Jan 30, 2010

Taxation without Representation: TODAY

History is largely the story of men's constant efforts to get the wealth produced by other men, with politics and the state as the main means of acquisition. It's amazing that this ever-present dimension has been so slighted in most history books. Men have fought for power for many reasons, but the strongest has always been their own enrichment. It's hardly too much to say that the story of taxation is the story of mankind.

"Look at the law, and see if it does for one man at the expense of another what it would be a crime for the one to do to the other himself." Wow, think about this statement for a minute or longer until it sinks in.

The government, beyond the strictest limits of justice, becomes "organized plunder," a device by which "everyone seeks to enrich some at the expense of everyone else." Today, Obama and progressives want to take from the rich that have produced so they can redistribute it to those who don't produce. In other words, government itself tends to become the very evil it is supposed to prevent: crime. Government sets the rates, exempts certain people, gives entitlements, creates the intities to spend the tax dollars on and today, it spends the tax revenues of future generations. But it confuses people because it enacts criminal acts under the forms of law. I say, 'To get something you never had, you have to do something you never did." So,....
How much is enough? What is the limit? At what point, short of taking 100 per cent of our earnings, do our rulers feel they are taking too much from us?

The obvious answer is that they recognize no limit. The subject never comes up. They view the taxpayer as an inexhaustible resource. As long as people work and have more babies, immigration (legal or otherwise) brings in more workers to tax, people seek to have food, clothing and real property and now, wish to live healthy...then the Gov has a way to impose and create spendable tax revenues to spend.

And why shouldn't they? The sad fact is that the American taxpayer is a remarkably passive creature. He merely grumbles at conditions far more oppressive than the tyranny that drove his ancestors to rebel against British rule in 1776.

One of the chief complaints of the American colonist was that he was taxed without his consent. Yet by today's standards, his taxes were amazingly low. Precise figures are hard to come by, but in 1764, for example, the average American was taxed by the Crown at the rate of sixpence per year. That is not a misprint. Six pennies per year. One penny every two months. Even adjusting for inflation, that is a pretty light tax burden. Today's children pay more than that in sales taxes for candy.

And the British were cautious about raising taxes. Even a slight tax increase, as on a commodity like tea, could bring the colonies to a boil. The Americans knew that a principle was at stake. Unlimited taxation could mean slavery. That is why they tried, at every turn, to nip it in the bud.

Under slogans like "No taxation without representation," Americans fought for independence and established their own governments. They thought self-government was their bulwark against tyranny and overtaxation.

The Lincoln administration imposed the first Federal income tax to meet the costs of the Civil War. But again, by our standards the rates were amazingly low: the basic rate was 3 per cent, with a top rate of 5 per cent. Even so, after the war the U. S. Supreme Court soon ruled that a Federal levy on incomes was unconstitutional.

In 1913 the Federal Government surmounted this obstacle by winning a constitutional amendment authorizing taxes on incomes. No upper limit was set, but most Americans were unaffected. "Incomes" were narrowly defined; an unmarried taxpayer had to make about $50,000 (in today's money) to pay the tax at all; and the top rate, a mere 7 per cent, reached only the very rich. It wasn't until after World War II that most Americans paid income taxes, but then the rates rose to their current punishing levels. And in recent decades most states have imposed income taxes too. Other taxes have also increased at dizzying rates.

At nearly every step, the government has had its way. Taxpayers have mounted only sporadic resistance, in what are often called "tax revolts." The phrase is significant. If our rulers are really our "servants," as self-government implies, why are the wishes of the ruled considered "revolts"? Can we "revolt" against our own servants? Or have they really become our masters?

Corrupt is "Government-run healthcare and car companies, White House coercion, uninvestigated ACORN corruption, bailouts for some banks and closing others, ignoring illegals yet give them 1st priority in HHS handouts, attacks on conservative media and the private sector, jeapordizing the value of the dollar, unprecedented and dangerous new rights for terrorists, requiring intruding questions on US Census, perks for campaign donors – this is Obama's 'ethics' record – and that's just the first year of his presidency." At what point do we shut this all down? At what point does 'treason' kick in?

