Democrats pass government-run (socialist) health care through US Senate

The United States Senate voted to turn America into a soft tyranny.  If the health care legislation becomes law, it will set the precedent that Congress, and not individuals acting according to their own self-interest, will decide who gets health care, how much it will cost, whether it will be provided, and who gets excluded.  All of this will be done based upon political calculations.  It is an act of contempt against the American people to believe that 435 Members of the House of Representatives and 100 US Senators can determine what is the "best" health care.    Suffice it to say, we hope Democrats fail in this endeavor.  

Health care is more of an art than a rigid, bureaucratic, follow-the-rules type of occupation.  The reason why patients choose some doctors over others is precisely because people assume (quite rightly) that certain doctors follow practices that are superior over other doctors.  Some doctors have more experience, talent, insight, education, or are just plain more pleasant to work with.

Health care is so complicated that one person is not able to understand all of the variables that exist within this profession.  What might appear "unnecessary" due to the high cost may be a very useful if it saves one's life.   What Congress is trying to do is ensure that everyone receives equal health care.  That is not possible in the real world.  As a result, the most that can be attained is to ruin everyone's health care through providing disincentives for doctors to provide the absolute best treatment, by subsidizing medical treatment (which will increase demand on doctors who are already overwhelmed through existing government mandates and programs), and taxing every aspect of the country, to the point in which the country will be a lot poorer.

Exceptional undergraduate students who might otherwise consider the medical profession will give up on their dreams because they are not interested in subjecting themselves to the whims of bureaucrats in Washington, D.C., who are only concerned about costs, and not about how to achieve actual results for the patient.  When the government agent gets in between a doctor and his patient, nothing good can come from this.  Why have we done this to ourselves?

Well, the answer is simple:  Democrats truly do have contempt and despise the America that we love.  This legislation is part of an effort to destroy what is special and exceptional about America.  Thankfully, we have the opportunity to fire these Democrats in November of 2010.

Barack Obama, in his own words, said that the Democrat Party has "similarly zealotry" as Republicans -- but just can't "enshrine some of [our] more radical ideas into law"

Candidate Barack Obama said "there are those within the Democratic Party who tend toward similar zealotry.  But those who do have never come close to possessing the power of a Rove or a DeLay, the power to take over a party, fill it with loyalists, and enshrine some of their more radical ideas into law."

Until now, that is!

John Kerry supports massive taxation of Americans to redistribute to the Third World -- all in the name of "climate change"

Senator John Kerry supports punishing millions of Americans through "global warming" laws that will increase energy taxes to astronomical levels.  He also supports stealing the wealth from millions of Americans and sending it to the Third World, with the aim of forcing those who live in poor countries to continue to remain in poverty.  Does this sound like someone who loves mankind?  We think it sounds like someone who has contempt for man and man's mind.  Why would anyone impose such disastrous policies if they truly loved America?  John Kerry believes that the geniuses of the world, the ones who create energy intensive industries, which he could not create on his own due to his poor intellect, should be punished precisely because of their success.  It is obvious that John Kerry hates America, and also hates the poor who live in the Third World, too.

Thankfully, there are Americans in Congress who are sensible.  Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla) is traveling to the Coppenhagen conference to let the elitist world leaders know that America is not going to bankrupt itself to fulfill the collectivist fantasies of the world's socialists.

Lisa Jackson, EPA administrator, seeks dictatorial powers.

Lisa Jackson, the Environmental Protection Agency Administrator, is threatening Congress to impose cap and trade legislation on the American public.  If Congress choses to listen to its constituents, and decides not to adopt a "cap and trade" law, Ms. Jackson will impose "command and control" regulations on the American economy.  As Ms. Jackson says in her own words:

"If you don't pass this legislation, then . . . the EPA is going to have to regulate in this area," the official said. "And it is not going to be able to regulate on a market-based way, so it's going to have to regulate in a command-and-control way, which will probably generate even more uncertainty."

Who does Ms. Jackson intend to command?  The American public -- especially when Americans are exchanging value for value -- in other words, economic transactions.  Who is Lisa Jackson, anyway?  She is an unelected technocrat that most voters have never heard of of.  But she wants dictatorial powers over the American public.  She is desperate because Congress, which must answer to the American people from time to time, is starting to balk at the outrageous costs and dubious science associated with the climate change hoax.  Tell your Representative that you do not want to give in to threats by a power hungry bureaucrat like Lisa Jackson.

A message to the people in Iran

We stand with the people of Iran. The Iranian regime is a Islamofascist gangster state, one in which the regime has an unlimited amount of power and authority to use arbitrary edicts to rule the people through fear, intimidation, and harassment. The people of Iran need to stand up, say "no more!", and remove this regime. Your leaders are using the power of the government to enslave you and to enforce conformity among the entire public. This is not the proper role of a government. The proper role of a government is to protect your individual rights, protect you from foreign invaders, and provide a court system that uses objective law to decide disputes among men. Your government is not following this form of government, and you are free to abolish it.

The United States Postal Service is a Failure. Privatize it.

The United States Postal Service lost $3.8 billion dollars for this fiscal year.  Isn't it great that we have given this government agency a monopoly over mail?  Think about this for a moment:  despite the fact that competition with the United States Postal Services' first class mail monopoly is a federal crime, it still is not able to turn a profit!  Imagine that! 

The Postal Service exists for one purpose alone: to provide union jobs for government employees.  Of course, the other reason is that this present (Democrat) Congress does not believe in liberty and does not like the idea of anyone challenging an iron-clad government monopoly.  This is important to keep in mind because once the "government option" (ephetistaically referred to as the "public option" in the health care debate) becomes the law of the land, Congress will also resist any effort to open up competition with a failed government agency.  We do not expect privatization efforts to succeed with this Democrat-controlled Congress, but now is the best time to campaign on a platform of privatization of the United States Postal Service. 

American voters do not believe in man-made global warming.

Does anyone believe in global warming anymore?  Everywhere we go, we see signs at retrailers promising "green" products.  Politicians propose programs that will "create" so-called "green jobs."  (What is a green job?  Installing expensive, hazardous lightbulbs that do not properly illuminate houses?)

  For those of us who sometimes wonder if we live in an irrational, anti-scientific era, there is some promising news.  According to Rasmussen Reports polling, 47% of the nation's voters believe that changes in climate are due to "planetary trends."  Only 37% believe that humans are the cause of any changes in the world's climate.   The idea that humans can change the Earth's climate has always striked us nothing more than the projection of superhuman powers onto mere mortals.  Of course, the real reason for the global warming myth has been an excuse to transfer power and wealth from millions of Americans to the Statists, who have an insatiable appetite for control.

The United States has always been defined as a beacon for freedom. Freedom is under threat in the USA!

"We should never despair, our Situation before has been unpromising and has changed for the better, so I trust, it will again. If new difficulties arise, we must only put forth new Exertions and proportion our Efforts to the exigency of the times." --George Washington, letter to Philip Schuyler, 1777

The United States has always been a unique nation precisely because of its founding principles. From the beginning, it has attracted friends of liberty like a magnet, while at the same time being the target of all those who oppose liberty. This group has consisted in various times the British Empire, Nazi Germany, Imperial Japan, the Islamofascist regime of Iran, and others. Today, the greatest threat to liberty comes from within.

The enemies of freedom work in our highest positions of power--from the Presidency, to the Speaker of the House, and the Majority Leader of the US Senate. Obama wants to restrict your ability to reach your economic potential by redistributing your wealth to those who are parasites--the non-producers.

Obama believes that you should look to the government when it comes to major economic transactions, whether it is receiving health care, buying a home, attending school, or starting a business. 

