Thursday, December 30, 2010

Ezra Klein, a liberal, hates the US Constitution

Smug liberal moron blogger Ezra Klein thinks that the US Constitution is “too confusing” because it was written more than 100 years ago.  He also said that the text is confusing, even though the text is actually written very clearly.  (Meanwhile, these are the folks who pass 2,000+ page unreadable bills in the middle of the night!)  Liberals hate the US Constitution because of what it seeks to clarify: that the government is limited to protecting individual rights, and nothing further.

Monday, December 27, 2010


Do you smell that fresh air -- the sense of freedom?  Yes, Congress is out of town, which means that Americans are now free, free at last.  Soon a GOP-led House of Representatives will represent the true interests of the American people.  This will include writing laws that the American people understand, passing laws that liberate the private sector from the shackles that have been in place for decades, and cutting back on the size and the scope of the government industrial complex.  What is most important, however, is actually repealing many of the tyrannical initiatives that the Democrats passed in the last two years, with government-run health care (Obamacare) being at the top of the list.  The idea that, in a country in which thousands of television stations are available, 300,000 Iphone apps can be downloaded, millions of items are available for purchase online (without any shipping costs) to those living in the most rural locations, that the government would be the most suited party to decide for you how you should get health care is absurd. How can anyone make such an irrational argument?  Well, that explains why House Speaker Pelosi said that "we have to pass the law so that you find out what is in it." Of course!  If she told you what was in it, you would have been even more vocal in your opposition.  Not that it would matter to Pelosi.  Or her fellow Democrats.  They knew that we would strongly oppose the law, and she decided to pass it over our objections.  Hopefully the Democrats will be in the minority for 100 years.  After all, we have a lot of laws to repeal.

Thursday, December 23, 2010

Democrats hope to profit from economic collapse.

America is suffering from high unemployment, but don't worry, Democrats are looking out for your interests.  While the people suffer, the Democrats are passing laws to allow flamboyant and openly gay men and women into the military and passing laws to undermine our national defense, just to make Russia happy.  Question:  How does this have anything to do with improving our economy?

That's right, it doesn't!  Democrats do not care about our economy.  They love the misery that they are creating because they believe that destitute individuals are more likely to vote Democrat because they will need government assistance in order to survive.  That shows that Democrats really have contempt for Americans and our way of life.  They are willing to destroy our economy just to get more votes!

Tuesday, December 21, 2010

Democrats hate representative government

While Americans are enjoying the end of the year celebrations of both Christmas and New Year's, the defeated 111th Congress will not take "no" for an answer.   When Republicans were defeated in the 2006 mid-term elections, they did not attempt to pass any controversial or sweeping legislation.  Rather, they left town and let the Democrats take over the show in January 2007.  Today's Democrats are a different lot.   They really do not believe in representative government.  To the extent that we have elections, they think of it as merely an inconvenience that must be tolerated as opposed to a cherished part of our government that protects the people from the iron fist of the state.   The reason we have elections is not just to go through the motion of having elections, but to provide the people with a meaningful opportunity to restrain the state.  We already had our election.  We told Congress--by defeating the large Democrat majority in the House of Representatives and replacing it with a large Republican majority--that we want less government, one that is focused on only the powers that the Constitution grants it, such as national defense.  The purpose of government is to protect the people from foreign and domestic threats, and to provide courts to adjudicate disputes using objective law.  That is certainly not the case today as the Democrat majority keeps on moving at full speed until they are forcefully evicted from power on January 5, 2011.

Saturday, December 18, 2010

DREAM Act Fails

The United States Senate rejected the mis-named liberal wet "DREAM" act, which would provide amnesty to illegal aliens.   Americans are tired of illegal aliens receiving a disproportionate amount of attention in our legislative bodies.  When our economy is suffering from higher taxes, bureaucracies that are out of control, a federal judiciary that is re-writing law from the bench, and high unemployment, it is outrageous for Congress to spend even one minute of time focusing on the rights of those who entered the country illegally.

Wednesday, December 15, 2010

Democrats have contempt for the American public.

It seems more and more apparent how much contempt Democrats have for the American people.  The American people said that they want less government spending, lower taxes, and want laws that improve American society, not trample on our liberties.  So what do Democrats do?  They hold the American people hostage by saying that if we want to maintain our current tax rates, we also must accept much higher levels of government spending.  That doesn't sound like an ideal system at all for the public.