At what point does taxation become confiscation, theft, and even involuntary servitude? Our rulers -- we may as well say our masters -- never address this point. The Ruler of the universe asks only 10 per cent of our wealth. Our earthly rulers won't settle for such a modest share. They consider us "greedy" for wanting to keep more of our own money; they consider themselves "compassionate" for wanting to take more of it -- 20 per cent, 40 per cent, why not 80 per cent?

Taxation has always been big business, the biggest business of government.
If the politicians had any respect for our rights, our property, our liberty, even our dignity, they would impose taxes only reluctantly, and they would acknowledge some just limit. They would act as if the money they take and spend is *our* money, to be used for the common good of all, and not for buying the votes of special interests and government dependents. In short, they would recognize that taxation is a *moral* issue, not a mere political convenience to be exercised arbitrarily and irresponsibly.

Take just one politician as an example: Taxpayers pay $101,000 for in-flight 'food & booze' on the jet provided to Nancy Pelosi, plus expenses of $2.1 million for her use of Air Force jets for travel just in this first 2 years of her 4 yr term. Sweet girl that she is, she also spends $8,000 per month to florists for "like me now" bouquets, at her discretion.

Only one country has gotten it right: Switzerland. The Swiss have kept their government under control pretty well, in great part because they have had the wisdom to keep the taxing power and the spending power under separate agencies. The U. S. Congress taxes *and* spends. So we lack checks and balances where we most need them. Moreover, the Swiss federal government can't raise taxes without a popular majority, which is usually denied. The Swiss taxpayer, unlike the American, has learned to defend himself.

We can talk a lot about what's wrong, it's time to start focusing on what WE CAN DO to fix it, because nobody else is going to. Short of a RealTeaParty or Shots Heard Around the World, We can hit them where it hurts the most. Pay less taxes. We have to give them only 'one choice' and that is fiscal responsibility. Unemployment has already put a big dent in tax revenues. If the IRS can only send them so many dollars to play with, eventually they will have to come up with tax cuts to stimulate more jobs and a reason for us to even seek one. The more people who become self-reliant by any means and go off the grid financially, the bigger the impact we can make on how things are done in Washington.
(but, that's a whole new topic, so be watching)

Jan 28, 2010

The Speech Lecture

I don't know who the President was in '09, but whoever it was, the dude who made that speech last night sure ran hard against him.
"Do not walk away from HC reform," Obama pleaded with Congress in his first State of the Union speech. "Not now. Not when we are so close. Let us find a way to come together and finish the job for the American people."

The claim has been made many times that this administration has only had a year to clean up the mess of the last administration. I wish they would at least get started! He did the numbers in his speech, then said we need "fiscal discipline". So after a year of outrageous spending and reading off a long list of new programs and goals for year 2, he speaks out of both sides of his mouth.

It was a highly partisan speech. He spoke of working together, but then he went in for the kill with this to the Democrats “I would remind you that we still have the largest majority in decades, and the people expect us to solve some problems, not run for the hills.” Followed up with a hit to the Rebublicans...“If the Republican leadership is going to insist that sixty votes in the Senate are required to do any business at all in this town, then the responsibility to govern is now yours as well. Just saying no to everything may be good short-term politics, but it's not leadership.”
Obama vows to speak to Republicans. What? Because only NOW he NEEDS to? Can you imagine the content of this meeting?

So much bothered me, but I will limit it to the three below.

JOBS: This one bothered me the most. "We need to create jobs". No, we need the ones we had. We don't want to dig ditches as in roads and infrastructure, there are people who already do that. "Green Jobs? That's a whole new industry. I want my old job.The only way to create jobs for the long run is to create economic health. The only way to do that is to incentivize individuals in the free market to risk their own capital or borrowed capital try to make a profit. Also, last night Obama decried sending American jobs overseas, then reaffirmed his carbon tax that will do just that. The only way to create jobs is to strip away everything the Government has done to this point in the private sector...get out of the way!

MILITARY: I'm not sure I can remember a time when a Commander-in-Chief with troops actively engaging the enemy on several fronts, failed to thank the brave people who risk their lives to keep this nation safe. Hell Obama didn't even see fit to mention them for an hour, and then it seemed as though it was an afterthought. Sadly he didn't even have the military in mind when he said he wants to wave student loans for anyone who opts for a career in "public service". He then grandstanded with this statement,
“This year, I will work with Congress and our military to finally repeal the law that denies gay Americans the right to serve the country they love because of who they are. It’s the right thing to do.” I say, why can't we wait until there isn't 2 wars and a country recovery effort in Haiti that may take more more money and manpower than both wars combined. I think we have too much on our military plate to disrupt it 'socially'.