Take the issue of health care in America:  the debate over health care has very little to do with 'health care' and everything about empowering Washington to control every aspect of our economy, including medicine.

This Saturday, the Democrats in the United States Senate voted to "proceed" with a debate on the health care takeover.  This did not happen easily.  In order to get there,  Harry Reid bribed US Senator Marry L. Landrieu with $300 million dollars for her home state. 

If the American people had an opportunity to vote on this bill, it would lose in a landslide.  According to Rasmussen, only 38% of Americans support the governmentalization of health care.  It's easy to understand why Americans do not want this bill to pass.  It increases taxes on literally everyone.  It gives bureaucrats the authority to determine what every health insurance policy must include.  This will raise costs, and thus, only result in more people being uninsured.  Of course, the Democrats tax the uninsured, which is quite astonishing.  The idea that such an atrocious bill could be imposed upon the people in a free country is frightening indeed.  Are we still a free country?  The American people need to rise up and say no way--not now, and not ever! 

George Washington's statement, made above, shows that while our situation is certainly difficult, we have faced difficult situations in the past, and if we "put forth new Exertions and proportion our Efforts to the exigency of the times," we will overcome these obstacles that the Obama Democrats have imposed on us.

Democrats are driving a Ferrari on the road towards socialism. Americans want to hit the brakes.

Democrats are more determined than ever to push through the federal takeover of health care. Citizens have faxed, e-mailed, and phoned their elected representative; attended tea parties, townhall meetings, protested on DC, met with Members of Congress, voted heavily for Republican Governors of NJ and Virginia in November, and yet, Democrats in Congress are even more determined to press forward with health care fascism and socialism.

Democrats do not believe that citizens should be able to exchange their wealth for a doctor's services. Instead, Democrats want to confiscate the wealth of citizens, transfer it to a bureaucracy in Washington, D.C., and control the doctor by imposing regulations, taxes, and mandates on what they are able to do in their day to day practice.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi "has reportedly told fellow Democrats that she's prepared to lose seats in 2010 if that's what it takes to pass ObamaCare," according to OpinionJournal.com, part of the Wall Street Journal. If health care 'reform' (which we'll call destruction) is so great, then why would a majority party do something that it knows will result in losing a large number of seats in the federal legislature? It is not because the people want it. They don't. It is not because they want to do what is good for the people. All of the evidence from around the world suggests that such legislation will result in higher costs, the denial of care, and lower quality health services.

The only plausible answer that one can arrive at is that the Democrats are trying to impose socialist health care because they believe that it is the best way to turn the country into a socialist, third-world country.

Democrats want to ration health care, fund abortion.

The Democrats are trying to nationalize health care as soon as possible. And what is interesting is what they intend to fund with their 1,900 page monstrosity. Despite comments made by Democrats that the bill does not fund abortion, it does. We found the provision in the bill that does so:

‘‘SEC. 340O. COMMUNITY-BASED COLLABORATIVE CARE
9 NETWORK PROGRAM.
10 ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may award grants

[Editor's note: In other words, in the discretion of the Secretary of Health and Human Services]

11 to eligible entities for the purpose of establishing model
12 projects to accomplish the following goals:
‘‘(d) COMMUNITY-BASED COLLABORATIVE CARE
2 NETWORKS.—
3 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—
4 ‘‘(A) DESCRIPTION.—A community-based
5 collaborative care network described in this sub6
section is a consortium of health care providers
7 with a joint governance structure that provides
8 a comprehensive range of coordinated and inte9
grated health care services for low-income pa10
tient populations or medically underserved com11
munities (whether or not such individuals re12
ceive benefits under title XVIII, XIX, or XXI
13 of the Social Security Act, private or other
14 health insurance or are uninsured or under15
insured) and that complies with any applicable
16 minimum eligibility requirements that the Sec17
retary may determine appropriate.
‘‘(B) REQUIRED INCLUSION.—Each such
19 network shall include the following providers
20 that serve the community (unless such provider
21 does not exist within the community, declines or
22 refuses to participate, or places unreasonable
23 conditions on their participation)—
‘‘(iv) A community clinic, including a
2 mental health clinic, substance abuse clin3
ic, or a reproductive health clinic.

In other words, if the Secretary of Health and Human Services decides to fund "community-based collaborative care networks" (whatever that means), the government MUST fund "reproductive health clinics," which is a fancy way of saying abortion facilities. They thought they could burry this on page 1441, but we found it!

I went to a TEA Party in Griffith Park, Los Angeles, Ca.

I just got back from a TEA Party Express event in Griffith Park in the Los Angeles area. What is quite apparent is that the passion against the statism-collectivism-altruistic vision of the Obama Democrats is growing, and becoming stronger by the day.

It's rare to see a true citizens protest movement. Most people are too busy to get active in political debates. That's reasonable because in a free society, there are thousands of different pursuits that one can engage in. Now that our country is headed down a very dangerous course, one that could affect the very foundation of the country, regular citizens are becoming far more involved. It was truly a remarkable experience to see so many people at this event.

I saw people from every walk of life there. I heard an American who immigrated from Russia who said that she is getting involved because she does not want America to go down the path that Russia once went through. People who have experienced tyranny know the signs of its development.

President Obama, unlike our Founding Fathers, does not believe in liberty.

I have been reading David McCullough's "John Adams." When reading this book, it's clear that John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and George Washington had a unique understanding of human nature. Human nature, they felt, resulted in government encroachment on the natural liberties of the people. Government, not the people, should be constrained in order to provide the maximum amount of liberty to the people.

Thomas Jefferson once said: "The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the Constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first."

Notice that Thomas Jefferson wanted the chains on the government and not American citizens.

President Barack Obama does not want any limits whatsoever on his powers. He has not made any reference to the limitations on our federal government during his time as president. Even worse, prior to becoming president, he complained that the US Constitution acted to prevent government action, which he found problematic since he believes that it is the power and perogative of the government to involve itself in literally every aspect of our lives.

When listening to speeches and comments made by Obama, it's clear that he does not believe in the Declaration of Independent's clear reference to an unalienable right to the pursuit of happiness. Every policy he proposes is intended to get in the way and block one's right to the pursuit of happiness. Just yesterday, Obama has proposed new limits on what higher level executives are able to make at their firms. Why does he propose this policy? Simple: He does not believe that individuals should pursue their rational self-interest by working hard and receiving a high salary to compensate them for their efforts. Rather than celebrate individual achievement, Obama believes in punishing it.

Democrat Sen. John Kerry: You should be poorer!

Sen. John Kerry, authoritarian Democrat from Massachusetts, said:

"Let me emphasize something very strongly as we begin this discussion. The United States has already this year alone achieved a 6% reduction in emissions simply because of the downturn in the economy, so we are effectively saying we need to go another 14%." [emphasis added].

John Kerry is advocating a permanent reduction in our economy. This is an elected official who is openly stating that he wants America to be a poorer country. How will he do it? By 'capping' our economic growth by creating artificial and arbitrary restrictions on what individuals are able to do in the economy to improve their lives.

Thus, is it fair to say that John Kerry hates this country? Of course John Kerry hates America.

He does not like the fact that the US Constitution is a document intended to protect the individual from the iron fist of the state. Just look at what he says about this country and what he wants to do with the power that he holds.

Are the people from Massachusetts going to figure this out?

Once the government takes over the health care industry, it will fight against any competition with its monopoly.

When you are in a hospital receiving care, do you often think, "If only the government would take control of this entire enterprise, the system would truly be effecient and run a lot better"? Don't laugh, that is the argument being made in Washington!

Do doctors think that things would improve in health care once Washington politicians, bureaucrats, and courts override the will of their patients?

No one thinks this way. Doctors don't think this way, and neither do patients.

