This time last year, two proud and powerful citizens of the world stood at the pinnacle of victory. Barack Obama was being inaugurated as President of the United States. Both on the campaign trail and in his inaugural address, Obama proclaimed the start of his “remaking America” revolution.
Soros, the instigator and funder of various “velvet revolutions” in smaller countries, seemed convinced that all he needed to bring the U.S. into submission to a global government, stripped of her sovereignty, was a “citizen of the world” president to replace the all-American president, George W. Bush. Soros has openly referred to the “bubble of American supremacy” and has berated our lone-superpower position as bringing much more harm than good to the “global family.”
Soros explained his early support of Obama, telling Judy Woodruff in May 2008, “…Obama has the charisma and the vision to radically reorient America in the world.” When Woodruff queried Soros on whether it might be a concern that Obama lacked experience to lead in this dangerous time we live in, Soros responded, “…this emphasis on experience is way overdone…”
While most voters now regret their willingness to let the experience factor go by the wayside in the last presidential election, Soros knew that the nearly complete inexperience of his own candidate would be his best friend.
Soros has brought about his “velvet revolutions” using not experienced political power-brokers, but by financing NGOs (non-governmental organizations). So, for Soros’ purpose of ushering in a global government with oligarchs like him in charge to replace American supremacy, Barack Obama’s campaign “charisma” was the vital ingredient. His lack of experience meant, also, that Obama would be forced to rely on the various socialist think tanks and NGOs that Soros has been funding and guiding for two decades now.
Over the past year, the Soros-Obama revolution has made some amazing progress. Obama’s blitzkrieg of “change” has required so much scrutiny to every tree that the big-picture of the forest has gone virtually unnoticed. Now that we’re one year in, it’s a good time to remind ourselves of the real objectives of this “remaking America” revolution.
Both Soros and his hand-picked president appear to share a worldview, which holds that the United States of America, especially her prosperity, in worrisome disdain. This view is nothing new, of course. It’s been promoted by international leftists for generations now. What is new, however, is having a man with such an anti-American world view (or post-American, as some have called it) as our own president. Soros fully intends to bring about a post-American world and if our own president is fully on board with that, we haven’t one chance in hell of stopping it unless we stand back and look at the big picture.
What are the basic ingredients necessary to accomplish Soros’ stated goal of destroying American supremacy?
1. Plunder American wealth through redistributive policies on a national and international scale. Solidify the power of mega-corporations under increasing federal control, so that the economy can be planned and wealth can be distributed “more fairly” to all (corporatism ).
2. Reduce America’s military might and shift our military’s purpose from national security to police actions in concert with international bodies, such as Interpol and U.N. peace-keeping forces. End G.W. Bush’s Global War on Terror and replace it with policies more palatable to the world community, i.e. close Gitmo and treat terrorists as common criminals, worthy of civilian trials with full rights of U.S. citizens.
Now, one would need to be living under a rock not to see the Soros “velvet revolution” at work in President Obama’s domestic and foreign policies. Though the power of Obama’s charisma has faded quickly, his policies continue to wreck not only our own economy, but also our standing in the world, among both allies and enemies alike.
The Domestic Picture
The Soros-Obama plans are running into, perhaps unanticipated, problems on the home front. President Obama remarked last week on the loss of his super-majority in congress, brought about by Scott Brown’s victory in Massachusetts, that his agenda had hit a “buzz saw.”
In fact, the Democrats have faced three resounding electoral defeats in the last year: Virginia, New Jersey and Massachusetts. Every political watcher in the country is now indicating that the presumed “realignment” of the 2006 and 2008 elections was both a premature and unfounded assessment of the American electorate. This year’s polling has shown that American conservatives outnumber liberals by 2 to 1 (40% to 20%) and that independents have moved to center-right, not center-left. Tea Parties, aimed at demonstrating American anger over increasing and irresponsible spending and federal overreach, have swept the country. And, shockingly, when polled on party allegiance recently, Americans gave the Tea Party stronger support than either of the two actual political parties.
Two legislative initiatives, which were early on seen as virtual slam-dunks, have hit huge headwinds and, to date, remain un-enacted:
The Cap and Trade bill passed by the house is seen now as dead. The still-sagging economy cannot bear its weight and all sentient congress members know this. Add in economic uncertainty, the Climategate revelations and the utter failure of Obama to secure any cooperation from India and China – the world’s two biggest polluters – and Cap and Trade, designed to further the global governance agenda, is a dead horse. Americans now rate global warming dead last in a long list of priorities.