EDUCATION: Mr. Obama has no intention nor inclination to make the pivot right. He is a man consumed with the passion of his ideology, convinced that he is right & that he and his ilk know what this country needs. He talks about education reform as though there is not a school district in America that is performing well. His statist mentality was never more on display then when he said "The best solution for poverty is a world class education." I really think that his plan is also his solution to keeping new blood from hitting the unemployment lines by keeping them in school longer.
The idea that the President (and Dems) can create jobs works beautifully in their favor per their view of the world. It puts them in control to pull the strings on voter's livelihoods and keeps them dependent upon politician's whims.

After a year of showing us all what Progressive looks like, the American people have declared in three elections so far that they didn't vote for that. They wanted 'change' in DC and not in their homes. They wanted someone who would stop the bickering, secure our country and grow the economy. Obama scolded the Dems, the Republicans, the Military, the Supreme Court Justices and the American people for not understanding. That leaves just Him. Hmmmm. Wait, I thought he worked for us.

Jan 26, 2010

Finding Humor When We Can

Sharing good Tweets and Cartoons...Enjoy!

Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career.

Progressives from EVERY party must be voted out of any position of power.

It amazes me, that a group of individuals who are allegedly politically savvy, can not recognize that the anger sweeping the nation has everything to do with them!

New Strategy? Obama calls the American people stupid

There's not a liberal America and a conservative America - there's the United States of America - Barack Obama -- well, Meet us Patriots!!

Start Drilling for Oil in the USA it will create thousand of (shovel ready) Jobs, Keep Billions of $$ at Home & cut the Debt

U.S. troop funds diverted to pet projects: Study finds .6 billion taken from guns and ammunition, including

National Debt: No More Business As Usual

A fine is a tax for doing wrong. A tax is a fine for doing well.

Pope’s Message to Priests: We Must Blog

Brown's win is a message to ALL POLITICIANS, not just Dems. We, the people DEMAND you hear our voices!

If a conservative doesn't lk a talk show host, he switches channels. Liberals demand that those they dont lk B shut dn.

Just think, in two years Scott Brown can run for president and have more experience than Obama did in 2008

Winds of Change...Economic Collapse... Be Prepared

Hey Politician: Calling yourself a "Leader" is essentially calling We The People "followers". Bad idea!

The bad thing about running on change is you can only do it for your first election.

Hey Obama! This community organizing thing is kinda fun once you get the hang of it!

Scott Brown is the beginning of the end for this administration. I intend to do my part to insure it.


Republican Party needs to clean its own house before it demands that the Democrats clean theirs.

CAll ME a teabagger? Well, Id rather be a teabagger than a douchebagger!

On a lighter note, SEIU is out $1M dollars of member dues that were thrown down the Coakley rat-hole.

Barack Obama: review of pledges kept and promises broken in first year

If the Democrats have Tax funded Acorn, and now the Republicans have unlimited advertising from corporations who do we the people have?

Harry Reid just said there is "no rush" on health care.Translation: we don't know how to pass it yet.

Americans Spoke: It’s Time to Hit the Reset Button on Health Care

The more Barack Obama repeats himself the less patience people will have for his agenda.

Obama will NOT listen and will take his agenda into Hyperdrive, watch out! Are we ALL ready for Bigger Hurdles than MA... are YOU ready??


Jan 25, 2010

Barrack's Coach & Fix-it Team... Game Plan or Bandaid

Obama is gathering his forces to try and prevent Democratic disaster this November.

WASHINGTON — President Obama is reconstituting the team that helped him win the White House to counter Republican challenges in the midterm elections and recalibrate after political setbacks that have narrowed his legislative ambitions.

Mr. Obama has asked his former campaign manager, David Plouffe, to oversee House, Senate and governor’s races to stave off a hemorrhage of seats in the fall. The president ordered a review of the Democratic political operation — from the White House to party committees — after last week’s Republican victory in the Massachusetts Senate race, aides said.

In addition to Mr. Plouffe, who will primarily work from the Democratic National Committee in consultation with the White House, several top operatives from the Obama campaign will be dispatched across the country to advise major races as part of the president’s attempt to take greater control over the midterm elections, aides said.