Further, once the government takes over health care, it is aggressive in its attack against any alternative to the government-run monopoly.

Let's look at Canada for a moment. There is a movement in Canada to offer more privatized health insurance there. However, the "government-run" monopoly advocates are screaming at the top of their lungs that such voluntary, individualistic care is harming the government-run monopoly system.

"What it means is that people who have no money, who are chronically ill, disabled, who require medical attention frequently, are going to suffer dramatically," said Leslie Dickout of the B.C. Health Coalition, as quoted in the LA Times. In other words, the government-run system is not paying doctors sufficiently, and offers long lines to patients, but the private-sector alternative is able to lure doctors through better pay, and patients with less waiting times, and that's considered unfair. These government-run health care advocates do not care at all about health care. What they care about is control over doctors and patients in a totalitarian, government-run health care utopia.

Democrats in Congress believe in restraints on individuals, but no restraints on the government.

It's getting harder and harder to read the news lately. Everyday there is a new plan, policy, or speech by President Obama demanding that we surrender even more of our liberty, transfer more of our wealth to the government, and most of all, to keep quiet.

The politicians are trying to take away our liberty to decide our own health care and instead ensure that we're forced--from now until the end of time--into an authoritarian, top-down, government-run health care system that will ration care, deny treatment, and tax Americans into an oblivion. This is the type of policy that one would get from a dictatorship. Yet our elected officials seem quite content to ram this down our throats despite what we have said all across the country. It's sad. Very sad. But we are not dispirited. We do not give up hope! Never surrender!

The politicians answer to us. They are our employees. If they are unwilling to listen to us, ultimately it is our duty to show up in great numbers on election day and defeat them. They are abusing their power -- and therefore, it is up to us to vote in great numbers and defeat the authoritarian Democrats presently in control of Congress.

Government-run health care is NOT compassionate.

The idea that government-run health care is "compassionate" is refuted by the fact that people who live in countries where the government runs the health care market only have access to a waiting list. Why is it that those in Canada who truly need treatment trade their waiting list for the US system, even after they have paid a fortune in taxes for their "free" health care in Canada? Government-run health care leads to rationing, and rationing eventually leads to death panels. How is that compassionate? I don't want to be a statistic on a government budget. There are ways to reduce health care costs in America: a) allow Americans to buy health insurance from companies in all fifty states; b) tort reform: stop frivolous lawsuits; c) shift tax bias from employer- to consumer- health insurance; d) eliminate health insurance mandates.

Government-run health care is not a free-market reform. I realize it is obvious, but Obama's drones on Twitters continue to spread lies.

The most remarkable part of life is having people distort the obvious meaning of words into something that it was never intended to mean. Recently I had the fortune of arguing with a 'liberal' who claimed that government-run health care is a "free-market" reform! I have never heard of something this irrational.

However, a lot of the liberals have read Saul Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals," in which he trains radical leftists to use the framework that people are used to (capitalism) in order to support the Statists' perverted and unpopular radical views. Thus, when trying to create a government-run, authoritarian health care system, it makes sense to lie and call this "free-market" than to call it what it is -- a dark road towards serfdom, where citizens become subjects, and those within government become our masters.

For those who had the misfortune of going to a government-run school, a "free-market" is one in which an individual, freely and voluntarily, purchases products and services from another, or works or invests with another, without coercision, and without subsidies or mandates to interfere in this judgment. From the definition in Wikipedia: "A free market describes a market without economic intervention and regulation by government." Thus, by definition, the ObamaCare proposal is not a free-market reform.

Democrats want to take away your health care options. Meanwhile, you have a million films available to watch on Netflix!

If President Barack Obama had his way, the entire health care system would be run by a centralized, authoritarian, government-run scheme, which, incidentally, enough, would have "death panels."

What this means is that President Obama does not believe that individuals should be in charge of their own health care. He believes that he should be in charge of your care. However, he does not say that the care that he would grudgingly provide would be superior care. That is a major reason why individuals have gone to town hall meetings to tell their elected representative that they do not want the government to take away their health care options.

In a free society, individuals should be free to make their own health care decisions. People should have thousands of health insurance options, and the best way is to permit individuals to purchase health insurance from a company in any state of the nation.

It is ironic that the politicians want to take away one's health care options even when, in other parts of life, there are literally hundreds of choices for cereal, e-mail providers, cars, and movies on Netflix. The only part of our life that should be free from choices is health care! Your life is now property of ObamaCare, Inc. Go figure!

Rep. Diane Watson admits government-run health care is a failure, but proceeds to create such a system in America!

I went to Rep. Diane Watson's townhall meeting. This was a very unusual townhall meeting. It was quite apparent that Diane Watson was able to fill the townhall with an overwhelming number of left-wing lunatics who hold unreasonable and irrational political opinions. For instance, when Diane Watson talked about how she had not read the bill, the audience laughed and even applauded. That is not a very typical reaction from members of the public. In most parts of the country, such an admission would result in a great deal of scorn from the audience members.

Normal people are not enthralled with politicians, especially those who are open enough to say how lazy they are about the work that they are entrusted to act upon. Thus, it is striking that Rep. Diane Watson was bold enough to say that she is open to nationalizing 20% of the entire United States economy without bothering to read the fine print.

Some audience members, who read a script, and were members of some government-run health care pressure group, were demanding that Diane Watson propose the creation of an authoritarian, monopolized government-run health care system (single payer--also known as 'single provider' of health care: i.e., a monopoly).

Thankfully, I was able to ask her why government-run health care would work when it failed everywhere. Her answer was most unusual: She admitted that government-run health care systems around the world have failed, but she insists that we can avoid the mistakes that have existed in other countries. Doubtful. Some ideas are reprehensible regardless of what country one lives in. The idea that we need to copy the failures of other countries, such as UK, which exhibit an enormous amount of rationing of health care, poor quality and hygiene, is irrational. If an idea does not work in other countries, there is no sensible reason to impose it here. At least Diane Watson admitted that government-run health care has failed everywhere that it has been tried. That is a remarkable admission for someone who wants to create such a monster here in the United States of America.

Americans love liberty, and will not bow down before politicians

Americans have always been rebellious against government officials--whether in London or Washington--who wish to exercise arbitrary and abusive governmental power against individual citizens.

Americans hold the view that the government has a very limited set of objectives upon which it is empowered to act upon, namely, to protect the rights of individual citizens. Thus, it is the government's job to protect individuals from those who would exercise force, and thus, abridge one's rights. For this reason, the government must take action to protect individuals from criminals, foreign governments, and to provide neutral forums to adjudicate disputes between different individuals through the use of objective law.

When the government acts outside these constraints, it can be very dangerous to the liberty of the people.

Right now we are in the middle of one of the great debates in all of American history. The debate is whether the government has the right to force you to purchase health insurance, require private companies to operate under the dictates of government central planners rather than customers, and to slowly develop a pathway in which the government will control every aspect of health care. The US Constitution, however, establishes the powers upon which the Congress may act upon. No where in the US Constitution does it say that Congress has the power to pass laws requiring citizens to purchase health insurance, or to essentially require that government planners will have de facto control over American insurance companies. Americans are saying 'no' to all of these unconstitutional ideas in townhall meetings all across the fruited plane. This is definitely quite exciting to see. Keep up the pressure. E-mail your elected officials, and definitely call them. Show up at meetings and ask tough and pointed questions. We can defeat ObamaCare.

We were right: Democrats do hate America.

We always were under the impression that Democrats hated America. Finally even Democrats are being honest about their intentions and beliefs. We have waited quite a while. Now elected Democrats are calling opponents of their socialist policies 'mobsters,' 'Nazis,' and 'Astroturf' (essentially, fake grassroots protesters). Further, elected officials have been found ignoring constituent questions, answering phone calls during townhall meetings, and denying the existence of provisions within the national health care bill.

