The Welfare State and The Selfish Society

I came across this article by Dennis Prager this morning and it "hit the nail on the head"

The Welfare State and the Selfish Society

In the contemporary world, where left-wing attitudes are regarded as normative, it is a given that capitalism, with its free market and profit motive, emanates from and creates selfishness, while socialism, the welfare state and the "social compact," as it is increasingly referred to, emanate from and produce selflessness.

The opposite is the truth.

Whatever its intentions, the entitlement state produces far more selfish people -- and therefore, a far more selfish society -- than a free-market economy. And once this widespread selfishness catches on, we have little evidence that it can be undone.

Here's an illustration: Last year, President Obama addressed a large audience of college students on the subject of health care. At one point in his speech, he announced that the students will now be able to remain on their parents' health insurance plan until age 26. I do not ever recall hearing a louder, more thunderous and sustained applause than I did then. I do not believe that if the president had announced that a cure for cancer had been discovered that the applause would have been louder or longer.

It is depressing to listen to that applause. To be told that one can be dependent on one's parents until age 26 should strike a young person who wants to grow up as demeaning, not as something to celebrate.

Throughout American history, the natural -- or at least hoped for -- inclination of a young person was to become a mature adult, independent of Mom and Dad, and to become a grown up. But in the welfare state, this is no longer the case.

In various European countries, it is increasingly common for young men to live with their parents into their 30s and even longer. Why not? In the welfare state, there is no shame in doing so.

The welfare state enables -- and thereby produces -- people whose preoccupations become more and more self-centered as time goes on:

How many benefits will I receive from the state?

How much will the state pay for my education?

How much will the state pay for my health care and when I retire?

What is the youngest age at which I can retire?

How much vacation time can I get each year?

How many days can I call in sick and get paid?

How many months can I claim paternity or maternity care money?

The list gets longer with each election of a left-wing party. And each entitlement becomes a "right" as the left transforms entitlements into the language of "rights" as quickly as possible.

What entitlements do, and what the transformation of entitlements into rights does, is create a citizenry that increasingly lacks the most important character trait -- gratitude. Of all the characteristics needed for both a happy and morally decent life, none surpasses gratitude. Grateful people are happier, and grateful people are more morally decent. That is why we teach our children to say "thank you." But the welfare state undoes that. One does not express thanks for a right. So, instead of "thank you," the citizen of the welfare state is taught to say, "What more can I get?"

Yet, while producing increasingly selfish people, the mantra of the left, and therefore of the universities and the media, has been for generations that capitalism and the free market, not the welfare state, produces selfish people.

They succeed in part because demonizing conservatives and their values is a left-wing art. But the truth is that capitalism and the free market produce less selfish people. Teaching people to work hard and take care of themselves (and others) produces a less, not a more, selfish citizen.

Capitalism teaches people to work harder; the welfare state teaches people to want harder. Which is better?

A Brief History of the Public Sector Unions That Are Bleeding America Dry With the Full Support of the Democrat Party

This is an amazing article which explains unions in such a simple manner, even a liberal can understand it:

Throughout American history -- and as recently as the 1950s -- there were no unions for government workers. Public-sector employees were expected to earn a bit less than their private-sector equivalents. The reasons they did so included an interest in public service, job security and reasonable benefits.

But that changed in the late fifties with New York City Mayor Robert Wagner's cynical appeal to the votes of city workers. He signed an executive order authorizing them to unionize, and soon other local and state Democrat legislators around the country followed his lead.

These efforts culminated in 1962, when President John F. Kennedy granted federal employees the right to collectively bargain. Since then, public sector union membership has skyrocketed while, in the private sector, unions have fallen out of favor.

In 2009, private sector union members were outnumbered for the first time by their public sector counterparts.

The historical basis of unions revolved around workers receiving a reasonable share of a company's profits. But that tenet is nonsensical when applied to public service. Governments don't make profits; they simply assess taxes.

The aims of public sector unions conflict directly with the interests of taxpayers.

And because it has been exceedingly hard to fight public sector unions, the salaries and benefits of public employees have skyrocketed in recent years. Since the election of Barack Obama, the number of federal employees making over $150,000 a year has more than doubled to over 10,000.

In 2009 government salaries jumped 2.4%, approximately twice the increase earned by private sector employees. In fact, the average salary of a federal worker is now $71,000, about $22,000 more than the average private sector employee.

Worst of all, public sector unions have negotiated pension plans that are proving financially untenable. Many allow workers to retire at age 55 at around their full salary in their final years of employment. These pensions often include inflation adjustments as well as lifetime free health care.

These plans are so outrageous that state retirement systems, for example, are currently underfunded by about a trillion dollars.

So how have public sector unions achieved these amazing results? The answer is hundreds of millions of dollars, the approximate amount that unions have contributed to federal campaigns since 1990. Almost every dollar went to Democrats or Democrat causes. In the 2008 election alone, some estimates put public sector union contributions to Democrats at $60 million.

These unions are also astroturfing for Democrats, providing slush funds to help liberal causes. An example is ThePartyIsOver.org, a faux populist website designed to discredit TEA Party activists.