“We are turning the corner to a much more political season,” said David Axelrod, a senior adviser, who confirmed Mr. Plouffe’s role. “We are going to evaluate what we need to do to get timely intelligence and early warnings so we don’t face situations like we did in Massachusetts.”

Time to get your game on Mr President? Some call it Plan 'B'. Some call it Calamity Control.
Only the 'wise' will see the subtle changes being made in the days to come. What political strategies will be used to bamboozel the citizen's this second time around....after all, he thinks, they all think, the average citizen is gullible and stupid. Barrack lied all the while he campaigned, he has lied since, what can he do now that will be any different.....I suspect blackmail. There's already been a hint of it with the EPA stepping in if some kind of Cap & Trade is not passed. I believe bribes in the form of more welfare to the poor and amnesty to the illegals are the 2 ways they will get their votes, bipassing us regular tax paying citizens.

What kind of creative masterminding will Plouffe come up with to reverse the ever cognizant and aware people who were voting with their voices the day MA voted in 41-Scott Brown! Every State sat on the edge of their seats. The message has been sent. They deny the message, but they KNOW. The biggest drawback to the whole situation is that politicians, as well as the President, will now focus on alot of ass-kissing and venting blame, instead of keeping their eye on the ball.....their job. The USA will be on hold until November, stagnet and unaware of a bigger threat than losing a few Democrat seats. The economy and terrorism are going to sneak up and bite us.

Obama made over 400 speeches his first year. Starting with his State of the Union speech, let's all keep a real close eye on the demeanor and tone. Let's all remember the campaign lies, all the numbers and so called predictions they falsely used to back or justify the crap they have done so far. Be leary...if you find yourself relaxing, then you might just be getting sucked in, again.

Jan 24, 2010

Coming to a Neighborhood near You

UN Agenda 21 - Coming to a Neighborhood near You...

Most Americans are unaware that one of the greatest threats to their freedom may be a United Nations program known as Agenda 21. The United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Division for Sustainable Development created Agenda 21 as a sustainability agenda which is arguably an amalgamation of socialism and extreme environmentalism brushed with anti-American, anti-capitalist overtones.

The United Nations purposely recommends avoiding the term Agenda 21 and suggests a cleverly named alternative: "smart growth."

Participating in a UN-advocated planning process would very likely bring out many of the conspiracy-fixated groups and individuals in our society such as the National Rifle Association, citizen militias and some members of Congress. This segment of our society who fear 'one-world government' and a UN invasion of the United States through which our individual freedom would be stripped away would actively work to defeat any elected official who joined 'the conspiracy' by undertaking LA21. So, we call our process something else, such as comprehensive planning, growth management, or smart growth [emphasis added].

Undoubtedly, residents of any town, county, or city in the United States that treasure their freedom, liberty, and property rights couldn't care less whether it's called Agenda 21 or smart growth. A recent example of this can be found in Carroll County, Maryland, where a smart growth plan called Pathways was drafted by the County Planning Department. The plan, if enacted, proposed a breathtaking reshuffling of land rights:

Rezoning of thousands of acres of beautiful, low-density agricultural farmland and protected residential conservation land into office parks
Down-zoning of agriculture land to prevent future subdivision by farmers
Up-zoning of low-density residential land around small towns into higher density zoning to permit construction of hundreds or possibly thousands of inclusive housing units, including apartments and condominiums
Inclusive housing with placement of multi-family construction on in-fill lots within existing residential single family communities
Endorsement of government-sponsored housing initiatives (subsidies) to ensure healthier, balanced neighborhoods

Carroll County, Maryland is one of 1,168 cities, towns, and counties worldwide that are members of the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) - Local Governments for Sustainability, which is an international association of local governments as well as national and regional local government organizations that have made a commitment to sustainable development. The ICLEI mission statement closely resembles that of Agenda 21. In fact, the ICLEI has Special Consultative Status with the UN Economic and Social Council and coordinates local government representation in the UN processes related to Agenda 21.

