ObamaHood.org

The catalyst for our Industrial Revolution began with coal mining in Pennsylvania. Even today coal plays an integral part in our means of energy production. The keystone states’ economy is considerably dependent on the coal industry. If you do not think a President Barrack Obama would be a threat to your pockets and living, you are sadly mistaken.

“Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket. Even regardless of what I say about whether coal is good or bad. Because I’m capping greenhouse gases, coal power plants, you know, natural gas, you name it — whatever the plants were, whatever the industry was, uh, they would have to retrofit their operations. That will cost money. They will pass that money on to consumers.”

Full Transcript

“The problem is not technical, uh, and the problem is not mastery of the legislative intricacies of Washington. The problem is, uh, can you get the American people to say, “This is really important,” and force their representatives to do the right thing? That requires mobilizing a citizenry. That requires them understanding what is at stake. Uh, and climate change is a great example.

You know, when I was asked earlier about the issue of coal, uh, you know — ) Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket. Even regardless of what I say about whether coal is good or bad. Because I’m capping greenhouse gases, coal power plants, you know, natural gas, you name it — whatever the plants were, whatever the industry was, uh, they would have to retrofit their operations. That will cost money. They will pass that money on to consumers.

They — you — you can already see what the arguments will be during the general election. People will say, “Ah, Obama and Al Gore, these folks, they’re going to destroy the economy, this is going to cost us eight trillion dollars,” or whatever their number is. Um, if you can’t persuade the American people that yes, there is going to be some increase in electricity rates on the front end, but that over the long term, because of combinations of more efficient energy usage, changing lightbulbs and more efficient appliance, but also technology improving how we can produce clean energy, the economy would benefit.

If we can’t make that argument persuasively enough, you — you, uh, can be Lyndon Johnson, you can be the master of Washington. You’re not going to get that done.”

If Senator Obama can foresee skyrocketing energy costs being passed onto the American consumer due to his cap and trade plan, why can’t he foresee the damage his tax plan will do to the American economy? His tax plan instantly increases the tax burden on corporations and small businesses. No amount of money he can redistribute will be able to offset the rising costs of goods and services that will be passed on to the American consumer. This is basic economics. Corporations do not pay taxes! They are passed on to the consumer. To take all this free capital and funnel it through an even greater Washington bureaucracy would prove catastrophic to this economy!

How about Biden’s Stance on Clean Coal:

From Fox:

In the coal country of Castlewood, VA on Saturday, Biden said that instead of John McCain’s tax breaks for oil companies, the United States should be investing billions in clean coal technology. “We have enough coal to meet our needs domestically for the better part of the next 100 200 years,” Biden said. “That can free us from being dependent on foreign oil countries and at the same time not ruin the environment.”

But on the rope line after an event in Maumee, OH last week, Biden told an environmental activist who questioned why coal is necessary given clean, effective alternatives like wind and solar, “we’re not supporting clean coal.”

NEWT GINGRICH ON OBAMA/BIDEN

“The most comical example was Biden’s claim that we could go with him to Katie’s restaurant to learn about the problems of the middle class. Barely any attention was given to the fact that Katie’s restaurant closed in 1986. No elite reporter asked whether Biden had not learned about the middle class since 1986 or whether he is simply out of touch with reality.”

Possible Cabinet member under an Obama presidency, New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson, lowers the middle class income level once again to $120,000.  Less than half of the original promise of $250,000.

$120,000 MIDDLE CLASS
 

Debunking Obama’s 30 Minute Primetime Infomercial Special. We at Obamahood.org are committed to exposing the lies and propaganda displayed in the special. For a complete analysis and break down read below:

How Do You Give a Tax Cut to Non-Income Taxpayers?

Myth: “As president, here’s what I’ll do. Cut taxes for every working family making less than $200,000 a year. Give businesses a tax credit for every new employee that they hire right here in the US over the next two years, and eliminate tax breaks for companies that ship jobs overseas.”

Fact: According to IRS data, 33% of families don’t even have an income tax liability, so it’s impossible to cut their income taxes. Also, Obama’s summary conveniently leaves out the fact that he would bring the small business tax rate to over 50 percent and would hike the capital gains and dividends tax at a time of market turmoil. His plan is a massive tax hike.

Obama to U.S. Companies: Don’t Let the Door Hit You on the Way Out

Myth: (Ted Strickland speaking): “Think of this. Barack Obama is going to be a Democrat in the presidency who actually cuts taxes. But he’s gonna cut taxes for the people who really need a tax cut. He’s gonna cut taxes for the struggling families. And he’s gonna do that while holding accountable those companies that take advantage of tax breaks in order to send jobs offshore and to other countries.”

Fact: Obama will raise taxes by over $1 trillion by hiking the small business tax rates, the Social Security tax rate, and the nest egg tax rates on capital gains and dividends. Also, the reason companies move overseas is because our taxes are already too high. How does raising their taxes do anything but make this problem worse?

“Rocket Fuel” for Small Businesses?

Myth: (Gov. Tim Kaine) “Barack has looked at the small business side of the American economy and says ‘Look, that’s where most innovation and entrepreneurship is. Let’s give them the rocket fuel to really accelerate rather than giving tax cuts to the ExxonMobils or the big oil companies that need not one ounce of help from the government to be very successful.’”