Congress does not have enough time to consider the full ramifications of the START treaty, especially with regard to how it weakens our national defense.  Democrats don't care.  They want to pass it anyway.  In fact, they are happy about the fact that it harms our national defense.  The answer is simple:  They want to harm our national defense and they are not interested in doing anything to improve upon it.  This reflects their well-established ideology, and it is a permanent part of who they are.

Same for "don't ask, don't tell."  There isn't enough time to consider the harm this will do to American society.  Touch luck.  Democrats don't give a damn.  They like the fact that it will harm American society, and they are more than happy to pass it do exactly that. Shame on this party.  Let's hope that they will never get a majority of the vote again.

Saturday, December 11, 2010

Republicans should wait until January 3 to preserve (and lower) the Bush tax rates

Republicans should say no to Obama’s tax “compromise.”  Republicans have the stronger hand.  We won a decisive victory this November, and we will have a large conservative majority in the House of Representatives. 

The Democrats have asked for unreasonable compromises in the lame duck session, including extending unemployment benefits for an unprecedented 13 additional months (after extending them for a record 99 weeks!)  Enough is enough.  We do not want more spending.  Republicans did not win their election by promising to increase spending even further.  They won by promising to cut spending.  Don’t take the deal.  Walk away.  We are going to have a large majority this January 3rd.  Wait until then.  Then we’ll talk to Obama.

Thursday, December 02, 2010

Socialist Diane Watson votes no on censoring Charles Rangel

Representative Diane Watson, a hard-left socialist from Los Angeles, voted against censuring Democrat Representative Charles Rangel.  The resolution, as written, follows: 

In the matter of Representative Charles B. Rangel of New York.

    Resolved, That (1) Representative Charles B. Rangel of New York be censured; (2) Representative Charles B. Rangel forthwith present himself in the well of the House for the pronouncement of censure; (3) Representative Charles B. Rangel be censured with the public reading of this resolution by the Speaker; and (4) Representative Rangel pay restitution to the appropriate taxing authorities or the U.S. Treasury for any unpaid estimated taxes outlined in Exhibit 066 on income received from his property in the Dominican Republic and provide proof of payment to the Committee.
      77 other corrupt Democrats also voted “no” on censoring Charles Rangel.  You can find out who voted no here.

    Rules for Radical Conservatives

    In "Rules for Radical Conservatives," David Kahane takes off the mask that the American left has shown the public for decades.  Instead of assuming that liberals are just another legitimate political philosophy, Mr. Kahane shows that it is a philosophy that is aimed at turning America from a constitutional republic to a tyrannical regime that would never reverse back.  Instead of accepting the premises of the left, we must reject their premises.  Accepting the liberal premises of the left results in adopting all of their policies as well.  Rather than debating policies on the liberals' turf, it is better to articulate our (superior) philosophy, which will result in the policies following the philosophy. 

    The left did not get to where they are today through convincing people that their side is right.  Rather, they have done so through intimidation, coercion, emotional arguments, and through steadily gaining ground in the universities, media, schools, and our bureaucracies.  Even today, the liberals are a distinct and insular minority, representing about 20% of the country, but their dominance in the blue-states and cities--mostly on the coasts--have still allowed them to have far more influence than their numbers would imply.  My view is that they have gained power mostly because Republicans have not acted principally to reject the FDR philosophy and instead advance the Founders/Ronald Reagan/Ayn Rand philosophy into law.  Democrats also have campaigned as Republicans.  Even the hard-left radical Obama campaigned on Republican themes of lower federal spending and tax cuts. 

    Thursday, November 25, 2010

    Happy Thanksgiving!

    Happy Thanksgiving, America!  Be thankful that you live in the greatest country in the world.  While the worst president in American history is still president, we should not judge our love for country based upon temporary political leaders.  Bad times shall pass, just as they have in the past.  Happy Thanksgiving, everyone.

    Tuesday, November 16, 2010

    TSA Has Gone Too Far

    TSA (Thousands Standing Around) is providing Americans with a choice: they can subject themselves to harmful dosages of radiation from an x-ray machine or they can be felt up by thugs who got fired from the post office.  The time has come to abolish TSA.  We are Americans.  We should not permit this kind of abuse of our constitutional rights.  Enough is enough. 

    Sunday, October 31, 2010

    Too bad the Democrats can return until Jan 3, 2011

    Tuesday is a day of liberty for the nation because it is the day that voters are finally asked what they think of Democrats running every part of the federal government.  People are tired of being told what type of light bulb to have in their house, what health care plan they must purchase, and what type of automobile they ought to drive.  The great thing is that this isn’t North Korea.  We still get to fire these authoritarian statists.  The only sad thing is that once we fire them, they are permitted to return until January 3, 2011. 