Americans are learning the truth about the Democrats--finally. The goal of the Democrats is to re-make America, evade or distort the true meaning of the US Constitution, and transfer power from individuals to government officials. But the people have found out what is taking place, and they are protesting. Congratulations, America. You make us proud.

The government has already made our health care system quite irrational.

I wrote an op-ed describing how our health care system is presently irrational. You can read it here.

Barack Obama is intentionally trying to destroy America

President Barack Obama has enough historical economic data and research to know that his economic policies are not capable of working. So why does he continue his disastrous policies, including, but not limited to, nationalization of financial, insurance, health care, car companies, and others; massive tax increases on every American; $1 trillion deficit spending; fake "stimulus" plans that merely increase the size and scope of federal spending?

There is a reason why Barack Obama is pursuing this path: He is intentionally trying to destroy the American economy. Remember: Democrats do hate America, and Obama has made this clear.

He is trying to "fundamentally" transition Americans from a capitalist economy into a socialist-based one. This is not an accident. He is not merely ignorant, misinformed, or stupid.

It's worse. He is doing this intentionally. Well, thankfully, the US Constitution does not give the President dictatorial powers. Congress is independent of the President, and they have their own unique constituency. When the American people tell their elected representatives "no," it will make many of these Democrats in Congress fearful of going along with these socialistic policy proposals.

Government-run coffee houses.

Do Democrats want the government to take over coffee houses like Starbucks? Read my satirical report here.

Video shows the horror of government-run health care.

This is a very good video that explains how the socialist, government-run, authoritarian, top-down health care systems do not produce good results at all. We need to spread the word to the public and ensure that they oppose ObamaCare, because they won't like it when they get it. Also, once this type of authoritarian system is in effect, it's very hard to repeal it.

Hands off our health care system.

Americans must loudly demonstrate to Congress that we do not want a government-run health insurance system. Every government health care system in the world has failed. Some have failed more than others, but all of them provide substandard care, less quality, rationing by bureacratic officials, and less choices.

Further, the debate about the "uninsured" in America is the greatest source of misinformation.

From Mark Levin's book "Liberty and Tyranny":

"In 2006, the Census Bureau reported that there were 46.6 million people without health insurance.

• About 9.5 million were not United States citizens.
• Another 17 million lived in households with incomes exceeding $50,000 a year and could, presumably, purchase their own health coverage [1].
• Eighteen million of the 46.6 million uninsured were between the ages of eighteen and thirty-four, most of whom were in good health and no necessarily in need of health-care coverage or chose not to purchase it [2].
• Moreover, only 30 percent of the nonelderly population who became uninsured in a given year remained uninsured for more than twelve months.
• Almost 50 percent regained their health coverage within four months [3]. The 47 million "uninsured" figure used by [Speaker of the Houe Nancy] Pelosi and others is widely inaccurate."

Why are we trying to destroy the greatest health care system in the world? There is no health care crisis. Tell Congress to keep their hands off of our health care. Call (202)224-3121 and ask to speak with your elected representative.

President Obama attacks Swiss sovereingty.

Barack Obama campaigned for president in 2008 partly on a platform of trying to restore America's "respect in the world." Voters were told that America would reach out and try harder to show our friendship with those in Europe, in particular.

So how is Obama proving his friendship with Europe?

By trashing the sovereingty of Switzerland. The United States is demanding that certain tax related data from clients by Swiss-based UBS be turned over to the Internal Revenue Service. If UBS does so, it would undermine Swiss's bank secrecy laws, and thus, their entire banking system. When a customer places money in a Swiss account, there is the implicit assumption that their data will not be turned over under any circumstances to authorities in other jurisdictions. If customers no longer believe that their banking related information is kept secret in Switzerland, customers will find other jurisdictions that are able to maintain such secrecy. As a result, a lot of Swiss's banks will have fewer deposits, more will fail, unemployment will rise, and the economy will suffer. What does Obama have against Switzerland?

Interestingly, Switzerland is considering passing a law preventing UBS from complying with the IRS mandates. As Reuters reports, this case is "souring diplomatic ties."

So much for the broken promise of Barack Obama trying to repair relations with the rest of the world.

Is Obama asking the Russians for a tutoring lesson on how to get czars to enforce an authoritarian agenda?

Obama is presently in Russia. We're a bit curious to know whether Obama is asking the Russians how to get the czars to enforce Obama's authoritarian agenda. If anyone knows something about czars, it's certainly the Russians.

Letters to the editor are usually not representative of the general population's views.

I noticed a strange letter to the editor today in the New York Times. It was from a woman named Barbara McFadden from Oakland. She wrote to urge Congress to eliminate the tax exemption for employer-provided health care (presently, employees pay no tax on the health insurance that they receive from their employer). Whenever someone suggests that we raise taxes, I always look up their name on Google because it is rather rare for an average, run-of-the-mill person to say, "Raise my taxes." In 2008, this woman gave $750 to Barack Obama's campaign for president and $250 for Hillary. Further, while her occupation stated that in February that she was a teacher, by October she listed her occupation as retired. Meanwhile, she writes: "I have employer-provided health insurance. What is more, I am ready to give up the current exemption and pay taxes on the insurance so that other Americans can have decent coverage." In October of 2008, she listed her occupation as retired. How can she have employer-provided health insurance? Is this retirement-based health insurance? Or did she change jobs? Further, this is equally disingenuous because Congress is debating the idea of taxing every employee's health insurance benefits except for those received by union members! This woman is very likely a member of California's teacher's union, which means that she would be exempt from this tax increase. It's always easy to call for a tax increase when someone else is paying the bills!

Democrat Karen Bass, Speaker of the California Assembly, labels anti-tax voters as "terrorists"; wonders why we permit free speech!

Assembly Speaker Karen Bass was recently interviewed in the LA Times today. One exchange she had is particularly glaring:

How do you think conservative talk radio has affected the Legislature's work?

Assembly Speaker Karen Bass responds:

"The Republicans were essentially threatened and terrorized against voting for revenue. Now [some] are facing recalls. They operate under a terrorist threat: 'You vote for revenue and your career is over." I don't know why we allow that kind of terrorism to exist. I guess it's about free speech, but it's extremely unfair."

Karen Bass believes that when a citizen communicates with a lawmaker, and states that one does not want to pay higher taxes, that this is a form of terrorism! This is part of the continued Democrat assault on free speech. They do not believe in informed debates. They do not believe that individuals should be able to discuss issues and tell their elected representatives that we do not want to pay higher taxes. Instead, they label those who peacefully petition our government as terrorists! And she wonders why we "allow" this. Does she intend to write a law to repeal the First Amendment? Thankfully, term-limits ensures that Karen Bass will not be returning to the California State Assembly.

Democrats truly hate Americans.

Democrats have decided to go to war against the American people. The radical environmental groups--who are Statists who oppose the rights of the individual--want the government to regulate substantial amounts of our energy usage, production, manufacturing, water use, etc. This bill will substantially raise the cost of electricity, fueling one's car, and it will send millions of jobs outside America as our country will be a lot less competitive in the future. This is a completely outrageous bill, and every Member of the House who voted for this is disgraceful. This bill is going to hurt millions of Americans. This shows that Democrats truly do hate the American people because this law is designed to punish Americans.

Congress debates outrageous cap and trade legislation

Congress is currently debating one of the most outrageous and clearly irrational policies in American history. Congress wants to impose a substantial tax increase on consumers of all forms of energy. Absolutely every single person will pay this large tax. Millions of American jobs will be lost. Once the bill's restrictions kick in completely, the average family will face a new tax increase of $6,800 when it is phased in completely. This legislation is designed to punish Americans. It is based upon the premise that the America that we have come to know and love, based upon individual liberties, should be changed to one in which Congress decides how much energy we should be entitled to use. Where do they claim this power?

