Friday, October 11, 2013

NEVER LET A CRISIS GO TO WASTE: I Can Assure You That Obama Wants the U.S. to Default

From Doug Ross:

Updated 10/10/2013 20:19: Obama is intransigent. He will not negotiate on spending, on the debt ceiling, on Obamacare, on anything.


Twitter message from the New York Times:

Breaking News: Obama Rejects Republican Proposal for Short-Term Debt Limit Plan
"You never want a serious crisis go to waste." --White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, February 9, 2009
I've heard no commentator ask the following question: What if President Obama wants a default?

This is, after all, a man whose starting negotiating position is that he "will not negotiate" with Congress on spending to raise the debt ceiling. This is a position unprecedented in American history since only Congress is granted the "power of the purse".

This is a man willing to use the instrumentalities of government to punish innocent Americans.

This is a man willing to torture World War II veterans, many of whom are terminally ill and trying to see their memorial for the first and last time.

This is a man spreading panic and fear about the debt ceiling, an utterly irresponsible, reprehensible and unprecedented step by a president.

Here are the facts:

There is virtually no chance of a default, unless Obama orders a default

In fact, Dean Clancy has done an exceptional job dissecting Obama's fear-mongering over the debt ceiling.

There is virtually no chance of a default, unless Obama orders a default.

...Mr. Obama is misleading the public by suggesting the question is whether to pay our bills. Of course we will pay our bills. No one is saying we shouldn't. The question is whether to raise the debt ceiling without also putting in place reforms to make future borrowing less necessary. Mr. Obama's resistance to such reforms makes him, not fiscal conservatives, the one holding the absurd position...
...As the chart above shows, if we hit the debt ceiling, we will still have more than enough tax revenue coming in to pay the most economically and politically sensitive obligations...

...In talking about "not paying our bills," Mr. Obama is hinting -- without openly saying -- that the US Government might fail to pay its creditors. This is highly irresponsible. He knows very well that, in the event we hit the debt ceiling, the US will continue to be able to pay all holders of US bonds (principal as well as interest). Even so deep-dyed a left-winger as Mr. Obama would never dare to miss a payment to bondholders. If he did, Uncle Sam's credit rating would almost certainly take an immediate hit, driving up interest rates and rattling world markets. In failing to make all this clear, the President allows those who are less knowledgeable to mistakenly assume that a debt default is a realistic possibility. It's not.

True, Dean, under normal circumstances, a default is not a realistic possibility.

But these are not, by any stretch, normal circumstances.

The Cloward-Piven Strategy of Manufactured Crisis

Author James Simpson has probably done the most comprehensive work in documenting "The Cloward-Piven Strategy of Manufactured Crisis". His seminal article, written before Obama's 2008 election, predicted what the community organizer had in mind for America. The strategy, first articulated by two Columbia professors -- who taught there during Obama's years as a student -- describes crushing capitalism by overwhelming it through massive expansion of the welfare state.

The "Cloward-Piven Strategy" seeks to hasten the fall of capitalism by overloading the government bureaucracy with a flood of impossible demands, thus pushing society into crisis and economic collapse...

...Cloward and Piven were inspired by radical organizer [and Hillary Clinton mentor] Saul Alinsky...

...Their strategy to create political, financial, and social chaos that would result in revolution blended Alinsky concepts with their more aggressive efforts at bringing about a change in U.S. government. To achieve their revolutionary change, Cloward and Piven sought to use a cadre of aggressive organizers assisted by friendly news media to force a re-distribution of the nation's wealth...

Are Obama's refusal to negotiate, his threats of economic collapse, and his incessant agitating all intended to set the stage for a default?

As a lever to achieve his oft-stated goal of "fundamental transformation"?

I leave that answer as an exercise for the reader.


"We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded." --Senator Barack Obama, July 2, 2008

5 comments:

Unknown said...

You're 'awake' Pasto. :)


Epaminondas said...

The default is a by product, a side effect.

The strategic target is the destruction of the republican (or any successor) party as an effective political force.

FUNDAMENTAL TRANSFORMATION

By doing this there is no armed revolution, and any violence might be that they can connect to '2nd amendment extremists' and hate groups. The constant dialectic of the democratic party leadership is an unrelenting stream of public warping perception and it is NOT RESISTED.

Cloward Piven is a blunt and outmoded example. In fact we don't have the political will to deal with the actual problems leading to economic collapse. Therefore if Cloward Piven is the goal all that has to be done is NOTHING. But that risks REAL action by groups who would be justified in armed resistance to the goals of those using such crude methods.

This way the public is an ally against that BARE minority which finds disgust with the direction of the nation, and those who can be pressured to be silent, and sit on the sidelines, will do so.

We will VOTE AWAY our Constitution and it will die of atrophy and disregard.

The republican representation will shrink (IRS ANYONE?) by all means of pressure on the VOTE, SCOTUS will change over time, and the executive will be a prize among the left until even the Joe Manchin's retire in disgust.

And there will be no Cloward Piven

Pastorius said...

That's an interesting theory.

Maybe you should write a response post detailing the whole idea.

I've never seen that theory proposed before. But now that I've heard it, I think it makes even more sense than this one, which is the one I've ascribed to for about six months now.

Pastorius said...

For the record, I do remember you writing "it's all political."

But I did not really understand what you meant.

This comment makes it clear.

Your theory is that he is not using Cloward-Piven, he is attempting to "fundamentally change" the US by turning it into a one-party system.

Epaminondas said...

'By George, he's got it'