    Wednesday, October 20, 2010

    What the next Congress should do.

    In less than two weeks from now, Americans will head to the polls to elect a conservative Congress that will stop the Obama agenda.  They do not care how they get there.  They do not want any compromises whatsoever with Obama or the socialist Democrats.  None.  If Obama wants a particular law, Congress should say no.  Congress does not answer to Obama: rather, they are responsible to their constituents, not the executive.  Congress should refuse to fund Obamacare, investigate the czars, say no to his radical judges, and lower government spending dramatically. 

    Monday, October 18, 2010

    If you vote Democrat, you support Castro.

    Congresswoman Diane Watson revealed that she has a lot of praise for communist dictator Fidel Castro.  If you vote Democrat, you empower radicals like Diane Watson to enforce their agenda against the will of the American people.

    Tuesday, October 12, 2010

    Anti-American President Obama Opposes Free speech for Business Owners.

    Obama has defamed the Chamber of Commerce by falsely stating that they are accepting money from foreign sources.  Even the New York Times has said that this allegation is false.  The Chamber of Commerce is a quintessential American institution, with millions of members, and has a history that goes as far back as 1768 in New York City.  The Chamber of Commerce represents the American spirit of the industrious individual who uses reason to achieve their dreams.

    The truth is that Obama does not like any dissenting voices against his rush to impose socialism and fascism in America.  Business leaders should not lose their right to participate in elections simply because they provide services and products to millions of people.  Obama suggests that the most productive individuals—who we rely on to provide cutting edge products and services—should be quiet and not make any effort to inform the public about harmful policies coming from the government. 

    Meanwhile, President Obama does not object to government parasites—such as government unions—spending millions to influence the 2010 mid-term election.

    Friday, October 08, 2010

    How about we all get waivers from Obamacare? Vote GOP!

    I have an idea on how to get a waiver from Obamacare: repeal the law through the election of a GOP Congress.  If everyone wants a waiver from a particular law, it means that the law is oppressive.  So let's repeal the law. 

    Obama wants to take away McDonald employee's health insurance

    Remember when Democrats passed the health insurance so that the "poor" folks who work at fast-food restaurants will get health care?  Well, apparently that was just another huge lie.  Apparently those "greedy" fast-food corporations already had innovative health insurance plans for their employees.

    It is Obama who wants to take away worker's health insurance!

    Friday, September 24, 2010

    Democrats support brainwashing children

    Democrats support brainwashing children with environmental fascist propaganda. 

    Obama certainly does not love America. Woodward's book, "Obama's Wars," proves this.

    President Obama confirmed the worst suspicions held by conservatives when he stated that "We can absorb a terrorist attack. We'll do everything we can to prevent it, but even a 9/11, even the biggest attack ever . . . we absorbed it and we are stronger."  This statement shows that Obama does not take seriously his role as commander and chief.  Rather than being on the 'defensive' posture and thinking about how we can "absorb a terrorist attack," a real commander in chief, one who truly loved America, would talk about how fighting the enemies on their own turf, and properly identifying domestic Islamic terrorists, would be able to prevent another terrorist attack, as was the case during President George W. Bush's eight years in office.  Obama proved, once again, that he does not love America.

    Liz Cheney, daughter of former Vice President Cheney and chairwoman of Keep America Safe, reacted very strongly to the statement.  "This comment suggests an alarming fatalism on the part of President Obama and his administration," she said in a statement. "Once again the president seems either unwilling or unable to do what it takes to keep this nation safe. The president owes the American people an explanation."

    Sunday, September 19, 2010

    Democrats deserve contempt

    Democrats do not deserve to win another term in Congress. They will try to obscure the issues and confuse the public, but we will not forget what they have done to our country. They ignored us, and we will return the favor by firing them in November.

    Obama’s core supporters are not motivated to “guard the change.”

    President Obama told his “supporters” today that “[t]he last election was a changing of the guard -- now we need to guard the change.”  (emphasis added).  It must be hard to motivate his supporters.  After all, hasn’t the government already taken over much of the private sector?  In 18 months, Obama has taken over America’s automobile industry, the health care industry, the financial sector, and spent $800 billion on non-stimulus “stimulus—in other words, worthless make-work jobs for government workers. His core supporters in the deranged and informed community might not be too pleased with the high unemployment and lower income that has taken root as a result of the ‘change’ that they voted for.  Perhaps they are not interested in “guarding the change.”

