managers were standing in the way of saving Chrysler.

Was it his naivety that prevented him from seeing the obvious - - that the hedge funds, and those Americans who had invested their personal money in those funds - - were the very thing that has kept Chrysler afloat in the first place? And is he so naïve to think that he will, to use his terms, “get credit flowing in America again,” while using his office to ruthlessly steamroll over the top of contracts, accounting rules, legal precedents, and law itself? Does he really think that he will “save” the U.S. economy and get banks lending again and get people with money to invest in new businesses and begin producing new employment opportunities, by denying legal rights to investors?

President Obama has now demonstrated to the world’s investors that rules and laws don’t matter - - his personal and political preferences are what matter, and he will get his way, even if investors are denied their rights and damaged in the process.

If Obama’s objective is to weaken the U.S., so as to make a “more fair world,” he’s well on his way to achieving that goal. Yet if Obama actually wants something other than a weaker U.S., then his naivety is something America cannot afford.

by Austin Hill

Obamanomics

Obamanomics

by Ken Blackwell

Editor’s Note: This article was co-authored by Ken Klukowski, a policy consultant and legal analyst in Washington, DC.

Last week’s revelation - in Barack Obama’s own words - that he believes the U.S. Supreme Court should redistribute income to bring about “economic justice” in this country is the final piece of the puzzle that reveals what he believes about the role of government in our lives. Taken with his other statements about wealth, taxes and spending, it reveals a radical-left view of government like this country has never seen.

In 2001, on WBEZ radio in Chicago, then-state senator Obama gave a radio interview. Calling it “redistributive change,” Mr. Obama advocated the courts redistributing income as a civil rights issue. He acknowledged the Founders designed limits on judicial power that they considered “essential,” and then went on to say he could develop a legal justification for the courts to abandon those limits and redistribute wealth.

In that same interview, Mr. Obama said he was not optimistic about the Court redistributing income, not because the Court shouldn’t, just because the process of income redistribution would be difficult for the Supreme Court to manage. However, he continued, it could be done more effectively through legislation or administrative action.

In other words, Mr. Obama doesn’t at all object to federal courts redistributing income, because “economic justice” should be part of advancing civil rights.

These statements are the last piece of a puzzle people have been trying to decipher for two years: What does Mr. Obama really believe? These statements, combined with his other statements over the past few months, finally give voters a coherent picture of Mr. Obama’s views.

Earlier this year, Charlie Gibson asked Mr. Obama if he would still raise capital gains tax if it would not bring in additional revenue and instead adversely affect millions of Americans. Mr. Obama responded he would still do it out of “fairness.” Even if the tax would hurt the economy, losing millions of jobs and squeezing working families, Mr. Obama will do it because in his mind it’s “fair.”

That statement is consistent with Mr. Obama explaining to Joe the Plumber, “When you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.” It’s in those moments when he’s not giving canned speeches from a teleprompter, examined in advance for alarming statements, that Mr. Obama reveals what he truly thinks. By his own words, he will use government and higher taxes to “spread the wealth around.” This means he’ll take it from those he decides have too much, and give it to others he decides should have more.

Add to that Mr. Obama’s running mate, Joe Biden. When asked about higher taxes, Mr. Biden said it was patriotic to pay higher taxes without complaint. Later asked if Mr. Obama’s statements made him a Marxist, Mr. Biden ridiculed the question and the reporter asking it.

Then Mr. Obama and Mr. Biden ridiculed Joe the Plumber by name at his campaign rallies, starting the very next day. Evidently that is how Mr. Obama will deal with people who disagree with him. He went to Joe the Plumber’s neighborhood, walked down his street and in front of his house. As a voter, Joe decided to ask Mr. Obama a question. Now Mr. Obama’s unscripted answer has caused him trouble, and so Joe the Plumber has been attacked by Mr. Obama and his minions for daring to question Mr. Obama in public.

A government that can take your money and redistribute income will not tolerate any criticism from the people or the press. They should simply stand quiet as an all-wise government decides how much money they should have.

And now we know he wants to appoint Supreme Court justices, with lifetime appointments, who will do the same.

This is Obamanomics. While previous American presidents based their tax policies on what would bring in the most to government coffers and help the economy, Mr. Obama says he will base tax policy on what he decides is “fair.” According to Mr. Obama, he will decide what taxes are “fair” and what distribution of wealth and income achieve “economic justice” through “redistributive change.”