Community leaders working together in Carroll County recently defended their county against overreaching smart growth initiatives. Richard Rothschild, a candidate for Commissioner, emphatically remarks, "Smart growth is not science; it is political dogma combined with an insidious dose of social engineering. Smart growth is a wedding wherein zoning code is married with government-sponsored housing initiatives to accomplish government's goal of social re-engineering. It urbanizes rural towns with high-density development, and gerrymanders population centers through the use of housing initiatives that enable people with weak patterns of personal financial responsibility to acquire homes in higher-income areas. This has the effect of shifting the voting patterns of rural municipalities from Right to Left."

Smart growth plans usurp property rights and constitutional rights. Local officials, at the behest of State Government, revise zoning laws to fit into a "smart code" zoning template. A massive reshuffling of property rights ensues. Farmers may lose subdivision rights; conservation land adjacent to population centers may be rezoned into commercial employment centers; and low-density land in small towns is re-designated as growth area and rezoned to accommodate diverse housing including high-density apartments and condominiums.

Finally, a healthy dose of federal- or state-sponsored housing initiatives is embraced to ensure communities are properly balanced. The net effect of these plans is to create highly urbanized population centers throughout otherwise-rural counties, while simultaneously limiting the availability of land for suburban and estate subdivisions, as these are considered an unsustainable waste of land by Agenda 21 disciples.

Clearly, smart growth plans will impact Americans' future choices in where and how they live. Furthermore, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and other federal and state agencies may attempt to deny grant funds to states and cities that do not adopt smart growth plans.

Most Americans will remain unaware of the implications of smart growth and Agenda 21 until after it is promulgated in their own backyards. Ironically, these plans are more insidious than the Eminent Domain ruling by the Supreme Court in the case of Kelo v City of New London. Under Eminent Domain rulings, property owners usually receive compensation for their losses.

Conversely, smart growth municipal plans, required by statute, enable municipalities to change zoning laws and engage in other regulatory actions that devalue property, restrict off-conveyances, and otherwise erode property values without payment of any compensation to the property owner.

Smart growth has another interesting unintended consequence: it can disrupt conventional alliances and lead to strange political bedfellows. Rural urbanization plans may raise the ire of environmental groups while simultaneously stirring the wrath of both conservative and liberal residents that want to maintain the rural fabric of their communities. Conversely, developers, sensing opportunity, may side with government smart growth bureaucrats in support of these plans.

Regardless of political orientation, two indisputable facts remain. Agenda 21 is a direct assault on private property rights and American sovereignty, and it is coming to a neighborhood near you.

Jan 22, 2010

Depression or Collapse...Angry America

We are rapidly moving toward a dangerous time in our history. Society as we know it is vulnerable to political and social unrest.

The dollar, mismanaged by the Fed, has not been a benefit to the savers who sought to responsibly take care of themselves. They’ve been cheated by a rotten system and are just beginning to understand exactly how the Federal Reserve has been responsible for the swindle.
It’s impossible to predict the time when confidence will be lost, but it can come quickly. Resorting to buying other paper currencies will not be of much help. When the dollar crashes, most likely the purchasing power of all currencies – since all countries hold dollars as a reserve – will go down as well.

This means that dollars and other currencies will go into buying consumer items, precious metals and other physical properties. Consumer prices will soar, as well as interest rates. The central bank will lose control; and the more they inflate, the worse the confidence becomes. The interest rates will respond to these efforts by rising sharply.

If the Fed tries to reverse the run on the dollar, interest rates will also soar, and the pain on the American citizens will be of such proportion that political chaos will result. Either scenario leads to political and social chaos – the third event, and the most dangerous.

With no ability of the federal government to fund its commitments, international or domestic, major changes will occur in our system. The social unrest will elicit cries for government to exert unusual force to head off a complete breakdown of law and order. The ultimate trap will be set for a system of government claiming to protect a free society.

If more power and police authority are not given to the federal government, it will be argued that only anarchy will result. If more government policing power is given, it will mean a lethal threat to civil liberties. Already we have permitted the notion that a single person, the Attorney General or the President, can decide who is an “enemy combatant”, thus denying that individual the right to habeas corpus, permitting indefinite detentions without charges made. This attitude toward civil liberties has changed significantly since the fear built around 9/11.

Yes, I know, declaring one an “enemy combatant” is reserved only for the radical Muslims engaged in terrorism against the United States. To be reassured by this reasoning is quite dangerous and na├»ve. Logic should not lead us to equate suspects with terrorists, and include American citizens, and yet this has already been set by precedent. Under difficult circumstances, our political leaders will not be hesitant to use these powers to maintain order. Tragically, the people may even demand it.

