White House and Democrats Urge More Money To Prevent More Urban Unrest

[From article]
I’ll give POTUS credit: He can lay it on thicker than a John Deere manure spreader.
Let’s talk “massive investments,” shall we?
In 2009, Obama and the Democrats rammed the $840 billion federal stimulus package through Capitol Hill under the guise of immediate job creation and economic recovery. An estimated $64 billion went to public school districts; another nearly $50 billion went for other education spending. This included $13 billion for low-income public school kids; $4.1 billion for Head Start and childcare services; $650 million for educational technology; $200 million for working college students; and $70 million for homeless children.



How’s that all working out? Last week, economists from the St. Louis Federal Reserve surveyed more than 6,700 education stimulus recipients and concluded that for every $1 million of stimulus grants to a district, a measly 1.5 jobs were created. “Moreover, all of this increase came in the form of nonteaching staff,” the report found, and the “jobs effect was also not statistically different from zero.”



[. . .]
In 2010, President Obama signed the so-called Edujobs bill into law — a $26 billion political wealth redistribution scheme paying back Big Labor for funding Democratic congressional campaigns. A year later, several were spending on the money to plug budget shortfalls instead of hiring teachers. Other recipients received billions despite having full educational payrolls and not knowing what to do with the big bucks.
[. . .]



The “social innovation” slush fund was intended to “create new knowledge about how to solve social challenges in the areas of economic opportunity, youth development and school support, and healthy futures, and to improve our nation’s problem-solving infrastructure in low-income communities.” The biggest beneficiaries? Obama’s progressive cronies.
Apparently, the richly funded “social innovators” haven’t reached the looter-prone neighborhoods of Baltimore yet. But it’s not ideologically bankrupt Obama’s fault. It’s ours.

http://michellemalkin.com/2015/04/28/debunking-obamas-bilious-baltimore-babble/

Debunking Obama’s bilious Baltimore babble
By Michelle Malkin
April 28, 2015 10:12 PM

Creators Syndicate

Obama Must Want Harvard University To "Spread Its Wealth"

[From article]
The president undoubtedly Tweeted Harvard’s Dean of Donations this week to remind him that “at a certain point you’ve made enough money,” and that, while he doesn’t want to punish Harvard’s success, “when you spread the wealth around it’s good for everybody.”
[. . .]
It was, after all, a $37.5 billion record year for giving to America’s 4,800 colleges and universities, but $6.75 billion of that went to just 10 schools. In other words, the top two-tenths of one percent got 18 percent of the money.
You may ask why Barack Obama, of all of the Harvard grads, should be the one to alert the guardians of this Ivy League bastion to their opportunity to address historical inequality?
As a millionaire, living in a palace, with servants meeting his every need, security watching his every step, becking and calling limousines and luxury aircraft, vacationing in posh resorts, and golfing his days away — Barack Obama clearly has the prestige, and the leisure time, to petition the captains of Cambridge, Mass., to redress this lingering injustice.
However, you may contend, the donors to Harvard did not intend their wealth to be spread around so liberally.
Yes, but what is Harvard, if not an educational institution? Should that education stop after a few years of undergraduate work, a master’s or a doctorate? No, I say, let the learning continue for a lifetime, as Harvard teaches its wealthy capitalist alumni the vanity of greed and the surpassing value of selfless giving.
May Obama’s elite friends in academia experience the full blessing of his legacy of leveling.
http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2015/01/28/obama-calls-on-harvard-alma-mater-to-spread-around-1-5-billion-in-2014-donations-it-received/

Obama Calls On Harvard Alma Mater to ‘Spread Around’ $1.5 Billion in 2014 Donations It Received
January 28, 2015 - 7:59 am
Scott Ott

Former Justice Department Attorney, Now Labor Secretary, Advocates Sharing Wealth

Tom Perez, Obama Acolyte

The man who refused to enforce civil rights laws in a race neutral manner (see, J. Christian Adams, Injustice, and John Fund and Hans van Spakovksy's Who's Counting?) when he was chief of the Civil Rights division of the Department of Justice now advocates stealing from wealthy people and giving it to poor people? How long will that last?

[From article]
Labor Secretary Thomas Perez said President Barack Obama will take "aggressive executive action" on immigration, which Perez said will bring about more "shared prosperity."
[. . .]
Silicon Valley companies like Microsoft are laying off thousands of American workers, even as they clamor for more guest-worker permits for cheaper foreign labor. Though numerous scholars and studies have found that America has a surplus of high-tech workers, Obama suggested in Southern California recently that he is considering granting more guest-worker visas to high-tech companies via executive action. Perez spoke about the importance of giving more opportunities to enter the middle class, but he did not address Professor Ron Hira's concerns that massively increasing guest-worker permits for high-tech workers would "cut off" entry into the middle class for people from working-class backgrounds.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/10/23/Labor-Secretary-Obama-Will-Take-Aggressive-Exec-Action-on-Immigration-for-Shared-Prosperity/

