Obama Factor, Live From Berlin

Talk about misinterpretation by media, now even Fox is doing it.

Obama goes to one of his favorite places, Berlin. Ah, time to lecture the Europeans on politics. And to talk trash about American politics.

He talked about division but in a partisan way. He complained some people turn it into a circular firing squad, as the Democrat primary heats up and expands. So he warns of inter-party fighting,

Then media, like Fox, falls for the easy bait and says Obama is sounding moderate now. They jump at the chance to agree with him. What was the event? It was his Obama Foundation doing a Townhall at Brandenburg Gate. From the Foundation:

(Mission) “Obama join[s] hundreds of emerging European leaders for a town hall conversation to discuss the future of Europe and the importance of leadership in creating lasting change across the region.”

Well, nothing overtly political about that, is there? No doubt about what he is doing.

The statement he made about a circular firing squad:

“One of the things I do worry about sometimes among progressives in the United States and maybe it’s true here as well, is a certain kind of rigidity. Where we say “ah ha, I’m sorry, this is how it’s going to be” and then we start, sometimes, creating what’s called a circular firing squad where you start shooting at your allies, because one is straying from purity on the issues. And when that happens, typically the overall effort and movement weakens.

So I think whether you are speaking a s a citizen or as a, you know, political leader, or an organizer, whether you are in a non-profit space, a civic space, or you are in the political arena; you have to recognize that the way we’ve structured democracy requires you to take into account people that don’t agree with you. And that, by definition, means that you are not going to get 100% of what you want. But you should take some time to think in your own mind and continually refine and reflect “what are my core principles” because the danger is if you don’t know what your principles are that’s when you compromise your principles away.

So you have to know ahead of time “here’s what I am willing to compromise on and here are the things that I’m not.” You can’t set up a system in which you don’t compromise on anything, but you also can’t operate in a system where you compromise on everything – everything is up for grabs. That requires a certain amount of internal, ah, reflection and deliberation.”

The only thing is theory does not overcome reality for Obama. He never was that compromiser. He was always a rigid my way or the highway person. He told McCain, the election is over, “I won.” He did not compromise on Affordable Care Act. He repeatedly lied about what was in it. His advice is not for himself. He’s such a hypocrite and phony. They would only eat that up in Europe, where he could get away with it.

Don’t buy the crap sandwich though. Obama’s only fear is that infighting of Democrats could weaken the party. Wait, that is not moderate when you think about it.

But we’ve seen that movie before. In past primaries, Democrats made a friendly arrangement deal between candidates not to attack each other. That’s how they operate, under normal circumstances. And likely what will happen this time. Look, Obama being objective or wise is hogwash.

Actually if they can ever get a chance, they love to stoke infighting on the right. They even find candidates on the right to do it. Obama is just worrying out loud that the Democrats might hurt themselves. But hey, we saw that even Hillary and Bernie could not bring themselves to attack each other. Obama does not sound moderate, and that is not his position to moderate. He just doesn’t want any infighting to start. In other words. let the hard left run rabid. Kow-tow to it rather than buck the hard left. How about Chuck and Nancy on the wall? Their objective is not to compromise.

That is the same message he is giving them on quasi-political operations. In fact, the effect of what he says is meant to weaken the other side. He knows the loudest radical voices get the attention and action because they drown out others – by design. They don’t want any other voice heard. You don’t compromise if you are the only voice in the room. Still Obama is embarking on a global political structure, much like the Soros machine. The other thing he is really selling here is incrementalism. Start something, no matter how flawed, that your opponents cannot get out of and then just keep piling on it. (he calls it building)

It is disguised as sounding moderate. And he knows full well the dangerous momentum of the socialist left. He must be ecstatic. He knows if anyone must stop the criticism it would be moderates speaking against that far left. It’s those moderates that should be forced to bite their tongues and not make waves.

This word salad only gives the appearance of moderation, when it is the opposite. He doesn’t want Democrats to rise up against the commie left.

You only have to look at who Obama backs to see which side he is on. He loves “Beto,” Robert Francis. He’ll do nothing to get in Bernie’s way either. He’s down with all the commie crap. And look, he organized a coup against Trump, so don’t think he is not strategically aligned with the hard left. He said it there, he does not want a weakened party or movement. Now does that sound moderate?