We are rapidly moving toward a dangerous time in our history. Society as we know it is vulnerable to political and social unrest.

This impending crisis comes as a consequence of our flawed foreign and domestic economic policies, a silly notion about money, ignorance about Central Banking, and ignoring the onerous power and mischief of out-of-control intelligence agencies, our unsustainable welfare state, and a willingness to sacrifice privacy and civil liberties in an attempt to achieve safety and security from an inept government. Dangerous times indeed!

What can be done about it? Must we wait for the inevitable and expect to restore our liberties in a street fight against the overwhelming power of the state? Not a good option!

The only way that we can prevent blood from running in the streets is to offer a better idea of the proper role of government in a society that desires first and foremost liberty.

And that is impossible without a firm commitment by our thought leaders to the ideas of freedom, the source of all creative energy and prosperity. An all-powerful state is the threat to that ideal.

The prevailing attitude of the people, as it once was in early America, must be that of liberty and self reliance, rather than the nanny state and dependency, relying on government force to mold all private choices.

If this is understood, a smooth, although not painless, transition to a free society is achievable. Ignoring this option will be very destructive to everything that is dear to the hearts of most Americans.

What is it that we must do? We must immediately embark on:

*Balance the budget by reducing spending
*Change our foreign policy to that of non-intervention
*A full audit and more supervision of the Federal Reserve leading to abolishing
the Federal Reserve
*Legalize competition to the Federal Reserve with competing currencies
*Regain respect for civil liberties and privacy while reigning in the CIA
*Wean ourselves off the dependence of wealth transfers by government
*Abolish crony capitalism: no subsidies, no bailouts, no regulatory or tax
privileges to protect the powerful elite, especially the military-industrial complex
*Eliminate the income tax, inheritance tax and taxes on savings and dividends.

None of this can happen without the restoration of Congress to its dominant position of the three branches of government as was originally intended by the Constitution. The Executive and Judicial must be reined in, and Congress must assert its prerogatives over all legislation curtailing all unconstitutional agendae through budgetary controls.

Signs abound that angry Americans are now more ready than ever before for a change in direction that is indeed real. If this program were improvised, even suddenly and dramatically, the adjustment, though significant and to a degree somewhat painful, would be much shorter and of minor consequence compared to the chaos and poverty that will result if we refuse to change our gluttonous appetite for a free lunch.

Particial excerpt from Ron Pauls article

Jan 20, 2010

The First Year of Obama

One down, three to go.
Everyday of the last 365, we watched something scary-new happen in DC that was meant to be Change. This Change came as an aggressive assault on conservative values, a government with a push toward extreme progressivism. The Push was to cram as much into the first year as possible while the Democrats ruled the house.
Last night we watched the election results in MA and we are now one seat closer to taking away the power of a one sided House and Senate and putting it back toward true democracy, the American way. Congrats to MA, to senate-elect Scott Brown, but more so to the People who have awaken, whatever your party. Bravo!

Here's my State of the Union Speech for today...what a year it has been!

RAH! RAH! GO TEAM...crap
I think it's been pretty damn clear whose side the President is on. He's on the side of his sponsors. As far as I'm concerned neither he, nor any member of Congress should be seen in public without a jacket covered with the logo patches of their corporate sponsors.

Obama will do the same thing Democrats always do and think that he went too far instead of going far enough. And that's because the Rahms and all the other DLC idjits have that crap hardwired in their shortsighted brains and that's who he's listening to. You are who you hang with.

Everyone knows this HealthCare legislation is a gift to the insurance industry. Everyone knows it's all about paying for illegals. Everyone knows this bill is a stealth tax on the middle class. Everybody knows this legislation is a bunch of bullshit sprinkled with loophole-laden "benefits" and Union pandering. The Liberals claim it's unpopular because of the teapartyer's 'deficit' concerns and the fear of big government ...with the Constitution being stomped on.

Obama f---ed up. If he had fought (which is what he was elected to do) on the side of the will of the people with Change, those few Blue Dog Democrats who chose to stand against him would be the ones in danger of going down (strip Lieberman of his frickin' committee assignments already) instead of this presidency and the whole of the Democratic Party. He has only been playing with his A team and has left the rest of the elected Body on the bench. He's only playing with Half of his resources, what coach does that? Transparency joke and BiPartisanship lipservice lies aside, his leadership is a failure.