The Democrats' health care bill, the 'Employee Free Choice Act' and the $800+ billion stimulus bill all contained payoffs to public sector unions. In fact, while the private sector has shed 7,000,000 jobs since the recession began, the number of public sector jobs has risen every month.

Public sector unions are killing our economic system and the American taxpayer. The debt unleashed by their outrageous benefits plans simply cannot be paid. The union bosses have lied to their members about lifetime benefits and they have betrayed the American people. Public sector unions must be disbanded and outlawed before our country resembles Greece, Spain and other European countries that are teetering on the brink of destruction, thanks to unions just like ours.

http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2010/02/illustrated-history-of-public-sector.html

Based upon: Amy H. Laff, StateBrief.

George Washington's 1789 Thanksgiving Proclamation

There sure are a lot of references to God. I thought President Obama said we were not a Christian nation. HAPPY THANKSGIVING EVERYONE!!!

GEORGE WASHINGTON'S 1789 THANKSGIVING PROCLAMATION

Whereas it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favor; and Whereas both Houses of Congress have, by their joint committee, requested me to "recommend to the people of the United States a day of public thanksgiving and prayer, to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many and signal favors of Almighty God, especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a form of government for their safety and happiness:"

Now, therefore, I do recommend and assign Thursday, the 26th day of November next, to be devoted by the people of these States to the service of that great and glorious Being who is the beneficent author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be; that we may then all unite in rendering unto Him our sincere and humble thanks for His kind care and protection of the people of this country previous to their becoming a nation; for the signal and manifold mercies and the favorable interpositions of His providence in the course and conclusion of the late war; for the great degree of tranquility, union, and plenty which we have since enjoyed; for the peaceable and rational manner in which we have been enable to establish constitutions of government for our safety and happiness, and particularly the national one now lately instituted for the civil and religious liberty with which we are blessed, and the means we have of acquiring and diffusing useful knowledge; and, in general, for all the great and various favors which He has been pleased to confer upon us.

And also that we may then unite in most humbly offering our prayers and supplications to the great Lord and Ruler of Nations and beseech Him to pardon our national and other transgressions; to enable us all, whether in public or private stations, to perform our several and relative duties properly and punctually; to render our National Government a blessing to all the people by constantly being a Government of wise, just, and constitutional laws, discreetly and faithfully executed and obeyed; to protect and guide all sovereigns and nations (especially such as have shown kindness to us), and to bless them with good governments, peace, and concord; to promote the knowledge and practice of true religion and virtue, and the increase of science among them and us; and, generally to grant unto all mankind such a degree of temporal prosperity as He alone knows to be best.

Given under my hand, at the city of New York, the 3d day of October, A.D. 1789.

Wow!! Obama Faced Toughest Presidency?? Really??

There is no depth in lying that they will not stoop to. I suppose they feel they have "dumbed down" public education enough over the last 20 years that Americans may accept this idiotic claim as truth.

Obama Regime Revealed...Top 20 Socialist Soundbites

An instant classic!! This is what currently represents our nation!!! There has never been a more important time to VOTE in the history of our nation!! Let's get these radicals out of office!!

Concerning Strange Bedfellows (repost)

I am reposting this as I have noticed many crazies have once again grabbed the coattails of conservatism.

Concerning Strange Bedfellows

In my daily attempt to shed light on the liberals statist agenda that seeks to convert our fine republic into a socialist doormat for the world, I come across a great many characters with quite a few interesting viewpoints.

Throughout 2009, as President Obama and the liberal congress made it increasingly obvious that the oath they swore to uphold the Constitution of The United States meant nothing to them, a movement began which has been dubbed the “Tea Party Movement.” As the movement grew and gained popularity as a strong attempt to reclaim conservative values based upon the Constitution, fiscal responsibility, limited government, and free markets, many different viewpoints and, in some cases “fringe” elements have attempted to attach their causes to the coattails of this movement. Let’s examine some of the different schools of thought I come in contact with daily:

Those that contend the President and the liberal-run congress support policies that are socialist in nature, and therefore are not supported by our Constitution. I would say the vast majority of conservatives, myself included, believe this is true.

Those that contend the President and the liberal-run congress are enacting reckless spending policies on purpose in order to cause a catastrophic failure of the free market in order to enact a new socialist government…see Cloward/Piven Strategy. Quite a few are beginning to accept this theory, and I consider it to be a possibility. Whether you believe this is true or not, the problem here is that this thought process begins to lend itself to the conspiracy theorist crowd, which loves to take a small fact or truth, and run with it to the point that it becomes laughable.

The libertarian school of thought has been more widely accepted as of late, and a great many conservatives find themselves having “common ground” with the libertarians’ strict views of limited government and personal liberty. The problem with becoming too cozy with libertarian philosophy is the broad spectrum it encompasses. Some libertarians take limited government and go so far as to desire the abolition of the state completely. This school of thought seems to vilify all government representation as evil and an enemy of individual rights. Their “live and let live” philosophy is a close cousin to pacifism, which is typically espoused by liberal fringe groups…thus, completely perverting the initial belief system 180 degrees, and allowing persons who do not represent conservatism in any way a perceived voice in the discord.