So Fox can prance around all it wants trying to paint Obama’s remarks as a voice of moderation. But that doesn’t work. We know who he is and so does the left. They also misrepresented the intended message. Does the context not matter of who he is talking to? They are still playing down the threat Obama poses, well into the future. I thought that crazy mantra was debunked by now.

Right Ring | Bullright

Left’s dual rules: Cake Bakers eat your hearts out

So, we get it: the cake bakers are disturbing hateful bigots for not making cakes, but cleanse the campus coffee houses of conservatives. No tolerance whatsoever.

Constitution.com

“Members of the Fordham University College Republicans club were recently asked to leave an on-campus coffee shop because they were wearing ‘Make America Great Again’ hats.”

The left calls offensive things triggering which deserve banning. But a cake baker must be forced to bake them a beautiful cake against his will.

Evil Obama clowns’ radical rabid strategy

Time for a situational evaluation. Obama is not gone, Even as his legacy is shrinking into thin air, he trots around as if he were a king. He pops up everywhere conspicuously to undermine Trump’s agenda and administration. Along with his perpetual criticism — something he has experience at, criticizing and undermining sitting presidents.

Obama’s former advisers have morphed into trolls across social media — including Fiction Ben Rhodes — to preserve Obama’s disappearing agenda, desperately trying to lay credit to anything good happening now. So the Shadow Government of Obama is now fully operational. He denies the past and the one president policy. He has no real legacy, he must steal one, or create one from thin air. Enter fiction writer Ben Rhodes to the rescue.

As Bill Clinton said about Obama’s campaign: “this whole thing is the biggest fairy tale I’ve ever seen.” And it’s getting bigger every day. So many lies, so little time, so much to hide, so much to revise, so much to do — nipping at the heels of Trump.

The insults fly from everywhere at Trump, both personal and on his presidency. Something Obama never had. The opposition of the Resistance is in ful bloom, with the willing collaboration of media. The calls for impeachment have begun and they push the 25th amendment, something reserved for drastic circumstances. Another historic first.

But the left and Democrats’ desperation call for drastic measures. So they attach the word unpresidential to everything Trump does: his Twitter, his speeches, his choices, his actions. Everything Trump does is called dangerous. Obama weaponized government.

However, what is truly unpresidential and unprecedented is Obama. The lying chameleon is on the loose and fully engaged in undermining the 45th president of the United States. He is unpresidential at every level, like he always was. What he is doing is unprecedented. He went straight on the road, armed with his expense account and vacation stipend, to travel the world on his campaign to undermine the current president, Trump.

What one president policy? One president at a time policy. The attacks and politics should stop at waters’ edge. Remember all that? Gone like the wind. But Obama won’t leave the stage. On Trump’s first trip, he went wheels up for the Middle East and they rolled out the attacks. Incidentally, Obama’s specialty was always going overseas to attack America and his political opponents. None of that was strange because it was normal under Obama. Yet they shunned anyone criticizing Obama, or fighting back. Press refrained from being critical anytime, especially when Obama went abroad.

But now that offshore targeting is the new normal. Yet it is now unpatriotic and unpresidential and unprecedented for Trump to say anything to defend himself or even criticize the press offshore. Obama thrived on offshore attacks. Media celebrated them.

Obama is trolling Trump around the world on the public stage. He seems to think he is still president that what he says still matters. So he talks to world leaders after meetings with Trump. He tells them his policies, which apparently Trump should be obligated to pursue, are the only option. Who exactly does he think he is? He cares nothing about America and never did. He aids and abets our enemies seeking to undermine the current administration any way he can. He is invested in America’s demise, as much as Putin.

At the very same time, his apologists come out to defend his operational strategy by saying he is reluctant to get politically involved in current policies. No, he is not reluctant at all; he is more anxious now than he ever was to talk about N. Korea as a threat, or other problems he left in his wake. He wants to be very involved. Who can tell him to back off? He cannot give up the podium. He refuses to let the current president do his job. Then his network of hacks are busy in media and the public stage criticizing Trump, as if they care anything about America or Americans.

Maybe he has too much time on his hands simply because there are no current investigations or special counsels looking at what he did at every level? What we need is some form of accountability for it all. We really don’t need hearings, though, we need prosecutions. We need grand juries and indictments. We need hearings about stripping him of his privileges. We need these rat bastards to testify on what they’ve done.