Oh, and the Congressional liberals don't get a pass -- you cowards stood by while the Reid/Pelosi wackos crafted this POS bill, all the while refusing to listen to your constituents. You could have gotten respect by threatening to derail the POS bill or demanding it be put together right, but you stood by murmuring discontent and voting for the Monster anyway. Either you stand behind the legislation or you don't. If it doesn't reflect the will of those who voted for you, you betrayed them. Period. You lost your base.

I understand Nelson's problem-NEBR hates HCReform --it's so simple, vote against the bill, but no... he is Democrat. Instead he votes for cloture and lets the bill proceed. It all boils down to being chicken-shit and not wanting to ruffle the feathers of the big birds in the D party. Just Screw Nebr, vote party then.....maybe make a Turkey deal home to feed the flock? Man, he forgot who the true Huskers are.

Lastly, What the hell is this obsession with saving the seats of the endangered Democrats, anyway? We are broke. It won't be any fun without money to play with. Might as well go home. Who wants to fight for the job anyway. If their constituents want a Republican then vote for one, if they better represent the views of their districts and states. Being a Democrat is not like being jumped-in by a gang and there's no way out. Being signed up for either party is not a Lifetime commitment. You have choices and the freedom to vote your MIND. Your Party, whichever you choose, is not a All or or loose, rah-rah go team. We should become Fans of the Players, pick the ones you can support by way of performance or stats. Forget the team and get behind the best Players!

....wonder what the next three years will bring? Collapse of the Dollar, Food Shortage, Amnesty for all, Terrorism...oh boy, can't wait!

Jan 19, 2010

If Brown Wins...What's next???

If GOP state Sen. Scott Brown defeats Democratic Attorney General Martha Coakley in Today's election, it would put the seat held by the late Sen. Edward M. Kennedy in the hands of a committed opponent of the bill and deprive Democrats of the 60-vote majority needed to pass health care in the Senate.

Democrats are considering their options for health care should they lose in Massachusetts. One possibility is for the House to approve the Senate-passed version of the bill, despite House Democrats' numerous qualms with that version. This would send the legislation straight to the president's desk -- under the current process, by contrast, negotiators are trying to hammer out a compromise that both chambers of Congress would have to approve.

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer on Tuesday expressed a willingness to consider taking up the Senate bill.

"I think moving ahead on health care is essential. ... I think clearly the Senate bill is better than nothing," he said. Asked if it would be possible to pass legislation in the 15-day mandatory window during which the Massachusetts election is certified, Hoyer said, "Yes."

Other alternatives, like a process called 'reconciliation', are still on the table and would require only 51 votes in the Senate instead of 60.

But that would mean rewriting the bill in such a way it could be treated as a budget measure and that means issues like preventing insurance companies from excluding pre-existing conditions would be taken off the table. Pelosi on Monday told supporters in San Francisco that she is pressing ahead with her role in getting the legislation to President Obama's desk.

Democrats of all different stripes have strong objections to the Senate-passed version of the bill for all sorts of reasons, including 41 House Democrats who voted for tough restrictions on abortion that are not matched in the Senate bill. This could very well be the first sign of the breakdown of the solid Democrat snowplow shoving this ObamaCare down America's throat.

Democrats would be better off starting over from scratch and inviting Republicans to draft a bill that will win actual bipartisan support — one that will spread the responsibility to all incumbents, and that will necessarily be smaller in scope. More Democrats seem to understand this, and continued efforts by Pelosi and Obama to force them to wear an obvious albatross around their necks in an election year will only undermine their claim to leadership. Expect a back-bencher revolt in the House to strip away the rest of these options in the coming days if Scott Brown wins the election, and for Democrats to quietly decide on a “hard pivot” instead to the economy.

Jan 18, 2010

What Would Martin Luther King Think?

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Fewer Americans believe the presidency of Barack Obama, the first African American elected to the White House, has helped advance race relations compared with a year ago, a Washington Post-ABC News poll suggests.

The poll, published on the U.S. holiday commemorating civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr., found 41 percent now say Obama's presidency has helped race relations, compared with 58 percent on the eve of Obama's inauguration a year ago who said his presidency would help race relations.