    Tuesday, August 03, 2010

    Kagan's Alarming Record: Military, Guns, Abortion, Immigration

    Elena Kagen is NOT qualified to be on the US Supreme Court because she does not believe in the Constitution as it was originally understood at the time of its adoption. She would be an activist judge who ignores the clear meaning of the text of the US Constitution and instead enacts a so-called "progressive" (in reality, regressive) agenda.

    In particular, Elena Kagan opposes a government of limited powers, and instead believes in a government of unlimited powers. Instead of serving as a check on the federal government's usurpation of our rights, she would be a rubber stamp supporting every statist policy that Congress and the President enact. Want to sue the federal government to stop them from requiring you to buy health insurance? With an Elena Kagan on the court, good luck, because she is going to automatically vote to affirm the law, regardless of the fact that the law violates the US Constitution.

    Congressman Pete Stark (D-CA) Reveals the Democrat Authoritarian Instinct

    "I think that there are very few constitutional limits that prevent the federal government from rules that would affect your private life." Congressman Pete Stark (D-CA).

    Isn't it amazing that someone can be elected being this brazen about their desire to run our lives?  Democrats are not even trying to hide their authoritarian instincts anymore.  The Democrats, at their root, have a philosophy that is oriented towards state control and state management over every American's life.  That is why we continue to say that Democrats hate America, because America, at its core, was designed as a constitutional republic to protect the rights of the citizenry, not run their lives.

    Tuesday, July 27, 2010

    Rush Limbaugh Confirms that Democrats and Liberals hate America

    Rush Limbaugh gave a powerful monologue on how Democrats (and liberals) genuinely hate America, including our history and the institutions that made this country what it is today.  As Rush Limbaugh said today:
    Do you realize that the political arguments that we're having in this country are not just between two competing ideologies.  They're between people who love the United States of America and people who don't.  You might even go further and say it's not just people who don't love the country. It's people who have an active hate for it.

    I also wish that this were not the case.  I wish everyone in America loved the institutions that made America great, especially the US Constitution and liberty in general.  Sadly, that is not so.  A large number of Americans sadly reject our US Constitution and want to attack the liberty that brought about the highest standard of living anywhere in the world.  Many Americans have fallen prey to ideologies that are alien to our culture--such as socialism and fascism.  Since these individuals who hate America vote, their sentiments are reflected in the politicians that they elect. There is a way forward, however.  As Rush Limbaugh explained today:
    "If I could change one thing, it would be to change the fact that so many people born in this country hate it.  If we could change that, we would eliminate 90% of the problems politically that we have."

    I couldn't say it better myself.

    Thursday, July 22, 2010

    UCLA law professor Jonathan Zasloff opposes free speech

    In a recent online article on, it exposes the collusion between liberal reporters in their attempt to spread propaganda to millions of Americans.  One rather remarkable post on one of these litservs was a question by radical UCLA law professor Jonathan Zasloff, in which he asked, “I hate to open this can of worms, but is there any reason why the FCC couldn't simply pull their broadcasting permit once it expires?"   It is obvious that a man like Mr. Zasloff does not believe in free speech or the limitations placed on the government by the First Amendment of the US Constitution.  (Further, as the Founders ponted out, since Congress has not been granted the power to censor television stations, it simply cannot do this—even if the First Amendment had not been created.  I decided to write to this “professor.”  Here is the text of my written comments:

    Mr. Zasloff,
    I read on the internet that you wrote that the government should be able to shut down Fox.  You have a lot of degrees, but apparently you have never heard of the First Amendment.  Perhaps you believe that the only viewpoint that is worthy of free speech is the socialist-collectivist-altruist one.  As an alumni of UCLA, I am embarrassed that a "professor" would not understand how the First Amendment operates. 

    UCLA law professor Jonathan Zasloff opposes free speech

    In a recent online article on, it exposes the collusion between liberal reporters in their attempt to spread propaganda to millions of Americans.  One rather remarkable post on one of these litservs was a question by radical UCLA law professor Jonathan Zasloff, in which he asked, “"I hate to open this can of worms, but is there any reason why the FCC couldn't simply pull their broadcasting permit once it expires?"   It is obvious that a man like Mr. Zasloff does not believe in free speech or the limitations placed on the government by the First Amendment of the US Constitution.  (Further, as the Founders ponted out, since Congress has not been granted the power to censor television stations, it simply cannot do this—even if the First Amendment had not been created.  I decided to write to this “professor.”  Here is the text of my written comments:

    Mr. Zasloff,
    I read on the internet that you wrote that the government should be able to shut down Fox.  You have a lot of degrees, but apparently you have never heard of the First Amendment.  Perhaps you believe that the only viewpoint that is worthy of free speech is the socialist-collectivist-altruist one.  As an alumni of UCLA, I am embarrassed that a "professor" would not understand how the First Amendment operates. 