 

Finally, we need to enforce the One President at a time Policy. Obama doesn’t seem to get it on his own. He always had problems about rules applying to himself. He always had to push the envelope of what he couldn’t do. So where is Congress to tell him?

Now on Trump’s 2nd trip abroad, to the G-20 summit, they stage one great question about, what else, Russia and the elections. So Trump is attacked for responding to the question. Media later conflated world “diplomacy” with the way he answered the hostile press. They are two separate things. He goes to the G-20 Summit and all press cares about is Russia and the last election. He gives an excellent speech in Polland mentioning Russia, but all they care about is Russia and the last election — “attack on our democracy.”

The press is attacking our democracy every day, denying the results of the people’s will, stomping down and mocking the people’s freedom of speech. Then they totally ignore the huge mess Obama left us. No honeymoon… they want to steal the election victory from Republicans. Just act as if it didn’t happen. Then they want to impeach him.

But that’s okay, because Obama is still busy flirting around having personal meetings with world leaders, present and former: Trudeau, Merkel, Moon, Macron, David Cameron, and Matteo Renzi in Milan before sliding into home-turf in Indonesia. Even NYT, libs paper of record, comfortably acknowledged, “One might be forgiven for thinking that Mr. Obama was trolling President Trump.” Why be forgiven for thinking it, that is what he is doing? Then they quickly added too that:

Mr. Obama has generally tried to stay above the political fray in his nascent post-presidency. But in these charged times, just breaking bread with a world leader can take on a political subtext. It is a tension his advisers recognize, and say they try to mitigate by holding get-togethers at Mr. Obama’s hotel and avoiding the trappings of leader-to-leader meetings.”

He’s really trying not to have these be platforms to weigh in on the issues of the day.” – NYT

So then why is Obama doing the meetings?

No, he is not refraining from leader to leader meetings. He is making a point to go talk to them. For Pete’s sake, he is obviously and intentionally trying desperately to undermine Trump’s presidency. He is the first Presidential Troll.

Just last year, Obama had a completely different view. Obama wasted no time after election, on 11/14, saying ““there is one president at a time.” Then in December, at Christmas, the White House chief liar and adviser, Ben Rhodes, reiterated:

“On the president-elect, the first thing I’d just say is that there’s one president at a time. President Obama is the president of the United States until Jan. 20, and we are taking this action, of course, as U.S. policy.” — Rhodes on Israel policy — Washington Examiner

I guess Obama now thinks having a “foundation” gives him license to operate with some presidential status he only wishes he had. But if they can pretend, certainly Obama can too. So everyone goes along with this persistent meddling of an unprecedented, Treasonous and historically unpresidential Obama. Then claim that he is refraining.

RightRing | Bullright

Nothing new to CNN and blackmail

Back on the day before Trump’s inauguration, CNN’s Jeff Zucker said, basically threatening Trump and his administration, that:

“One of the things I think this administration hasn’t figured out yet is that there’s only one television network that is seen in Beijing, Moscow, Seol, Tokyo, Pyongyang, Baghdad, Tehran, and Damascus – and that’s CNN.

The perception of Donald Trump in capitals around the world is shaped, in many ways, by CNN. Continuing to have an adversarial relationship with [us] that network is a mistake.

Do the translation of that. We hold your perception in our hands, act accordingly.
Our media monopoly = your ‘perception’ demise, should we decide so. From the network with 93% negative coverage of Trump. (that is not adversarial, it’s vendetta journalism)

Forward to today and one objectionable meme to CNN. They hunt down and solicit an apology and he removes content, and then CNN says:

“CNN is not publishing “HanA**holeSolo’s” name because he is a private citizen who has issued an extensive statement of apology, showed his remorse by saying he has taken down all his offending posts, and because he said he is not going to repeat this ugly behavior on social media again. In addition, he said his statement could serve as an example to others not to do the same.”

CNN reserves the right to publish his identity should any of that change.

Andrew the self-anointed speech cop for CNN claims no threat.
Now we are “misinterpreting” their statement. Nah, don’t think so.

Two “Becauses”, one “in addition” and one “reserves right should ANY of that change.” = no threat? (IOW: a veto right to our nondisclosure of your identity and whatever we like.)

Where is his “right” (speech) “reserved”? No, it is now conditional upon CNN’s approval.

Misinterpreted? Lots of “intent” there. Who made them speech judge, juror, executioner?

(But if it were a CNN anonymous source, ignore and reverse all the above.)