Fact: Under Obama’s tax hike, the tax rate on two-thirds of small business profits will exceed 50 percent for the first time since Jimmy Carter. If that’s rocket fuel, the U.S. economy won’t ever get off the launch pad. Also, raising taxes on energy companies won’t do anything except make energy more expensive for consumers.

Barack Obama, Spending Cutter?

Myth: “I’ve offered spending cuts above and beyond their cost”

Fact: We can’t say it any better than the AP: “Obama’s assertion that “I’ve offered spending cuts above and beyond” the expense of his promises is accepted only by his partisans. His vow to save money by ‘eliminating programs that don’t work’ masks his failure throughout the campaign to specify what those programs are — beyond the withdrawal of troops from Iraq.”

Small Businesses and Savers Should Be Worried About Obama

Myth: “So I’m not worried about CEO’s, I’m not worried about corporate lobbyists, I’m not worried about the drug companies or the oil companies or the insurance companies — they’ll be fine, they’re going to look out for themselves. I’m worried about the couple that’s trying to figure out how they’re going to retire. I’m worried about the family that’s trying to figure out how they can save for their child’s college education. I’m worried about the single mom that doesn’t have health insurance. I’m worried about the guy who has worked in a plant for 20 years and suddenly sees his job shipped overseas. That’s who I’m worried about. That’s who I’m going to be fighting for and thinking about every single day that I’m in the White House.”

Fact: If he’s worried about the couple about to retire, Obama should be asking himself why he wants to tank their 401(k) nest egg by raising capital gains and dividends taxes. If he’s worried about the parents saving for college or struggling to afford health insurance, he should ask himself if raising their small business employer’s tax rate to over 50 percent is a good idea. If he’s worried about the longtime employee’s job getting shipped overseas, he should ask if the fact that America has the second-highest corporate income tax rate in the world has anything to do with that.

SOURCE Americans for Tax Reform

From AmericanMissive.com

As you can see, as Mr. Obama’s polling numbers move in an inverse relationship to the Dow.

But the question remains: is Mr. Obama rising in popularity because the market is falling and people perceive he can save us?  Or is the market falling because Mr. Obama is rising in popularity and people perceive he will hurt us?

Click here to read the full Article

With less than a week left to go ObamaHood.org is picking up huge momentum by gaining the media attention needed to expose Barack Obama’s Socialist Agenda. The Barack Obama Robin Hood mentality must be stopped.

WABC Audio for Quicktime Users

Just in time for the General election ObamaHood.org has distributed 1000 ObamaHood.org Stickers in the key swing state of Pennsylvania. The reaction was tremendous. We distributed them earlier in the week at McCain rallies in Eastern Penn.

Three Most Talked about Sections are bellow and you can access the Full Transcript by clicking here:

(I have corrected the spelling errors and inserted punctuation where needed. ObamaHood.org is only site at this point with the full transcript thats readable. I have not taken anything out of the transcript.)

OBAMA

39:45 And it essentially has never happened. I mean if you look at the victories and failures of the civil rights movement 39:48 and its litigation strategy and the court I think where it succeeded was to vest formal rights in previously dispossessed peoples so that I would not have the right to vote.. Would now be able to sit at lunch counter and as long as I could pay for it ..would be ok.

40:10 But the supreme court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth and sort of basic issues of political and economic justice in this society and to that extent as radical as people try to characterize the warren court it wasn’t that radical 40:30 It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the constituion. At least as it has been interpreted and the Warren Court interpreted it generally in the same way that the constitution is a document of negative liberties 40:43 Says what the states can’t do to you. Says what the federal govt cant do to you, but it doesn’t say what the federal govt or state govt must do on your behalf and that hasn’t shifted and I think one of the tragedies of the civil rights movement was that 41:01 the civil rights movement became so court focused. I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and organizing activities 41:12 on the ground that are able to bring about the coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributive change.. 41:20 and in some ways we still suffer from that.

Caller (Karen): 46:07 The gentlemen made the point that the warren court wasn’t terribly radical with economic changes my question is: Is it to late for that kind of reparative work and is that the appropriate place for reparative economic work to take place?

Q: You mean the court

Caller: The court or would it be legislation at this point?

OBAMA

46:27 You know maybe I am showing my bias here as a legislator. As well as a law professor, but you know I am not optimistic about bringing about major REDISTRIBUTIVE CHANGE through the courts. 46:43 You know the institution just isn’t structured that way. Just look at very rare examples where during he desegregation era the court was willing to, for example, 46:55 order you know changes that cost money 46:59 to local school district and the court was very uncomfortable with it. It was hard to manage. 47:04 It was hard to figure out. You start getting into all sorts of separation of powers issues. 47:09 You know in terms of the court monitoring or engaging in a process that is essentially is administrative and take a lot of time. The court is not very good at it and politically it is hard to legitimize opinions from the court in that regard. 47:27 So I think that although you can craft theoretical justifications for it legally you know I think any three of us sitting here could come up with a rationale for bringing about economic change through the courts. 47:45 I think that as a practical matter.. that our institutions are just poorly equipped to do it.

Click Here to Read the Full Transcript