    Thursday, July 15, 2010

    US Senator Barbara Boxer wants to raise electricity prices dramatically. Let her run on this platform if that is her passion.

    Democrat US Senator Barbara Boxer has spent the last several years championing the policy of dramatically raising our electricity prices.  Considering that this is one of her passions, why doesn’t she run on this policy?  She should say, quite clearly, in a television ad, that it is her goal to cause electricity prices to “skyrocket.”  Let’s see how many votes she will get then.

    Wednesday, July 07, 2010

    Donald Berwick, a Marxist, will now control your health care decisions.

    President Obama nominated Donald Berwick to run Medicare and Medicaid.  The US Senate did not schedule any hearings on this man.  Since the US Senate will be in recess, Obama will be making a recess appointment of this man.   Donald Berwick is the absolute worst person to be in charge of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS).  This is a man who believes that the government should be in control of health care and must ration care.  He praised the NHS health care system in the UK, which rations care.  He condemns capitalism and the American system of providing health care.  Instead, he praises, and indeed says that he “romanticizes” the fact that the UK system rations health care through the iron fist of its bureaucracies.  He is an idiot.  He is not an intellectual.  He is not compassionate.    He is a man without any merit who believes that his decisions should override those of millions of individuals arranging their health care decisions themselves. 

    Thursday, July 01, 2010

    Nancy Pelosi believes paying non-workers increases net employment. Seriously!

    House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said today that taking money from individuals who are working and redistributing it to pay those who are not employed will somehow create more jobs.  She really said this!   Is she working for the Onion?  How does this work in practice?  A logical person would say that this would make the productive worker poorer (and sacrifice his liberty) while the non-worker will receive an unearned benefit precisely because he does not work.  Hence, the worker who creates wealth gets punished, while the non-worker gets rewarded.  Hmm, could this be a pattern with the Democrat Party?  Could it be that they want to only provide support to those who are parasites?

    Friday, June 25, 2010

    North Korea thinks that they are Obama.

    North Korea says that they are owed $75 trillion from US citizens.  Who do they think they are?  Obama?

    Paul McCartney is a jerk.

    Paul McCartney is an immature, uncurious, and aggressive statist.  Yes, he was in the Beatles.  We all liked his music.   Does that mean that we should consider his uninformed opinion on the environment more than anyone else?  No.  What is his expertise on global warming/climate change?  Absolutely nothing.  However, what is quite clear is that he, like most statists, likes the idea of controlling the people.  Just as he was able to get girls to swoon to his music, he would like to get a continent to shrug as a result of his overbearing socialist policies. 

    Thursday, June 17, 2010

    Obama’s unconstitutional ‘taking’ of BP’s shareholder’s property

    What I really find upsetting about the BP oil spill situation is that Obama has acted in an unconstitutional manner.  Obama does not have any Constitutional authority to steal $20 billion from BP’s shareholders and redistribute it to politically connected recipients.  What do I support?  I believe that legitimate claims should either be voluntarily provided by BP or through civil lawsuits in state or federal courts.  When there is a legitimate grievance, individuals should have their day in court, with an impartial judge and possibly a jury (if they request one), using objective law and facts to prove that they are owed money.  In America, we do not assign presidents dictatorial powers to act as a judge and jury.  That’s not America. 

    Lame duck Congress is frightening

    Guess what is frightening?  A lame duck session in Congress where the Democrats will raise taxes, impose cap and trade, a VAT tax, and legalize the illegal aliens.  Democrats have contempt for the American people, so it is not unreasonable to imagine Democrats trying this.

    Wednesday, June 16, 2010

    Obama has shown contempt for the American people. 57% oppose his performance.

    Obama has shown nothing but contempt for the American people since he has been elected President of the United States of America.  Well, this arrogance has certainly had an impact in undermining his poll numbers.  57% of the American people oppose Obama’s performance as President.

    Saturday, June 12, 2010

    Time to fire US Senator (“ma’am”) Barbara Boxer

    When I casually did an informal, unscientific search of the California US Senate race, it is quite apparent that all of the energy is on the Republican side.  Very few Democrats are taking the time to show their support for the intellectually deficient, morally bankrupt, and emotionally unstable US Senator Barbara Boxer.  I suppose it is hard for Democrats to get very excited and in favor of a woman who supports destruction of the energy industry, health care rationing, and ever higher taxes.  It is time for California to vote to fire Barbara Boxer.  She has stayed long enough in the US Senate. 