Open Borders and Closing Freedom

The new paradigm of the Left is much like the old one. The only thing that changes are the means. They call themselves progressives using many cute slogans like “lean forward”. Their speeches are laden with phrases like “we want to keep moving forward” or “we aren’t going backwards.” But the direction they go is to their same old ideas of the past.

The left is now into its regressive movement. That is to close the door on freedom while opening the borders to anarchy. Or open our borders to hate while cracking down on opposing speech by calling it hate speech. Dems don’t have problems with hate.

Just recently South Carolina Senator Tim Scott read a list of the comments he regularly receives from the left. They are filled with names like Uncle Tom, sellout to your race, traitor. All names and labels are fair to them. By design they are meant to hurt and inflict pain. Force and intimidation are two of their favorite weapons.

But what we don’t hear is anyone asking the Democrats to condemn the remarks. They obviously haven’t done so on their own. But these people are the Democrats’ base, and the very people who put them into office. Yet they cannot denounce their words. and no one actually expects them to.

If a Republican supporter said these they would demand condemnation immediately. Look what they did with any racist or KKK statements. Not so with the left, they are free to offend anyone, even rewarded for it. Elizabeth Warren rakes in big dollars for name calling and attacking. She organizes their hate-fest. And the hateathon’s dollars roll in. But our condemnation of that speech is out of line and must be stopped, however possible.

The modern regressive movement is about stomping down the threat of freedom everywhere, even in the womb when they can. Doing the latter under the guise of freedom of choice, or reproductive rights. Nipping freedom in its nurturing womb is an ultimate goal, ripping out its roots before it grows. Nip that seed of freedom in the bud.

But open borders? Now that is something that needs to be unrestricted. Judges decide if we have the grounds, or authority, to restrict non-citizens’ freedom to invade. Though our freedom is wilting on the vine, if left to liberals. The left has set the default position to ‘unrestricted’ and say we basically cannot do anything about it; even if it is a matter of national security against those who declared war on us. Speak nothing about that.

So, open the borders wide and slam the door shut on freedom.

RightRing | Bullright

Word police, DHS, Jeh Johnson and speech p/c

DHS report before Orlando massacre: Political correctness needed to fight Islamic terrorism

Washington Times

A report by the Homeland Security Advisory Council released days before the Islamic terror attack in Orlando, Florida, stressed the importance of combating extremism by avoiding terms that might offend Muslims. A HSAC subcommittee first created by DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson in 2015 published its report on June 9. Some instructions found in the report include:…

More

The Daily Caller reports:

The report urges DHS officials to “Reject religiously-charged terminology and problematic positioning by using plain meaning American English.”

For example, the report says the DHS should be “using American English instead of religious, legal and cultural terms like ‘jihad,’ ‘sharia,’ ‘takfir’ or ‘umma.’”

The report acknowledges that, “There is a disagreement among scholars, government officials, and activists about the right lexicon to use around the issues of violent extremism.”

Nevertheless, the report states, “Under no circumstance should we be using language that will alienate or be disrespectful of fellow Americans.”

“We must speak with honor and respect about all communities within the United States. We should give dignity to the many histories and diversities within our nation and advocate for a consistent whole of government approach that utilizes agreed terms and words. Tone and word choice matter,” the report states.

Read more

It says that they should not use words like Sharia, Jihad, Takfir and refrain from using religiously charged terms. But the President of Islam defense goes to the prayer breakfast and lectures about Crusades and criticizes Christians.

The report advocates using and promoting gender diversity to youth. But avoid those things and terms that may be charged or problematic toward Muslims or Islam. Though any opportunity they get to critiize Christians or speak ill of them is acceptable.

For instance when they promote abortion and same-sex marriage, those are not divisive, religiously charged or problematic terms. My disgust meter registered a new high. Talking derogatorily about and marginalizing Christians is acceptable. In fact, it is encouraged.

I bet that would have some effect on Radical Islamic Terrorism.

Romney to the RNC Rescue

Mitt Romney is apparently rolling out a sequel to his first two failed presidential bids.

Romney is the poster-child for what is wrong with the GOP and their thinking. So now Romney is giving a great national speech to remind us what a perpetual failed candidate really looks like. And he will remind us of the problem with RNC thinking and scheming.

