Soros's CAP gives Obama his marching orders to subvert the will of the people Ed Lasky November 17, 2010 George Soros funds the Center for American Progress, which has been characterized as Barack Obama's Ideas Factory. John Podesta, its head, led the transition team when Barack Obama became President. The Center has also become a hiring hall for the Obama team, filling its positions with former employees (among these was controversial Van Jones -- who now is back at the Center). Apparently, George Soros and his Center are upset that the American people placed a roadblock in their plans when we rose up and painted the nation red. The Center now is providing a blueprint of ways Barack Obama can do an end run around the people's will by resorting to methods that will strike many of us as being improper-to say the least. Relying on executive orders, interpretation of regulations, rule -making and the like they are collectively a recipe for even more power being assumed by President Obama. From Tuesday's Politico Playbook: The New York Times fleshes out these proposals with some suggestions about policy changes across the board. The ideology of George Soros shines through the Center's report as it justifies this forceful approach to circumvent Congress when it states that: In other words, when Congress passed a variety of laws Americans became dismayed by the horse-trading and bribes that were resorted to by Democrats to impose these policies on us. Instead of compromise and listening to the American people, Soros counsels that more forceful measures should be used to override the will of the American people. And this is the man the Democratic Party has as their sugar daddy and who various Democratic leaders over the years have defended and praised (for example, as shown by this letter from 11 Democratic lawmakers). He is certainly a dictatorial daddy.
Let's assume he's dictatorial for a moment. That's good, right? I mean, the founders never intended for us to be a "runaway" democracy anyway, where everyone had a say... no, we're really a constitutional republic, where just a few should get a say. In other words, the elite, who get to "create" the constitution, via their legislation, know best, right? Furthermore, since there is no better indicator of virtue than success in business, big business, than big money, it is right and proper that those with big money be that legislative elite.
âA democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largess from the public treasury. From that time on the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.â â Alexander Fraser Tytler, 18th century Historian and Jurist
Makes sense. I know I don't need to tell you this, but... have money! During a crisis those who do, on average, fare better than those who do not.
Therein lies the rub, neither side legitimately wants to make spending cuts, they simply want to grandstand and piss off the littlest number of voters possible. This is why we are destined for total collapse. The debt comission came out with a somewhat decent set of rules which would cut the deficit to zero by 2015, but the problem is none of these cowards want to vote for it cause they dont want to piss off a certain portion of their voter base. We need a guy like Chris Christie to become president who doesnt give a shit about what people think and just does what is right. And the funny thing is he is very popular even with the spending cuts. The problem is that all of these politicians are gutless losers, and they assume that people will not jump on board if they make drastic cuts to spending.