During the last few weeks, America’s attention has been split between the Olympics and the back  and forth war of the SuperPACs. Now, realizing that a large part of the population won’t start bringing politics onto their personal radars until after the conventions, many things go unnoticed, especially with a completely complicit Lame Stream Media. However, many things still are able to part the curtain, thus exposing the man working the controls behind the scenes.

Yesterday, during a campaign speech in Detroit, the Obama agenda was exposed for all to see. He began speaking about the bail-out of the auto industry to the crowd. He held General (Government) Motors as a shining example of how well the bail-out worked for everyone. Then, Obama went on to say that, since the government take-over of the auto industry went so well, he wanted to do the same for the rest of the manufacturing industries.

First, the take-over did so well? In 2009, the Big Three, GM, Chrysler and Ford, there in bad shape. They were hurting. Sales were down and the whole industry was said to be in jeopardy of going bankrupt. The Obama administration offered a bail-out and General Motors and Chrysler accepted the taxpayer money to avoid bankruptcy. Ford, to their credit, declined to participate. Once General (now Government) Motors and Chrysler succumbed to the take-over, the Obama administration rammed the two companies through bankruptcy anyway. Government Motors was broken up and sold separately to other countries. Chrysler was finally sold off to Fiat, at around a $35 billion dollar loss. As of June, Fiat owns 61.9% of Chrysler. Government Motors, Obama’s shining example, still owes the American taxpayer around $25 billion dollars. So, I question whether this is a victory at all. Ford went on to increase its sales, mainly because the American people rallied around a company that went on without our tax money.

Now, on to my main concern regarding Obama’s statement, his proposed nationalization of industry in America. I think this is another example where his agenda is revealed. He is so anti-capitalism, in order to further control the economy, he wants to take over manufacturing. With government control of industry, corporations would not be able to complain about America having the highest corporate tax rate. Under government control, companies wouldn’t be able to move out of the country to find more lenient tax rates. Under government control, Obama could demand hiring of more people, with no regard to whether the business makes a profit or not. In fact, under government control, why would anybody expect a company to make money? How efficient is any government-run entity, such as the United States Postal Service or Amtrak?

Nationalization is usually the second thing to happen in a Socialistic environment. The first, of course, is the media and the government already controls the Lame Stream Media. The Socialists took over the companies in Russia. The Socialists took over companies in Cuba. The main word associated with socialism is control. Without central control, there can be no socialism. Nationalization of industry, under Obama, would destroy the economy. It has been forecast that China’s economy would become the number 1 in 2018. Just this year alone, China has increased its manufacturing base by 18% and grown its economy by $2 trillion. Government take-over of American manufacturing would only hasten Chinese prominence.