The decline was the sharpest among African Americans, with 51 percent now saying Obama has helped advance race relations, compared with 75 percent who, last January, said they expected Obama's presidency to help.

Jan 17, 2010

Master Delegator

As President, Obama is the top Delegator-in-Chief.

Yesterday he calls upon past Presidents Bush and Clinton to head up the Haiti issue, then today RIPS them both, but mainly Bush, when he campaigned for Coakley. Less than 24 hrs later. He delegates to them the responsibilty of Haiti so if there is 'bad press'for whatever reason, he can defer it to them.

He delegates major responsibilities in all aspects of his administration to unelected czars. He delegates his agenda to Pelosi and Reid and they do his dirty work. All the Dems follow him like sheep.

He sets the stage, pulls the strings and is the puppet master that has everyone doing his job for him...he is just the talking head. Suckers, all of them.

Hey Mr. Clinton! Who is doing the "Fetching" now?

Jan 14, 2010

Security is Serious Business..kinda

'24'shows tragic events with positive outcomes because of a guy who is quick,smart and a patriot, which is why I love this satire video. Jack Bower should go to work for Us...then Barry can just stay the hell on this 'course' instead of the 'put-put' political 'course' in DC.

Jan 10, 2010

Michele Bachmann Says It All!!


Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) tells Newsmax.TV the financial reform approved by the House gives Obama new bypass authority. She also explains why voter opposition to Obamacare keeps growing!


Olbermann's Pledge...Visit

Jan 5, 2010

America Rising...and SOON!

America elected you on a promise of hope and change.
We regret it.
In 2010, we are taking our country back.

Jan 1, 2010

2010’s Top Ten Myths

Obama: The only promise he made that he is fulfilling is the transformation of the U.S. into a failed socialist economy
In no particular order, here are ten myths that will affect U.S. domestic and international policy in the year ahead.

1. Myth: Global warming is real. It was never real except for the natural warming cycle that occurred from 1850 to 1998 when the Earth began another natural cycle, when it began to cool. The new cycle will last for several decades.

2. Myth: Carbon dioxide (CO2) is a danger to humans. This is the most pernicious lie that has been put forth by environmentalists and is the basis for the global warming lie. CO2 is vital to all life on Earth as it represents for all vegetation what oxygen is for all animals. This myth is the rationalization for Cap-and-Trade legislation.

3. Myth: The world is running out of oil. Not even close. New reserves of oil are being found on a regular basis. There is no substitute for oil as the basis for transportation and the many other products such as plastic for which it is the basic component. Failure to access national reserves of oil such as that in ANWR or offshore in the U.S. continental shelf is criminally stupid.

4. Myth: Afghanistan is critical to the war on terror. No, sorry, all the real action is in Pakistan these days and, in the days to come, in Yemen. Few NATO members want to provide forces for action there for lack of confidence in its present government and other factors.

5. Myth: The future is in “clean energy” as opposed to “dirty” coal. Wrong again. If wind or solar energy could demonstrate any practical use beyond very small projects it would attract investment, but it does not. Dependent on unreliable factors and requiring a backup source of energy such as a coal-fired or nuclear plant, large scale applications are a huge waste of money.

6. Myth: The U.S. must become “energy independent.” No nation on Earth is energy independent. The U.S. has failed to encourage the building of a single new refinery since the 1970s and is failing to encourage the building of nuclear plants to meet the nation’s growing need for more electricity.

7. Myth: The government can create or “save” jobs. Wrong again. The only jobs government creates are government jobs. These are essentially managerial and often exist to justify the continued existence of government agencies that actually impede job growth or significantly interfere with the free market.

8. Myth: The financial crisis is not a significant threat. An economy whose annual gross domestic product (GDP) is estimated to be $14 trillion cannot long survive a debt ceiling of $12.4 trillion as approved by Congress on December 24. That requires too much borrowing. Only less spending can ensure stability.

9. Myth: The United Nations is necessary for resolving international disputes. Historically the UN has repeatedly failed to stop conflicts since its inception after WWII. It has a long record of corruption and inaction.

10. Myth: President Obama tells the truth. Barack Obama’s first year in office demonstrated to his supporters, independents, and critics that he lies all the time about everything. The only promise he made that he is fulfilling is the transformation of the U.S. into a failed socialist economy.

By Alan Caruba Thursday, December 31, 2009 Signs