    Thursday, June 03, 2010

    Vote for Chuck DeVore for US Senate from California

    If you’re like me, you are probably tired of Republicans who know how to talk about conservative policy positions and then move leftward after they win a primary.  However, there is one statesman running for the US Senate from California.  The name of this man?  Chuck DeVore.  Chuck DeVore knows that the government’s job is to protect individuals’ pre-existing individual rights.  He has opposed the bailouts, opposed the phony “stimulus,” supports dramatic reductions in taxes and government spending, and would vote “no” on Obama’s radical judicial nominees.  Vote for Chuck DeVore. 

    Thursday, May 27, 2010

    Zev Chafets' book on Rush Limbaugh

    I just read an excerpt of Zev Chafets' book on Rush Limbaugh, and it is great.  Read it here.

    Wednesday, May 26, 2010

    Obama doesn't care about the troops.

    Why is President Obama not going to Arlington National Cemetery on Memorial Day? It is simple: Obama does not care about showing signs of patriotism to this nation.  He does not respect liberty, and he certainly has no interest in celebrating anything that happened prior to him being elected.  So it makes sense that a man like him, who has no class, and who does not care about the office of the presidency, would not even show our soldiers and veterans that he cares.  Why should he?  He doesn't care.

    Wednesday, May 05, 2010

    Obama's ideas aren't new, but they sound like socialism

    I'm always shocked by the wealth of information that one can find on the internet.  While browsing through Google's Book search feature, I found an old pamplet published in 1848 about communism and socialism.  The fact that it describes Barack Obama proves that a) his philosophy is not new and b) his philosophy is indeed socialistic in its orientation.

    Friday, April 30, 2010

    Obama is opposed to economic freedom

    In a shocking statement, Obama said that "I do think that at a certain point you've made enough money."  Who is to decide when someone has made enough money?  Obama.  He does not believe in economic freedom, but instead believes that individuals should be directed by government officials.  Individuals who have ambition, have high financial goals, and pursue their independent path have no need for politicians who promise bailouts, regulation, and higher taxes like President Obama.

    Wednesday, April 07, 2010

    President Obama gives instructions to our enemies on how to attack us without receiving a devastating nuclear attack

    President Obama released his "Nuclear Posture Review," in which he publicly disclosed to our enemies how they can attack the United States without having to fear a nuclear retaliatory response.  In this report, Obama has let our enemies know that we will not respond with nuclear weapons if they destroy one of our cities while that nation is in compliance with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. 

    In the President's own idiotic and careless language, the report says: "The United States is declaring that we will not use or threaten to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear weapons states that are party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and in compliance with their nuclear nonproliferation obligations," the President pledged.  (emphasis added).

    If an enemy attacks us with chemical or biological weapons, we will not respond with nuclear weapons, so long as the enemy is in compliance with the Non-Proliferation Treaty!  Outrageous!

    The President of the United States has just given our enemies instructions on how to attack the United States and receive the least devastating response possible.

    Monday, April 05, 2010

    California bar association fears Professors's research will discredit affirmative action

    A UCLA professor, Richard Sanders, who is an economist and law professor, has asked for data from the California state bar, including applicants’ race, law schools attended, year graduated from law school, bar pass rate, law school grades and LSAT scores.  Sanders is trying to gather enough evidence to show that race-based admissions actually hurt the very students such policies were designed to help.  By admitting students based upon race, rather than merit, it results in students who cannot compete as well with the students who were admitted based upon race, says Richard Sanders. 
    Why won’t the California state bar release this information to Professor Sanders?  The main reason why is because the California State Bar is quite committed to race-based admission policies, and releasing this information will go against their ideological worldview.  So of course they are delaying and obstructing the release of this data.

    Friday, March 26, 2010

    Republicans in Congress have introduced legislation to repeal the government takeover of health care

    Republicans in Congress have introduced legislation to repeal the government takeover of the American health care industry.   This is exactly the right approach.  Socialist health care cannot be 'reformed' or 'fixed.'  If any part of the law were to remain in tact, it would suggest that Republicans agree philosophically with Democrats that certain industries ought to be run by the government.  That would be a disaster politically as well as philosophically.  Millions of Americans know that the US Constitution does not grant Congress the power to force Americans to buy insurance, to run insurance companies, or to force employers to offer coverage.  Americans will reward Republicans for standing opposed to socialist health care and insisting that health care is a private matter left up to millions of patients and the doctors who serve them. 