He’ll remind us of all the problems and how elite arrogance really doesn’t sell, even to the RNC base. He’ll remind us that the elite don’t want us to pick or elect our leaders. Those choices must be done by the superior thinkers in the RNC, who if they don’t get their way, will fold up their tent in a Frankenstein heartbeat.

Romney wants to rescue the party from the people. Everything we despise about the GOP establishment is represented by Romney.

They told us we must accept their chosen candidates, that we must hold our nose, that we must support them when they are wrong. Ride to the rescue, Romney!

Obama honors sacrifices at Selma

Obama gave a speech at the 50th anniversary of Selma’s “Bloody Sunday” march. He quoted the phrase “We shall overcome”. Some of us wish we would overcome, him.

But what about the 57 million fetuses and babies struck down in abortion since 1973?
What about their sacrifices in America, paying with their lives, blood and treasure?

  • Deprived of Life liberty and pursuit of happiness
  • Deprived of due process.
  • Deprived of their inevitable right to vote.
  • Deprived of their rights of speech, religion, and assembly.
  • Deprived of the opportunity to make change, to the culture and perception.

Obama’s Selma speech was hailed as historic and a mile-marker of time, to recognize a cause: from racism to voter rights. Yet just days before, Benjamin Netanyahu gave an important joint session speech while Obama, Biden and many of their fellow travelers could not even attend. However, Obama rushed out to say that there was nothing new in it.

So his speech at Selma was nothing new that we didn’t already know. And political.

Obama will boldly take executive action for amnesty for illegals and he unilaterally, unconstitutionally rewrites law under the guise of helping victims. But he would never take any simple action to save the unborn. In fact, he offers Planned Parenthood more money. He is the biggest friend and ally of the nation’s largest abortion provider. He swears on the altar of a decision of Roe v Wade. Now 17.3 million black babies aborted since 1973.

On this great anniversary of Selma, and Dr King, he allies himself with the downtrodden and victims, preaching social change and rights. The purpose of government is to secure our inalienable rights — not the other way around.

A couple of the quotes from his speech were: (3 excerpts from the transcript)

-“We secure our rights and responsibilities through a system of self-government, of and by and for the people.”

-“That’s what America is. Not stock photos or airbrushed history or feeble attempts to define some of us as more American as others. We respect the past, but we don’t pine for it.”

-“Because Selma shows us that America is not the project of any one person.

Because the single most powerful word in our democracy is the word “We.” We The People. We Shall Overcome. Yes We Can. It is owned by no one. It belongs to everyone. Oh, what a glorious task we are given, to continually try to improve this great nation of ours.”

“We” is a powerful word, no doubt about it. But he co-opted that into a cheap campaign slogan of “yes we can” to propel his own political agenda. And he still extorts the people for his own political ends. He offers no consolation or concessions to those that disagree with his agenda. Then he closed by saying: (emphasis mine)

“We honor those who walked so we could run. We must run so our children soar. And we will not grow weary. For we believe in the power of an awesome God, and we believe in this country’s sacred promise.

May He bless those warriors of justice no longer with us, and bless the United States of America.”

We honor their sacrifices, do we? Does he honor the combined sacrificed blood of 57 million abortions? Well, only if honor means swimming in the blood of 57 million aborted babies, who were denied their right to life and due process, who weren’t even granted second-class human being status, but aborted. No amnesty or Executive action for them.

But this guy can rally people lecturing them to use their God-given rights, extorting the Selma anniversary for political purposes. Yet he just condemned Netanyahu for giving a national security speech for percieved “political” reasons calling it a distraction. Democrats poo-pooed it as political theatrics. The urgency of an emergent nuclear holocaust means as much to him as the human genocide of abortion right here in the USA. In fact, he defends the latter as a right. So how far will he go to appease Iran’s nuclear aspirations?

We shall overcome“… Oh Lord, I pray it be so!

Obama’s Declaration of Socialism

Obama mentioned the Declaration of Independence, but his inaugural speech was all about collectivism. The philosophy behind the Declaration is rooted in individual freedom. Obama has it exactly backwards.

The “rights” movement of the left has been transformed into redistribution and class warfare, combined with the welfare state. The real “social justice” they talk about is economic redistribution. His campaign didn’t even address individual “freedom” as he calls it — unless that is about killing babies — it was all about the collective. Collective being the sum total of the special interests he panders to.

Obama said:

1)What makes us exceptional – what makes us American – is our allegiance to an idea, articulated in a declaration made more than two centuries ago:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.”