That’s just a fancy phrase for “spread the wealth around,” which is exactly what Mr. Obama will do unless he’s stopped at the ballot box on Election Day.

Obama's True Agenda Exposed

Beneath Obama's flowery rhetoric lies a dangerous economic plan that will wreak havoc on the American economy. Obama plans to return to the failed policies of high taxation coupled with an expansion of government spending. Worse, Obama says he is absolutely committed to almost doubling the capital gains rate — something he will easily accomplish with a Democrat Congress. In the coming months — when investors realize that Obama will raise the cap gains rate — there could be a stampede of asset sales as investors rush to take their profits now to avoid Obama's doubling of the tax rates next year.   An Urgent Message from The National Republican Trust PAC

Dear Fellow American: Never before in the history of our nation have we faced such a grave crisis: one of the most radical political figures ever to be nominated by a major party is just minutes away from becoming President of the United States. That man is Barack Obama. He promises to change America forever. If elected, he will do just that — but in ways you may not like. Remember Obama is the most liberal member of the United States Senate. He received a 100 percent Liberal Rating from the National Journal, making him the most left-wing Senator in Washington — more liberal than even Democratic senators like Ted Kennedy or John Kerry. If you look at Obama’s record, you will understand just how dangerous this man is. He even has terrorist friends he won’t denounce. One such man is William Ayers,a leader in the radical terrorist group the Weatherman Underground. The group bombed several government buildings, including the Pentagon, killing civilians and police officers. In 2001, Ayers said he had no regrets for his actions and wished he could have done more.  The ties between Obama and Ayers are tight. Both served on two non profit boards and they worked closely together. Ayers even hosted a political event at his home for Obama. Obama has acknowledged he is a friend of Ayers and defends his association by saying he, Obama, was only 8 years old at the time of the Pentagon bombing. However, Obama has no explanation as to why he is still a friend of Ayers. Obama has even been endorsed by radicals such as Nation of Islam Leader Louis Farrakhan.  Just this week Farrakhan again called Obama "the Messiah". No one can deny hearing about Obama’s relationship with the America-hating Rev. Jeremiah Wright. There should be little doubt that William Ayers and Louis Farrakhan and the Rev. Jeremiah Wright are rooting for Obama — because he is one of them. In keeping with such friends, Obama has promised to meet with radical leaders like Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad without “preconditions” even though Ahmadinejad has promised to “wipe Israel off the map” and “destroy” America. Even radical Hamas terrorists have praised him. “We like Mr. Obama and we hope he will win the election,” Ahmed Yousef, senior Hamas leader was quoted by ABC radio as saying.

Dangerous Economic Plan

And then there are Obama’s dangerous economic plans for America.

He wants to almost double the capital gains tax. He wants to strip the FICA tax cap off every worker making more than $97,500. He wants to increase the dividend tax. He wants to let the Bush tax cuts expire — giving almost every American family an automatic tax increase.

He has called for more than $800 billion in new spending programs. (Which if added to the now $810 billion bailout program will certainly cripple this country for generations to come!)

He is so radical he even backed driver’s licenses for illegal aliens — even though such a move would help future terrorists move freely in the United States.

He is the most pro-abortion candidate in the history of the country. In 2001, as a state legislator in Illinois, he opposed a bill to protect live born children — children actually born alive!  He was the only Illinois senator to speak out against the bill.

He opposes gun rights. He has long history of trying to deny ordinary citizens access to guns, one the basic rights of our Constitution.

He originally backed Washington D.C.’s total ban on private handguns — a ban that was overturned. The NRA rated him an “F” on gun positions and says he is one of the most dangerous anti-gun politicians in the nation.

Never forget that Obama is a Harvard educated elitist. To him we Americans are simply “bitter” and he has mocked us saying “[they] cling to their guns and their religion.”

Obama also has strong ties to ACORN, the most radical group in the country and has received large campaign contributions from Freddie Mac

Exposing the Truth

Hillary Clinton was late in recognizing the threat Obama posed to her campaign, but once she did, her strategy worked.

When Hillary exposed Obama publicly, her campaign saw a major turnaround.