The federal healthcare bill, which has consumed most of the time and energy of this administration and congress for the past year, is on life support. Attempts are still underway to shove this takeover of one-sixth of America’s economy down the throats of the people, but these plots still face grave difficulty. Essentially, it is nearly impossible under our system of government, with widely dispersed power, to enact such a huge redistribution program at a time of grave economic peril. Not only have citizens balked at the tremendous expense involved in universal healthcare initiatives, but also at the federal control over their lives, not to mention the back-room deals that were made to secure its passage.
Soros may have bitten off more than he can chew in attempting to bring down America. In other places, where his “velvet revolutions” have brought about desired regime change, he was working on the side of bringing more liberty to horribly repressed people. In America, he has faced the opposite challenge. Taking freedom away, in order to equalize America, has proved far more difficult than its opposite.
Also, unlike countries where his “velvet revolutions” have succeeded, money in America is far more widely dispersed and available to those with opposing interests. In formerly communist countries, Soros could come in disguised as the benevolent — and only — sugar daddy against a repressive regime. In America, there are far more options available to the people and far more various factions interested in America’s future.
The Soros-Obama “remaking America” agenda also got a huge blow last week from the Supreme Court. As Richard Poe and David Horowitz outlined in their book, Shadow Party, the fundamental control of the Democratic Party has shifted away from union, corporate and local political machines to a range of NGOs, largely funded by George Soros. Soros nearly single-handedly financed the lobbying efforts to pass McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform. In so doing, he was able to harness far greater political control for himself. Now that large portions of the law have been deemed unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, a fight will be necessary to salvage his leverage. President Obama has already signaled that this fight will be one of his own priorities.
President Obama is following perfectly the Soros Doctrines in his foreign policy. Much to the chagrin of our allies and to the delight of our enemies, the Soros Doctrines are proving not quite the light-of-the-world solutions many had hoped they would be.
In attempting to so openly court and appease our enemies, President Obama has become all but a laughingstock among them. Snidely snubbed by everyone from Putin and Medvedev to Kim Jong-Il to Ahmadinejad, he has weakened America’s standing in the world, but not to our benefit or the peace-loving world’s benefit. Appeasement, as all should know by now, merely emboldens evil men. It doesn’t mollify them.
French president, Sarkozy, has deemed Obama “weak.” Bowing to the Saudi king and then to the Japanese emperor did not help Obama’s image. Europeans have worries over Obama’s default on planned missile defense shields for Poland and the Czech Republic. Israel sees herself as singled out for ill-treatment, with no promising peace initiatives anywhere on the horizon. Iran steams full-speed ahead with nuclear development. The Chinese >openly harangue us on our economy, reminding us how much of our debt they are carrying.
Closing Gitmo has proved more difficult than imagined and represents another Obama failure. Obama’s decision to give the 9/11 planners a press-gala civilian trial to the tune of tens of millions of dollars in financially struggling New York may prove a bridge too far. Petitions against the terror trials are mounting and they are destined to be yet another headache for the floundering president. The Christmas day, citizen-foiled terror attack, as well as the Ft. Hood attack, have brought increased scrutiny to the president’s national security policies. None of these plans, part of the Soros Doctrines, are proving popular among those who pay the bills – American taxpayers.
Obama was caught in a trap of his own making when he ordained the Afghan War as the “good” and “necessary” war, drawing a strong distinction between that fight and “Bush’s War” in Iraq. With Bush’s War all but over, owing to the surge (strongly opposed by Obama), the Afghan War has steadily deteriorated. After dithering over General McCrystal’s request for a troop surge, Obama finally was forced by political reality at home and a perilous situation at large, to give his general most of the troops requested. But this past year has been the deadliest year of that war and Obama’s fortunes at home are now largely dependent on his success in his own “necessary war.”
All in all, the world – both enemy and ally alike – have not shaped up the way Soros or Obama would have wanted. Rather than being more stable and cooperative under the Soros Doctrines, than it was under the Bush Doctrines, the world shows greater and greater disdain for American leadership.
The state of the “remaking America” revolution would seem not all that well off. Nevertheless, those with megalomaniacal intentions rarely give up just because a little reality gets in the way.
As American pundits try to gauge which way the president will now turn, whether he will pragmatically move to the center to avoid electoral catastrophe for him and his party, or whether he will march on against populist headwinds, President Obama gave his answer to Diane Sawyer Monday night, saying, “”I’d rather be a really good one-term president than a mediocre two-term president.”
George Soros is nearly 80 years old. He has everything riding on Obama. If he is to get anywhere close to realizing his vision of a one-world government, then Obama must keep fighting for the revolution.
The president has just signaled his intention to do exactly that.