Today we continue a never-ending journey, to bridge the meaning of those words with the realities of our time. For history tells us that while these truths may be self-evident, they have never been self-executing; that while freedom is a gift from God, it must be secured by His people here on Earth.

2)My fellow Americans, the oath I have sworn before you today, like the one recited by others who serve in this Capitol, was an oath to God and country, not party or faction – and we must faithfully execute that pledge during the duration of our service.

Not self-executing? Remember, “you didn’t build that… somebody else made it happen.”

Individualism is out the window, long gone in his politics of division and class warfare. It is the politics of materialism. Their “social justice” is really redistributive justice. I suppose he will finally admit that is what his “fairness” doctrine is all about in his second term, unchained from the voters.

As Goldwater said decades ago, the left is driven by materialism. Even the morality they speak of has an element of materialism. Don’t you find it ironic that Obama only mentioned the Constitution he swore to uphold in passing.(…that thing) He seems to think backwards. But just as MLK Jr. used the Declaration, Obama wraps his speech with it. Then again, imagine a Liberal like Obama giving a speech based on the Constitution?

He adds:

“The patriots of 1776 did not fight to replace the tyranny of a king with the privileges of a few or the rule of a mob. They gave to us a Republic, a government of, and by, and for the people, entrusting each generation to keep safe our founding creed.

But exactly what is Obama giving us? A mob and a king. A king backed by a mob, with an absent and complacent free press. It works for him… quite literally. And a king that sanctions and endorses mob rule – if it’s within the orthodoxy of central authority.

So we see, with Obama our fight is not just against his bucket list of policies, but against a philosophy, an ideology and a political movement behind it, driven from top. (campaign org turns lobby)

He frames it trying to disguise it, and then throws a straw man in to add credibility

But we have always understood that when times change, so must we; that fidelity to our founding principles requires new responses to new challenges; that preserving our individual freedoms ultimately requires collective action. For the American people can no more meet the demands of today’s world by acting alone than American soldiers could have met the forces of fascism or communism with muskets and militias. No single person can train all the math and science teachers we’ll need to equip our children for the future, or build the roads and networks and research labs that will bring new jobs and businesses to our shores. Now, more than ever, we must do these things together, as one nation, and one people.

“Demands of today’s world” — whatever all that is — compared with fascism or communism, good comparison. (sarcasm) Or better comparing technology, markets, goals, ideas and personal struggles compared with fascism. From the Socialist-in-chief himself. That should make anyone chuckle. (one of those struggles is against institutionalized ideology of the Left.) But it is different when its a foreign country or an outsider that is pursuing the philosophy. When its inside your own country from the top down it’s quite different. Did the Nazis extinguish Hitler or his policies? You know the answer.

In fact, it was just the opposite; they gleefully went along and approved. Sound familiar? Just because a charismatic type A person can make a good sounding case doesn’t mean it is the best idea. ObamaCare is a glaring example, and the stimulus would be another. When the smoke cleared it wasn’t as good, or popular as it sounded. We even had Pelosi telling us they had to pass it before we know what’s in it. They tried to do it on amnesty but were stopped.

Goldwater said:
“[One] cannot be economically free, or even efficient, if he is enslaved politically; conversely, man’s political freedom is illusory if he is dependent for his economic needs on the State.”

And that is precisely what Obama has in mind and endorses, political slavery — individually and collectively.

Much of the equality or fairness Obama speaks about is really egalitarianism of the economic kind, just dressed in a fancy “fairness” package. And the left suffers under its own false pretenses about  conservatism. It is not simply an economic theory. But that is basically what the lefts ideology ends up being, a doctrine of economic egalitarianism. Or collective materialism. With a few words about civil rights thrown in, which they think they can keep on creating to suit their politics.

The Left feels it is their exclusive job to equalize, or that is what their rhetoric suggests. Enforcing that fairness just happens to lead to more power and control for ruling class elites. It also tends to get expensive to purchase all the votes to keep all that “fairness” flowing.  Sounds like another one of his “investments”.

Note: please don’t give me the ‘definition of socialism’ lecture. Do the math with the modern left(post 60’s), the green movement, EPA dictates, green industry, and Kelo’s decision. Then connect all the dots. And remember even Hitler did not want to abolish “private property”, rather everyone should understand that they are an “agent of the state.” So spare the academic arguments.