Hillary won every major state primary in the nation with the sole exception of Obama’s home state of Illinois.

And even though Obama was “anointed” by the media and Democratic elites, Hillary went on to win eight of the last 10 Democratic primaries.

How did Obama beat Hillary for the nomination?

Well, using a loophole in Democratic rules, he was able to rack up large majorities in caucus states where he outspent and out organized her.

But in large, contested states she won almost every time. Why? Because when Democrats heard what Obama really stood for, they turned on him.

Make no mistake about it: If Americans know the truth about Obama, John McCain can win this election! 

Barack Obama's Stealth Socialism

The Audacity of Socialism

Obama Now Says He Agrees With McCain's Resurgence Plan Proposal

Obama Now Says He Agrees With McCain's American Homeownership Resurgence Plan; then throws in if there is enough oversight, as if McCain wasn't planning to do that...  Anyway to grab some credit

McCain's American Homeownership Resurgence Plan

Obamanomics and the Coming Stock Market Crash

 How destructive to the U.S. economy would a Barack Obama presidency be?  

An exclusive Newsmax analysis warns: There would be a very rough time ahead.  Beneath Obama's flowery rhetoric lies a dangerous economic plan that will wreak havoc on the American economy. Obama plans to return to the failed policies of high taxation coupled with an expansion of government spending.  Worse, Obama says he is absolutely committed to almost doubling the capital gains rate — something he will easily accomplish with a Democrat Congress.

In the coming months — when investors realize that Obama will raise the cap gains rate — there could be a stampede of asset sales as investors rush to take their profits now to avoid Obama's doubling of the tax rates next year.

All of these issues and more are explored in Newsmax magazine's special report "Obamanomics — the Coming Tax-and-Spend Nightmare," by Wall Street Journal columnist John Fund.  This special report gives Americans the first in-depth look at the Democratic presidential candidate's likely strategies — and how they will affect not just the larger economy, but your personal wealth as well.  It is an article worth reading for everyone before they vote!!

Indeed, Obama makes no bones about his plans to go on a tax rampage. Not only would he increase the capital-gains tax rate from 15 percent to as much as 28 percent, he wants to allow the 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts to expire in 2010, which effectively raises taxes on Americans by tens of billions of dollars.

He also wants to do away with the $102,000 FICA payroll tax cap, which means anyone making over $102,000 would pay an additional 7 percent in taxes on earned income.

And the loan dividend tax rate George Bush implemented? Under President Obama it will be DOA!

If you are concerned about your money and family's financial well-being — and that the American economy remains strong — you must read this special report and share it with friends and family.

Wide-ranging points covered in this Newsmax Article:

• How Obama's policies could cost more than $850 billion over four years
• The dire repercussions of Obama's minimum wage proposal for small businesses and retail outlets
• Obama aides' private and very revealing admission about the candidate's economic savvy
• The surprising revelation when Barack's own tax returns were reviewed by an expert
• The "proof" that Obama will kowtow to organized labor
• Obama's Social Security plan: a giant income-redistribution scheme
• How Obama's policies could boost some tax rates to 60 percent
• Leading economist Arthur Laffer's warning on Obamanomics
• Obama's policies point by point on energy, healthcare, regulation, and the housing crisis
• Who would lose under Obama's tax proposals — and who would win
• How Barack "flunked" an easy question on capital gains
• The Democrat's contradictory statements on tax increases
• Why Obama's campaign against special interests would backfire
• Obama's plan to double America's foreign aid
• How Obama's trade policies would damage U.S. multinationals
• Obama's embarrassing denial regarding NAFTA
• The National Taxpayers Union's Obama rating: just 5 percent
• Obama's misguided views on technology's future
• How the Democrat would undermine private sector healthcare
• Obama's tactics — old left-wing populist ploys

Sen. Barack Obama’s “naïve” world view could embolden America’s enemies during one of the most dangerous periods for America since the 1930s, U.S. Sen. Joseph Lieberman told Newsmax in an exclusive television sit-down interview Tuesday. Lieberman, visiting Fort Lauderdale, Fla., also told Newsmax that he is so disappointed with the Democratic Party, he will consider whether to bolt the Democratic Senate caucus next session. [You can see the full video broadcast on Newsmax.tv — Go Here Now]. For completer article see:  Lieberman Calls Obama Naive