    The socialist health care law must be abolished completely, and only then, after the bad law has been repealed, is it possible to write new legislation that enables citizens to buy insurance across state lines, remove health insurance mandates that result in higher prices, institute tort reform, expand health savings accounts, and remove the employer tax subsidy so that consumers have the incentive to purchase health insurance on their own.

    Tuesday, March 23, 2010

    Democrats nationalize health care industry

    Democrats voted to nationalize the health care industry in America on Saturday, and today, Obama signed the unconstitutional bill into law.  Americans, we will not let this legislation remain on the books.  Americans know that this legislation hands over more and more power to the federal government -- instead of in the hands of millions of market participants deciding what is in their best interest.  Democrats do not believe in freedom.  They do not believe in the US Constitution.  It is time to wake up and elect principled conservative Republicans in 2010 and 2010 to contain this agenda and reverse it.

    Tuesday, March 16, 2010

    Isn't it obvious: Democrats do hate America!

    When we started this blog, a lot of people thought the idea that Democrats hate America was ludicrous.  But we knew that Democrats have contempt for America, its institutions, its Founders, and our Constitution. 

    Is there any doubt now that Democrats hate America?  We are now at a point in time in which Democrats in the House of Representatives do not want to even vote on their own disastrous health care bill. 

    Instead, they just want to have their legislation deemed passed if the Senate "fixes" the unpopular parts of the bill; this is unconstitutional as it is an attempt to evade the constitutional requirement that our elected officials have an up or down vote on identical legislation in each chamber, as the Constitution requires.  Article 1, Section 7 of the Constitution, however, states that for any bill to beome law "the Votes of both Houses shall be determined by the yeas and Nays, and the Names of the Persons voting for and against the bill shall be entered on the Journal of each House respectively."  

    Instead, the Democrats hope to pass the health care destruction bill through the "Slaughterhouse" rule, whereby the House votes to "deem" that it approves of the Senate health care bill only on the contingency that the "fixes" to the bill are made by the Senate.  It is a complicated, convoluted, and unconstitutional method of trying to pass a bill that is already unconstitutional for many other reasons.

    Why do the Democrats hate the US Constitution?  The main reason is because the Constitution is a constraint on government power, and hence, a restraint on their insatiable appetite to control the lives of individual Americans.  Thankfully, the US Constitution does provide us with one solution: vote against every Democrat on the ballot this November.

    Friday, March 12, 2010

    Wednesday, March 10, 2010

    Health insurance companies cannot cover "pre-existing" conditions and stay in business.

    Democrats have been rallying against health insurance companies for failing to cover those with "pre-existing" conditions.  However, it is common for insurance companies of all stripes to deny coverage for a condition after it has already happened.  To take one example: fire insurance.  You can't get fire insurance after a fire has taken place.  If a fire insurance company had to issue insurance after a fire, no one would pay fire insurance premiums until after a fire, and hence, the insurance company would only receive premiums from those who are already requesting a claim!  The fire insurance company would go out of business quite rapidly.

    The same is true when it comes to health insurance.  A health insurance company does not have an unlimited amount of funds.  It receives premiums from customers, who wish to transfer the risk of a catastrophic health care bill to the health insurance company.  If one could receive health insurance after a pre-existing condition, such as an illness or an accident, then there is absolutely no incentive to buy health insurance until after one needs coverage.  That is not the way insurance works, and there is absolutely no justification for changing this standard industry practice.  The only reason to re-write federal and state law to cover pre-existing conditions is to put the health insurance companies out of business and institute single-payer, government-run health care.

    Wednesday, March 03, 2010

    United States Postal Services offers us a glimpse into the future.

    The United States Postal Services is a government-run monopoly.  As a monopoly, it is the "single" provider of mail service across the nation.  Recently, the USPS has for the authority from Congress to substantially raise their prices, and offer less services, reducing their six-day delivery to five-day delivery.  What, pay more, get less?  That is the nature of how a government-run monopoly operates.  Since the USPS actually prevents competition through the force of law, it is a monopoly that isn't the sole provider because individuals have chosen it over other competitors, but rather because it has the power of brute force by preventing its competitors from competing.  If any competitor started to deliver first-class mail, the federal government would seize the property of that business and have the courts order an immediate halt to that business. 

    USPS is a glimpse into the future.