Democrats determined to tax the hell out of your energy!

Democrats hate your lifestyle. They don't want you to have an advanced standard of living, and thus, they have a solution: pass substantial tax increases on your energy usage.

Sen. Boxer belittles the men and women of the military.

I don't pretend to know exactly what runs through the mind of Senator Barbara Boxer. General Michael Walsh was testifying in front of Sen. Barbara Boxer, when he referred to her as 'ma'am.' Sen. Boxer interrupted Gen. Walsh in a very arrogant, condescending fashion, and it was disgraceful. Sen. Boxer ought to be ashamed of her behavior. Gen. Walsh has worked hard to defend the liberty of the American people, and he deserves more than to be belittled by an arrogant and condescending "senator." You can call her office at (202) 224-3553

California's worthless government employee unions bankrupt the state.

This is a wonderful ad that demonstrates that California's high taxes are not done for the purpose of improving the lives of Californians, but rather to pay super-high salaries to the state's government workers. These individuals are simply using the state budget in order to confiscate hard-earned wealth from the productive sector and shift it to them.

Why is President Obama in a hurry to nationalize health care? Senator Kyl knows the answer.

Senator Kyl made a very good observation of President Obama's behavior recently. Senator Kyl said, “There’s a reason why the president has said ‘if we don’t get this done [nationalized, government-run health care] soon, it’s not going to happen."

“Why? Why does he say that? Because he knows that momentum will inevitably slow for something that’s extraordinarily costly, will deny people the coverage that they already have, will ration their health care, and could provide some kind of government insurance company that’s going to drive out the private insurance companies that provide all these options,” he added.

Yes, this is absolutely right. The reason why Obama continues to try to rush the debate on nationalized health care is precisely because he knows that he will not be able to win the debate on the merits. There is no way that Obama can win on the merits by saying that he wishes to move from a private-sector health care system to one that will be government-run. No one has a positive experience dealing with government-run enterprises. When people hear that when they are in pain and need medical help, that they will wait in long lines like those at the DMV and the post office, they will not tolerate this.

Obama's goal is to steamroll the opposition, pass this legislation really quick without any public debate, and to move on to the next destructive policy. We can stop him, though. An educated citizenry is the best check against an authoritarian government.

Stop President Obama's authoritarian health care schemes.

President Obama is trying to bully doctors into supporting his authoritarian health care proposals that would shift roughly 17% of the economy directly to Washington, D.C., to be decided by 535 elected officials and thousands of bureaucrats. The idea that this will improve health care is risible.

For routine, expected expenses, the best form of health care would be if the patient pays the physician directly, with no middle man (including insurance or the government). Thus, if you have a cold, and you want to visit a doctor, you should be able to shop around and determine who is going to charge the best rates. As the system would move towards a capitalist system, doctors would post their prices online and there even would be advertisements making their prices known. However, since doctors get most of their payments through third-parties--including both the government and insurance companies--most people are ignorant of the prices doctors charge, and doctors themselves have very little incentive to cut down costs to pass it along to patients.

Obama has the worst of the worst ideas. Rather than moving towards a system in which the patient pays the doctor directly, he wants the patient to pay taxes, which will be sent to D.C., wasted by hundreds of thoudsands of bureacrats, and then sent back to you with millions of strings attached in terms of how you can visit your doctor, when, how often, what type of treatment will be offered, and how and when your doctor will get paid. This will cause a nightmare. It is your job to oppose this. I am including a form letter that you can send to your member of Congress as well as both of your US Senators. I already sent my letter to them and now it is up to you to do your part. You can send a message to your Member of Congress by clicking here.

Here is the form letter that you may copy and paste and send it along to D.C.:

As your constituent, I urge you to oppose President Obama's health care schemes. Government-run health care does not work, and should be opposed.

I do not want the government to be in charge of health care. We have seen that the government-run systems in the UK and Canada do not work. Instead, I support private sector solutions such as deregulation, enabling citizens to buy health care policies from a company in any state, and to provide tax deductions for individuals to purchase coverage.

For these reasons, I strongly oppose President Obama's government-run health care ideas. I urge you to vote against these bills when they come for a vote in Congress.

Sincerely,

President Obama Lies about Government-Run Health Care

President Obama has recently talked about how he wants a "government option" in health care in order to create "competition" to make the insurance companies "more honest."

President Obama, this is an outrageous lie. There already is competition in health insurance, with thousands of providers. Secondly, Obama has shown no interest in competition in anything that the government presently has a monopoly in, such as government schools. Does he support competition for government schools? No! Not at all!

Obama's Oppression

Sometimes we feel as though we are no longer in the United States of America. The greatness of America is that it is a nation that has a federal government with limited powers. Our Constitution does not grant the federal government unlimited power to do whatever it wishes. Rather, the federal government is limited only to protecting individual rights. Individual rights are another way of referring to liberty. However, we are seeing that these limits placed upon the federal government have steadily eroded over time.

We presently have a federal government that wants to intervene in every aspect of American life. Think about what starts in the beginning of the day: you eat breakfast, turn on the TV, and drive to work. Well, in every one of those areas, the government wants to intervene and change the way you live. First, the government wants to radically change your diet. It's hard to get Nancy Pelosi to come to your house to tell you what to eat, so the best way is by making certain foods more expensive so that you'd be forced to buy less expensive foods. Ostensibly, this means taxing "junk food," but it is not hard to conceive of Congress expanding far beyond this to coffee, beef, salt, etc, etc. Secondly, turning on your TV to catch the news will be far more expensive because the people in Congress have a hypersensitive and paranoid view of rising temperatures, which causes them to have the arrogant view that they, the United States Congress, actually have control over global temperature. (This actually reminds me of a documentary I rented recently. It was a documentary about pre-historic man. During one part of the documentary, it referred to the fact that ancient man believed that he could change the weather by chanting to the "weather god." Isn't this very similar, only that this time, Congress wants to force you to pay alms to this "weather god"?) Thirdly, driving to work will certainly be a lot more difficult in the future since Congress wants to design the type of car that you should be driving, impose substantial taxes on gasoline to make it harder to drive to work, and also, to impose policies that will make driving more inconvenient. For instance, Congress wants to shift gas tax revenue away from highway construction towards mass transit, which will result in more congestion.

As Americans, we must remember that our Constitution does not grant Congress unlimited majority rule. Our Founders choose specifically to limit the extent of Congress's powers. No matter who wins an election, there are some things that politicians cannot do. Politicians are to write laws to protect our individual rights; their job is not to abridge our rights.

Further, while we still have the freedom to communicate, it is essential to get the word out and let your fellow citizens know what President Obama has in store for America. Obama does not believe that Americans should have individual rights. Instead, he wants to ration rights and distribute it to his political allies and oppress those who are not favorable to him. It is important that we remain vigilant and continue to shed light on the harmful ideas and policies that Obama continues to bring forward.

Ronald Reagan on government-run health care

Ronald Reagan provides a compelling argument against government managed health care (socialist health care), which is what the Obama Democrats want to impose on America. In this video, President Reagan describes how, even though the American people will always vote against a government-run (authoritarian) health care system, Members of Congress, seeking to enlarge their authority, will attempt to implement these policies incrementally. As Reagan states, the openly stated goal of many of these socialists in Congress is to first enact a very minimal program, and then seek to expand the program inch by inch every few years, to a point in which the program becomes a massive authoritarian program. That is exactly what we have seen over the years in health care: from the introduction of Medicare (meant for the elderly) and Medicaid (for the poor), and the State Children's Health Insurance program (meant for lower-middle class families with children), to the new program of providing a "government-run" health insurance program for "everyone," which essentially gets us to the stated goal of the Statist, which is to have an authoritarian, government-run health care system for everyone.