LABOR SECRETARY: OBAMA WILL TAKE 'AGGRESSIVE EXEC ACTION' ON IMMIGRATION FOR 'SHARED PROSPERITY'
by TONY LEE 23 Oct 2014

Health Care Law's Damages Just Beginning

[From article]
As long as we remain confused, we need a guide to help us through the maze. Please note that the guides -- call them bureaucrats, administrators, Navigators, or in-person assisters -- work for the same people who created the smoke, set up the mirrors, obfuscated the straightforward, and wrote a law even they don't understand, that has a 10,000+ page rule book.
[. . .]
As ObamaCare shifts hundreds of billions of dollars from doctors to bureaucrats, there will be fewer providers of healthcare. UnitedHealth is already laying off thousands of physicians, citing "substantial funding pressure from the federal government" [ObamaCare]. Further, more and more doctors cannot afford to accept government insured patients or are simply retiring, as I did. Even if you have insurance, care will be less available and take longer to acquire.
[. . .]
president started the entire reform snowball stating (correctly) that we are spending too much as a country on healthcare.
His solution to this problem is to spend an additional $1.3-2.7 trillion dollars, adding this insane amount to the federal deficit. I have seen no proof from anyone, even the most ardent ObamaCare supporters, to show how spending more will spend less. And of course, we are spending this money to pay for additional bureaucracy, not for additional health care. What value are we getting for these trillions?

http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/12/all_too_soon_obamacare_will_give_us_standing.html

December 7, 2013
All too soon, ObamaCare will give us 'Standing'
By Deane Waldman

Redistributing Wealth A Form of Slavery

[From article]
What the positive rights tyrants want but won't articulate is the power to forcibly use one person to serve the purposes of another. After all, if one person does not have the money to purchase food, housing or medicine and if Congress provides the money, where does it get the money? It takes it from some other American, forcibly using that person to serve the purposes of another. Such a practice differs only in degree, but not kind, from slavery.

http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/williamns112713.php3#.UpeUF900i6Y

Jewish World Review
Nov. 27, 2013/ 24 Kislev, 5774
Masking Totalitarianism
By Walter Williams

Classroom Economics

An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never failed a single student before, but had recently failed an entire class. That class had insisted that Obama's socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer.

The professor then said, "OK, we will have an experiment in this class on Obama's plan". All grades will be averaged and everyone will receive the same grade so no one will fail and no one will receive an A.... (substituting grades for dollars - something closer to home and more readily understood by all).

After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy. As the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too so they studied little.

The second test average was a D! No one was happy.
When the 3rd test rolled around, the average was an F.

As the tests proceeded, the scores never increased as bickering, blame and name-calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else.

To their great surprise, ALL FAILED and the professor told them that socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great, but when government takes all the reward away, no one will try or want to succeed.
It could not be any simpler than that. (Please pass this on)
Remember, there IS a test coming up. The 2012 elections.
These are possibly the 5 best sentences you'll ever read and all applicable to this experiment:

1. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity.

2. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.

3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.

4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it!

5. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that is the beginning of the end of any nation.

Socialism and Equal Outcomes for Unequal Effort

[This pattern is true in another context. It involves working for the police, and the government. They punish people who help them and reward criminals. This same pattern extends to the FBI. I know this from personal experience and from a memoir by Robert Peroff, called "Peroff." After doing the government a favor, US agents destroyed his life. On the other side of the coin, a Massachusetts hit man who admitted to 19 homicides spent about 7 months for each murder in prison. When he was released the US Department of Justice gave him $20,000.]

This teacher is truly a genius!

The late Adrian Rogers said, "you cannot multiply wealth by dividing it."

This man is truly a genius!

An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never failed a single student before, but had once failed an entire class. That class had insisted that Obama's socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer.

The professor then said, "OK, we will have an experiment in this class on Obama's plan".
All grades would be averaged and everyone would receive the same grade so no one would fail and no one would receive an A...

After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy. As the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too so they studied little.

The second test average was a D! No one was happy.

When the 3rd test rolled around, the average was an F.

As the tests proceeded, the scores never increased as bickering, blame and name-calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else.

All failed, to their great surprise, and the professor told them that socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great but when government takes all the reward away, no one will try or want to succeed.

Could not be any simpler than that.

Spreading the Golf Wealth


This is a matter for the White House. It is about spreading the wealth, a Presidential priority issue. A billionaire Fat Cat athlete is exploiting a lonely immigrant. If Harvard Lawyer Review President, and Nobel Prize winner Obama can interfere in the most famous disorderly conduct arrest in the history of the world in Cambridge MA, he can surely speak out about an automobile accident with a personal injury and property damage. If he can speak out regarding the election of the New York State Governor, he can speak out about impaired driving. Help us solve this golfing scandal, Mr President.

http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2009/12/9/tiger-woods-public-golf/

Tiger Trap
Woods’s recent scandal demonstrates the flip side of life in the public eye
By Marcel E. Moran,
HARVARD CRIMSON STAFF WRITER
Published: Wednesday, December 09, 2009

How Obama Spreads the Wealth

How Obama Spreads the Wealth

“Since Obama launched his campaign at the beginning of 2007, he has raised more than $600 million, which almost doubles the previous record set by President Bush in 2004.”

Obama says he wants to spread the wealth. Is this what he means? Using other people’s money to pay TV stations to broadcast his image?

Roy Bercaw, Editor ENOUGH ROOM

http://www.slate.com/id/2202637?wpisrc=newsletter

Mad Money
By Daniel Politi
Slate.com
Posted Monday, Oct. 20, 2008, at 6:20 AM ET