    The authoritarian Democrats in Congress want to set up a health care system that would ultimately lead towards a "single payer" government-run health care system.  Single "payer" is another way of saying one government-run, authoritarian, top-down bureaucracy that would decide how all health care dollars are spent within the economy.  It would be command and control.  If you want a certain procedure, the government would have the power to say no to you.  Since the government-run health care system would be the only game in town -- hence the name, "single" payer -- you would be stuck. 

    In a market-economy, individuals decide how much they want of something through the price system.  People decide how much of their wealth they are willing to exchange for some good or service.  In a government-run system, the price system is eliminated, and the only party that gets to decide how much of a good or service you can receive is the government.  This would ultimately mean that there would be an unlimited amount of demand on the system, to the point in which the government would have to use brute force to cut costs by denying patients the ability to get care.  This is exactly what we are seeing at the Post Office.  Even while the Post Office is preventing individuals from competing with it, it still is determined to cut services and charge customers more.  That is why Americans do not want ObamaCare and will vote against Democrats for forcing such a system on the people.

    Tuesday, February 23, 2010

    Democrats are like rapists: both are impervious to cries of "no!"

    Democrats are like rapists:  both are impervious to cries of "no!"  Americans went to Tea Party protests, town hall meetings, wrote to their Members of Congress, elected anti ObamaCare Republican Scott Brown from Massachusetts in a special election, and clearly said "no!" every single time to socialized, authoritarian, government-run health care.  In a recent poll, 56% of Americans oppose Obama's "new" government-run health care plan.  However, neither Obama, nor the Democrats in Congress, care that Americans oppose what they are doing.  The elected Democrats have absolute contempt for public opinion and are willing to impose their will with raw political power, irrespective of the damage that this would do to a private health care system that is the best in the world.

    Monday, February 08, 2010

    Congress should reject President Obama's Federal Budget for the United States (2011)

    Many commentators have noted the outrageous price tag of President Obama's 2011 federal budget.  A lot of commentators have failed to note that any money that is spent for programs, departments, or agencies that are not authorized by the United States Constitution is illegitimate and void.  The purpose of our federal government is to secure our liberty, provide for forums where disagreements among individuals or corporations can be adjudicated, and to otherwise leave men free to pursue their self-interest.  

    As the Preamble to the United States Constitution states:

    "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
     Congress should reject President Obama's 2011 budget.  

    Wednesday, January 20, 2010

    Congratulations to Republican Sen-elect Scott Brown

    Congratulations to Republican Sen-elect Scott Brown of Massachusetts for his election victory, ensuring that he will be the 41st Republican in the United States Senate.  The fact that Massachusetts, which is a solidly Democrat state, voted to send a Republican to the Senate, shows that the people are rising up against the authoritarian Democrats in Congress.  Voters have said no to Democrats by electing Republican Governors in Virginia and New Jersey, and now, by electing a Republican Senator to represent Massachusetts.  

    The people of Massachusetts strongly oppose government-run health care. Only 36% of Massachussetts voters supported ObamaCare.  Philosophically, the Democrats' statist objectives run counter to human nature, which is to pursue one's own rational self-interest to find happiness in life.  The Democrats reject the Declaration of Independence statement that the objective of government is to protect "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."  Instead, Democrats believe that the objective of government is to control the population through the confiscation of their wealth and through regulations directing them to act in a certain way or face penalties.

    Sen-elect Scott Brown ran on a platform opposing government redistribution of wealth masquerading as fiscal "stimulus."  Scott Brown articulated the evil nature of taking the wealth from citizens and redistributing it to other individuals or organizations (i.e., bank bailouts).  He supported private property rights by stating that private Catholic hospitals have the right to manage their own hospital and develop their own policies, without government involvement.   Not surprisingly, Scott Brown opposes a federal government-run health care system, and he will now vote in favor of a filibuster to stop further socialization of our health care industry.

    Scott Brown also has shown the folly of global warming and will vote against cap and tax.  The idea of of punishing the producers of energy, with the intention of creating energy shortages, rationing, and price hikes, seems like a suicidal energy policy.  We look forward to seeing Sen-elect Scott Brown being a passionate defender of liberty here in the United States.

    Thursday, January 07, 2010

    Congress should say no to California bailout

    California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger is asking for a "bailout" of California, which faces a deficit of $20 billion, despite raising taxes in 2009.  The federal government should say 'no.'  Providing bailouts to failed states, or failed companies, creates a moral hazard, which makes future mismanagement even more likely in the future since there will be an assumption that there will be future bailouts.  California has increased its rate of government spending far higher than inflation and population growth over the last decade, mainly to enrich the perennially enraged lunatic government employee unions.  California's government needs to go on a diet.  Now.