Obama's Lies: Morocco was not the first country to recognize America.

During President Obama's speech, he stated that Morocco was the first country to recognize America.

Wrong.

The first country to recognize America diplomatically was Holland.

Is that really the job of an American President?

"And I consider it part of my responsibility as President of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear." -- President Barack Hussein Obama, in a speech made in Egypt on June 4, 2009.

It is not the duty of the President of the United States to "fight against" the negative appearances of Islam. What negative stereotypes, in particular, is he making reference to? I wonder if he also considers it his duty to fight against the negative stereotypes of Christianity, which is actually the religion of most Americans.

Obama uses dictatorial powers to seize GM, Chrystler, without Congressional authorization or Constitutional Power

Did you know that Congress never authorized a bailout of the auto industry? Yes, that's right. Even though President Obama has a large Democrat majority in Congress, they never authorized President Obama (or President Bush) to intervene in the auto industry and nationalize it.

This all started when President Bush asked for authority to bailout the auto industry, but Congress refused. Since that period of time, Congress has not authorized a single cent to the auto industry! As a result, President Obama is stealing money from the treasury to bailout the auto industry, even though the US Constitution says that Congress, not the President, has the power to appropriate taxpayer dollars.

Obama is acting without any constitutional authority whatsoever. This is the closest thing we have ever seen to a South American dictatorship.

How you can oppose Government Motors

Recently we decided to send a letter opposing the government owning GM and Chrysler. Our representatives are far-left, so it is likely our letters will end up in the trash can. However, you are more than free to copy and paste this letter and use it to send to your representative as well.

I oppose the federal government owning stock in GM and Chrysler. This is not necessary. I support free-enterprise, not socialism. I recommend passing legislation to sell the federal government's ownership stake in GM and Chrysler immediately. The government must not own and operate car companies. The government must get out of the car business. Let private actors manage, produce, and take ownership in private companies. The federal government should not be in this business at all.

Sincerely,

[Your name]

President Obama's Stealth Energy Tax Increase

Obama's intends to raise taxes on 100% of Americans. Despite President Obama's repeated statements on the campaign trial, by his own words in this video, he intends to raise taxes dramatically on all Americans who use energy.

Sonia Sotomayor is a terrible choice for the US Supreme Court

We recently submitted an op-ed article to Associated Content on why Sonia Sotomayor is a terrible choice for the US Supreme Court. We look forward to linking to it. We will keep you posted.

Henry Waxman reveals that he does not know what is in his own dumb global warming law.

Congressman Henry Waxman reveals that he does not even know what is in his own global warming law! The reason we have a republican form of government is precisely because these individuals are supposed to know the laws that they are trying to pass. Here, Waxman reveals that he has no clue what he is doing, or the harm that will arise if and when his bill becomes law.

Democrats propose legislation to increase energy prices and unemployment.

Democrats hate the high standard of living that we have in America. Case in point: Henry Waxman, a Democrat elected by the rich and famous in Beverly Hills, wants to impose a "cap and tax" bill that will substantially raise energy prices for millions of Americans. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that 80 percent of Americans can expect a rise in their energy bills and a reduction in real income because of the cap and trade bill. Further, interestingly enough, the legislation itself reveals the fact that Americans will lose jobs.

Tucked away in the legislation, the act states (Part 2, section 426): "An eligible worker, specifically workers who lose their jobs as a result of this measure, may receive a climate change adjustment allowance under this subsection for a period of not longer than 156 weeks." This means that Americans are guaranteed to lose their jobs, but Congress will provide "handouts" to compensate for this loss!

Californians vote against Democrat tax increases.

Californians proved that the citizens are unwilling to be punished for the failed policies of the Democrats in the Soviet-state legislature. Democrats wanted Californians to voluntarily support higher taxes, which would then be redistributed to the worthless public sector unions and bureaucrats. But normal citizens are not interested in being taxed to help the bureaucrats. This has been a wonderful day in California, and it is wonderful to see citizens saying 'no' to the big government Democrats.

EPA Will Ration Your Carbon (energy) usage.

The EPA wants to limit your use of carbon, and thus, lowering your standard of living. Read the op-ed here.

Why we love America

Why do we, in contrast to the Democrats, love America? America is a nation that was founded upon the principles of liberty. It is in America that the Constitution specifically limits the power of the federal government. This shows that the Founders had a particularly keen insight into human nature (and all of its history) and the fact that it is the natural state of human affairs for the government to grow and for individual liberty to recede. We conservatives/objectivists do not "hate" the government. Rather, we believe that America's government ought to be limited to a few enumerated areas, such as a court system to settle disputes between individuals -- and to be adjudicated according to objective laws; a military to protect against foreign invaders who would abridge the individual rights of American citizens; and to set national laws in areas that are specifically federal in nature, such as immigration, patents, copyrights, etc, etc. The fact that the federal government is limited in its powers only to a few areas enables citizens to have the maximum opportunity to hold their elected representatives accountable and for liberty to flourish. For instance, if a citizen of state A is not happy with the laws of state A, he can take steps to vote out the representatives of his state or move to state B, where the laws are more to his liking. However, when the federal government passes laws that one might not like, one has no means of escaping these bad laws.

High State Minimum Wage Laws Threaten Employment Opportunities

High state minimum wage laws threaten jobs. Read my op-ed column here.

The United States Should Not Adopt a Government Run Health Care System

Our column, "The United States Should Not Adopt a Government Run Health Care System," has been published. You can read it here.

Obama's health care obsession

President Obama and his fellow travelers in Congress have been talking a great deal about American health care. They have proposed "universal" health care, which, according to the Obama's White House, will "control rising health care costs, guarantee choice of doctor, and assure high-quality, affordable health care for all Americans." However, this is not true at all. In America, we have "universal" K-12 education. In 2009, 89% of K-12 students attended government-run schools. Although parents do not directly pay for the costs of the child's education in a government-run school, the costs continue to rise rather dramatically, which is reflected mostly in higher property taxes in many states. There is also no "choice" in K-12 education: if a parent is unable to pay to send their kid to a private school, they have no choice other than to send their child to the local government monopolized school system, which is infected with crime, anarchy, high drop out rates, and test scores that are below average compared to students from other nations. Do we really want to copy this feature in our health care system? Do we really want to tell patients that they have only one choice, which will be decided by a Washington, D.C.bureaucrat, and that if they live or die, it really is not even up to them?

The fact that the government has failed to deliver in K-12 education is a strong rebuke to the idea that the government is able to manage anything as complex as health care and deliver on cost, quality, and affordability. The government has not been able to deliver on any of these areas even in an area like education, which it has operated continuously for almost a century. (Year after year, we are told that this time, it will be fixed. It won't happen. Once the government takes over health care, and quality declines, there will be constant pleas for "more money" to "fix the problem." But money is not the source of the problem: freedom and individuality, reflected in the capitalist system, is what makes medical excellence possible).

Further, medical care is extremely complex, requiring highly motivated and intelligent individuals who have a fixed store of knowledge and able to use it in dynamic and novel situations. There are so many factors in play when it comes to medical care, including the creation of advanced theoretical knowledge to create new medicines and specialized procedures to cure ailments, distributions of new medicines, medical schools, medical professionals, hospitals, clinics, private doctor's offices, and many other variables, factors, and individuals that I did not even consider. Considering the fact that there are just a couple of people who are capable of running a multi-billion operation, is it possible that the 535 Members of Congress are not qualified to run a sector of the economy that accounts for $1.6 trillion or more of the economy?

Liberty should be the guiding principle of health care. When you are in pain, you want the pain aleviated. The best way is by going to a doctor who does not face a gun in his face telling him how to run his business, how much to charge, how to conduct his procedures: rather, we all want a medical professional who is guided by medical excellence. Let's face it: The government failed in education, but it has an insatiable appetite. Not content to monopolize only education, it also wants to destroy the best health care system in the world. Don't let it happen.

President Obama Hands Al Qaeda CIA Blueprints on What to Expect if they are Captured.

It is painfully obvious that President Obama is the first American president who truly hates America and is willing to take positions that are certain to undermine our national security. By releasing memos that the CIA had used in the Bush administration in determining what the limits are in interrogating terrorist barbarians, it puts our enemies--the barbarian Islamfascists--on notice of what the ultimate limits Americans are willing to use against them. These barbarians will use these memos as blueprints in determining how to avoid revealing any relevant information regarding imminent threats against America. Obama has essentially stated that he does not care if this hurts our national security. Considering the fact that our enemy is still out there, and we have shown weakness and have taken away a valuable tool to use against our enemy, we are in a far more dangerous position now. We will live to regret this day. And when that day comes, President Obama will be responsible and must be held accountable politically at the ballot box for his disgraceful and contemptible decision to reveal our nation's secrets to our enemies.

Americans say no to the establishment's philosophical worldview

Americans across the political spectrum are taking today as a day to protest the establishment's philosophical worldview, which is a mixture of collectivism, altruism, and statism, none of which has ever served to improve the lives of individuals. To those in Washington, the idea of a government being used exclusively to protect individual rights is a concept that is alien to them. However, the fact that hundreds of thousands of Americans are protesting and stating that they disagree with this worldview is encouraging, and is a strong signal that Americans are not meek and will not voluntarily hand over their rights to an out of control establishment that is drunk with power.

Satire: Barack Obama sends cease and desist letter to Kim Jung Ill

Obama's cease and desist letter to Kim Jung Ill:

It has come to my attention that you have made an unauthorized launch of a "rocket" into outer space. While I have no intention of retaliating or showing you that I can easily attack your rockets, I wanted to let you know that I have reserved all of my rights as US President, including the right to go to the UN. You neither asked for nor received permission to launch the rocket. Therefore, I believe you have willfully violated UN Security Council resolutions. I demand that you immediately cease the use and distribution of all rockets, and destroy such rockets immediately, and that you desist from this or any other infringement of UN Security Council resolutions. If I have not received an affirmative response from you by April 10, indicating that you have fully complied with these requirements, I shall consider writing another strongly worded letter to you.

Barack Hussein Obama
THE WHITE HOUSE
April 5, 2009

Why does Obama continue to criticize America on foreign soil?

Does this sound like a man who truly loves America? If a husband continuously made negative comments about his wife all the time, and stated, "but I love you," should she reasonably accept such a statement?

Companies head to Switzerland to avoid Obama and the Democrats' disastrous policies.

Obama's policies are not helping US companies. It is obvious that either Obama is not aware of the harm that his policies cause (in which case he is not that bright), or he is aware, and doesn't care about the harm that he is causing. In one case, high corporate income tax rates, cap-and-trade policies, new rules allowing easier unionization, and unfriendly policies towards major corporations, is causing some companies to move to Switzerland.

It's funny how a lot of liberals were threatening to leave the country when Bush was elected and re-elected, but real American companies are actually leaving due to Obama's poor policies.

Democrats attack Elected Sheriff for being Tough on Illegal Alien Criminals.

Liberal Democrats in Congress have shown their contempt for the citizens in Maricopa County, Arizona, who have elected the toughest sheriff in America. These liberal members of Congress, responding to petitions from ACORN and other radical groups, have asked for an investigation into the practice of enforcing our immigration laws at the state level.

This shows contempt for American citizens who are very concerned about illegal aliens, especially those who commit criminal acts. Showing leniency to criminal aliens will only serve to create more crime. Lower the cost of something and you will only get more of it. This applies to crime just as it does for products and services. In Maricopa County's jail system, 20 percent of the inmates are illegal aliens, and 70% of those illegal alien criminals were arrested for felony crimes. These crimes included:

Those felony crimes committed included the following: forgery, 12 percent; kidnapping, 10 percent; aggravated assault, 7 percent; driving under the influence, 7 percent; drug charges, 27 percent; robbery, 3 percent; murder, 3 percent; and theft, 4 percent.

Obama is intentionally causing this economic crisis.

Imagine that a politician was trying to enact policies that were actually designed to harm our national economy. I ask you, how would such a policy be any different from the policies that are currently being proposed by President Barack Obama? Obama's personal philosophy is one in which the government decides what type of cars one can drive, whether to get health care or not, how much one is permitted to earn, whether one can speak or not, and to substantially punish individuals who are productive and successful in what they do. Oh, and on top of all of that, he wants to substantially raise the cost of electricity through a cap-and-trade scheme, in the name of fighting global warming (which national polls suggest is dead last on the issues that voters care about). These policies have already caused a great deal of harm: the stock market has gone down over 3,000 points since Obama has been elected; millions of people have been thrown out of work; and home prices are heading downward on an even quicker pace. The stock market has been yanked downward because investors fear more taxes on capital gains, on corporations, on energy (the global warming cap-and-trade scheme), more regulations on how businesses operate (which we are already starting to see in the automobile and in the financial sector). Employers are laying off workers in anticipation of higher marginal tax rates and rules that will make it far easier for unions to unionize their workers, which will result in a lot less control over their business.

President Obama's policies are no different than the policies of one who would want to actually harm the economy. If you wanted to harm the economy, wouldn't you want to attack those who are productive, successful, and are employing individuals? How would the economy improve without successful entrepreneurs? The answer: it can't--that's why a destructive ideologue would want to punish them not for their vices, but for their virtues. If you wanted to harm the economy, wouldn't you want to raise the costs of energy so that it would be very difficult to manufacture, run a business, and maintain a high quality lifestyle? If you wanted to crush the economy, wouldn't you want to make it difficult for people to become wealthy, and thus, job creators, investors, and large businesses? So slap a high income tax rate on them to discourage them from using their talents for productive endeavors. We have enough economic and historical data, as well as from newspapers from other countries that have adopted such policies, that they do not work. It is not possible for Obama or the Democrats to suggest that they are unaware that such policies harm the economy. They do know that these policies are harmful, and they are willing to pursue these policies anyway. Ignorance is not a valid excuse. As a result, the only natural conclusion is to assume that President Obama and his comrades in the Democrat Party are intentionally trying to create another Great Depression through these wreckless and destructive policies.

Obama's end goal: destroy the private sector, and enact a centralized administrative state.

Everyday brings more news on how Obama wants to enact a new power grab, shifting power away from the individual and towards a centralized, authoritarian and unaccountable D.C. establishment. In a time period in which individuals are already hurt by a weak economy, President Obama promises to weaken the economy even further by punishing the absolutely most productive members of our society, serving to discourage them from hiring workers, donate to charity, and invest in new businesses. He wants to raise the top marginal tax rate through the roof, but he will later impose even higher marginal tax rates on the not-so-rich when the revenues promised from taxing the so-called "rich" (read: productive) turns out not to pan out the way he originally imagined.

He is going through a spending spree that serves to crowd out the private market. Obama wants to crush the private market--just as the liberal Democrats in Congress crushed the financial and automobile industries--so that he can nationalize them.

He wants to crush the health care industry with new regulations and by subsidizing the government-run model--to a point in which individuals will one day be forced into a government-run health care monopoly, one in which individuals will not have choices, seniors will be "sacrificed" through a lack of care, and new innovations (such as new drugs) would disappear overnight.

He is running trillion dollar deficits that will serve to encourage the Federal Reserve to start printing more money, which will cause the type of hyperinflation that is often seen in Third World nations.

Then, to cement his rule, he is hoping to legalize the millions of illegal aliens, who, due to their illiteracy, poverty, and inability to assimilate into American society, will be reliable votes for the Democrat Party. These are dangerous times. We Republicans must oppose all of this. Obama's plans are not typical positions for a person in power to hold. These are radical stances that are far outside the American mainstream. He is not constrained at all by the United States Constitution or the fact that public opinion disagrees with many of his ideological goals. He doesn't care. The man is on a mission, and he is out there to destroy the private sector.

President Obama releases terrorist who is now a free man in England.

A mere 24 hours ago, Guantanamo Bay detainee Binyam Mohamed landed in England - a free man. Mohamed was captured in Pakistan in April, 2002, and has admitted to training at various Al-Qaeda training camps and is alleged to have plotted multiple attacks on American soil.

Included in his laundry list of terrorist activities are:

• Training at various Al-Qaeda training camps, where he specialized in firearms and explosives
  
• Being taught by senior Al-Qaeda leaders how to falsify documents
• Receiving money by Al-Qaeda leaders to travel to the United States
• Tasked by senior Al-Qaeda leaders to blow up high-rise apartment buildings in the United States
• Holding meetings with Saif al Adel (a top level al Qaeda planner and leader) and Khalid Sheik Mohammed (9/11 mastermind)

Democrat Sen. John Kerry says that you are too stupid to spend your own money.

We have long held that Democrats believe that the American people are too stupid and incompetent to spend their own money properly. This is mainly because Americans would prefer to earn and invest their money by spending it buying homes, cars, eating at good restaraunts, whereas Democrats would prefer to spend it on condoms for kids, fixing the Department of Agriculture building, adding new furniture for the Department of Labor, and all sorts of other wasteful uses of tax dollars. However, in this clip, you can see that Democrat Sen. John Kerry truly believes that he should be the one who spends your money. He shows utter contempt for you and believes that your money is better spent when it is in his hands because he has superior wisdom over where this money should be spent.

He says that if a businessman or an individual has more of their own money, "there is no guarantee that the individual will invest their money." So what!? It is their money! Does the government "invest" the money when it renovates the Department of Agriculture's building?

"So government, yes, government--has the ability to be able to make a decision that the private sector would not necessarily make today," Democrat Sen. John Kerry states.

Yes, I think that John Kerry is quite right on this point. Most Americans would indeed far prefer to buy a bigger house, a new car, higher-quality food at Whole Foods, perhaps a trip to Las Vegas, as opposed to the wish list of odd ball things that John Kerry has in mind, such as condoms for kids, renovation of government buildings, giving away money to people who do not pay taxes, and creating a computer database for computerized health care data so Washington bureaucrats can learn about your health care history. Yes, I think that the people have different ideas on how to spend their money.

California's Democrats want to tax the population into abject poverty.

California is trying to do something quite immoral. Right now the Democrats in the California state legislature are trying to increase taxes significantly in an effort to continue paying lazy and incompetent government workers high salaries and benefits that are not affordable. We are in a recession, and it is only reasonable that government would also reduce their expenses in light of the national recession. As I have always said, liberalism is not sustainable. In order to keep these government worker's high, the politicians have to make the public a lot poorer. Also, interestingly, unlike the Washington, D.C. Democrats who say that they want to only "tax the rich," California intends to tax everyone, from the poor to the middle class. What the Democrats want to do is steal from you in order to keep paying their buddies--the state worker's unions. Further, this is only going to result in more businesses leaving the Golden State, which will result in even less taxes going to the state, which will result in the politicians imposing even higher taxes on the middle class.

Here is a sample of some of the new taxes that California's socialist Democrats have conjured up.

• Vehicle license fees would nearly double, going from the current rate of 0.65% to 1.15% of the value of a car or truck.
• The sales tax would increase by 1 cent, raising the rate in Los Angeles County to 9.75%.
• Gasoline taxes would increase by 12 cents a gallon.
• And Californians would pay a new surcharge on their personal income taxes, amounting to 2.5% of their total tax bills (this is a tax on your tax!)

Here are some relevant contact numbers for you to call and fax.

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger
State Capitol Building
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: 916-445-2841
Fax: 916-558-3160 ( new number )

Find out who your local representative is and contact them now!

OBAMA’S RECORD IS ALREADY DANGEROUS AND UNSAFE

Just think about what Obama has done in only about two weeks in office:

• He signed an Executive Order to close the Guantanamo Bay Detention Center.
• He ordered the Pentagon to find ways to cut our Defense Budget by over 10%
• He appointed Tony West as Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Division of
the United States Department of Justice. West was the lawyer for the American
Taliban, John Walker Lindh.
• He dropped charges against U.S.S. Cole bombing mastermind in the military
trials being held at Guantanamo Bay.
• He ordered all military commissions trying terrorists to be halted.
• He has ended aggressive interrogation methods by the military and our
intelligence agencies to get valuable information.

And this is only a partial list!

President Obama meets with losers in Florida.

President Obama had a rally today in Ft. Myers, Florida, during which he met with people who do not want to help themselves, but rather believe that the government is there to get them a home, a new kitchen, a new bathroom, increase their income, find them a new job, etc. These citizens are children and want to be dependent upon government handouts. They are losers. One woman, Henrietta Hughes, asked for a house from Obama! Obama could have said, "The federal government's purpose is not to steal money from one citizen to provide benefits to you. The purpose of the federal government is to protect your individual liberties so that you can go out in the world and start your own business or work for someone else." Instead, Obama pandered to the woman by falsely giving the impression that he was going to cure her economic situation, when he won't! These voters truly are expecting miracles from a politician, and these miracles will never materialize. No politician can ever provide you with all of your needs and wants. It is your job as a citizen to provide for your needs, wants, and long-term goals for the future. And why would you want to sit around and wait for President Obama to provide you with a house, a kitchen, and whatever else that you want? It is never going to happen if you sit at home and wait for some hack politician to provide these things for you.

Sen. Chuck Schumer thinks you're a damn idiot!

Look at this clip from arrogant deplorable New York Democrat Senator Chuck Schumer. Mr. Schumer represents the worst type of politician: one who steals from his constituents and brags about how "the American people really don't care" about this abuse of the public treasury. Yes, Mr. Schumer, the people love paying taxes and "really don't care" if the politicians are transferring this money to their politically connected allies and friends. The American people don't mind being economic slaves to the Washington political class. Instead of being able to serve their own needs, living for their own benefit, they are perfectly fine sending their money to Washington so glib politicians can spend it on wasteful projects and announce that the people "really don't care." Philosophically, this is part of the collectivist mentality that suggests that people should live for another's sake, rather than their own. Sen. Schumer is suggesting that one should not earn a living for their own sake, but rather for the benefit of politicians. New Yorkers: If you can re-elect such a contemptible, low life politician like this, what does it say about you? It says you're a damn fool if you vote for this man again.

President Obama admits that he will not be re-elected.

President Obama has said today that if his economic stimulus plan doesn't work, "you’ll have a new president." This is quite a shocking thing to hear, especially considering that no economic stimulus plan of this sort has ever worked in the history of mankind. This is therefore a puzzling statement for Obama to make. One would assume that Obama realizes that his economic stimulus plan won't work since most economists believe that this is part of a discredited, Keynesian economic theory. Perhaps Obama figures that the economy will recover by 2012, and he will be able to take credit for such a recovery. Still, he basically has admitted that he is now a failure for promoting a policy that will not work, which he says is a good reason to have a new president in 2013.