For example, I have made many friends in the last year writing my blog and have utilized facebook as a mechanism for keeping up with these alleged like-minded thinkers. I recently witnessed disturbing articles and videos from some of these self-avowed fellow tea party patriots which were in no way based in conservatism or the Constitution. Everything from anti-war veterans speaking of how evil corporate fatcats forced them to take part in unjust wars to schizophrenic 9/11 “truthers” were included. Needless to say they are no longer on my friend list.

Overall, the Tea Party Movement has done a great deal to fight the statist policies that threaten to bring this wonderful republic to its knees. I am a staunch supporter of it and would march in every event they coordinated if my status as a U.S. Marine allowed for it. My concern in this article is to point out that as this movement continues to grow at such a brisk pace, it will be important to ensure that the leaders of the movement are policing the ranks for those that would misrepresent the principles the movement stands for.

TWO BIRDS WITH ONE STONE: HOW NPR KNOCKS OUT A PLUG FOR OBAMA’S GOVERNMENT HANDOUTS AND FIRST LADY’S NUTRITION AGENDA

If it were not for my daughter, I would have never come across this article by NPR and I’m guessing nobody else would have either since they have about a dozen followers.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=128621057

This article sounds innocent enough. “Eating Nutritiously a Struggle When Money is Scarce” but quickly digresses into a bleeding-heart emotional boohooery (it’s my word and I’ll use it when I want) of complete garbage as only NPR can provide.

I only write about this idiotic article because it is a good example of what the left tries to do to win supporters over to their illogical, power-grabbing policies. They break out their section of violins and attempt to get people so emotionally overwhelmed with empathy and compassion, that they do not dig deeper than the symbolic surface to find logical substance underneath

Many will read the article and simply think that it’s just terrible that so many are struggling and cannot provide nutritious meals for their children. The government should do something about this…insert statist power-grab here. They’ve just gained one more supporter of redistributing wealth. Let’s examine a few lines from the article beyond the emotions, utilizing common sense and logic.

“But Alex, who lives in Carlisle, Pa., is one of 17 million children who live in U.S. households where getting enough food is a challenge.”

I would love to know where they came up with the 17 million statistic. According to government statistics, in 2009 there were 74.5 million children in America. So, according to the writer of this article, 23% of children in the United States don’t get enough food…oh, wait…that’s right, they vagueified (my word creation also) the sentence into “getting enough food is a challenge” which pretty much gives them free reign to make up whatever number they want. What exactly defines “challenge” in getting enough food?

"When he gets up on his own, he'll go find what he wants," she says. "He'll get a hot dog bun, or get a piece of bread. He'll get an ice pop or something."

And that's exactly what he did early one morning, before his family headed out to the local food pantry. Alex ate a blue ice pop for breakfast.”

OHH THE HUMANITY!!! NO!!! NOT THAT!!! NOT AN ICE POP FOR BREAKFAST!!!

Also, note that they were headed out to the local food pantry…we’ll discuss that more later.

“Hunger in America is complicated. It's not just getting enough food, but getting the right food — and making the right choices.”

Please, say this exact line to a humanitarian aid worker in a starving African nation and see what response you get. I doubt that a Mom over there would complain about her son eating an icy pop for breakfast.

“Connie Williamson says it's not easy on a tight budget. She spends hours driving around each month looking for deals. She has to stretch $600 in food stamps for herself, her husband, Alex and two teenage girls.”

Now we’ve reached the meat and potatoes of the article. That’s right, folks! This poor family has to survive on $600 worth of food stamps. It’s horrible how they’re expected to make it on a $600 handout. REALLY??? SERIOUSLY??? Have we truly reached that level of spoiled entitlement-minded hell, that Americans feel perfectly confident in receiving $600 free dollars from hard-working Americans and complaining that it’s not enough in the same breath? As Jack Nicholson said in A Few Good Men, “I would rather you just said Thank you, and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon, and stand a post. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you are entitled to!”

If you substitute “get a job” for “pick up a weapon” and “earn your own money” for “stand a post” it fits perfectly.

“But when Alex was thirsty after a walk, his mother gave him a plastic water bottle filled with orange soda.”

"A gallon of milk is $3-something. A bottle of orange soda is 89 cents," she says. "Do the math."

Wow!! Now this might be the stupidest statement in the entire article. HOW ABOUT WATER??? Last time I checked a glass of water was much cheaper than either, and was much better at quenching a child’s thirst. What idiocy!!! Also, if she’s talking about a 20 ounce bottle of soda, she’s trying to compare it with a 128 ounce gallon of milk…BRILLIANT!!!

”The White House agrees. First lady Michelle Obama recently welcomed hundreds of chefs on the White House lawn. She was encouraging them to volunteer at schools to help cafeteria workers, students and their parents learn how to prepare more nutritious meals.”

Insert political agenda of the entire article HERE.

"She noted that almost a third of U.S. children are overweight."

"Good nutrition at school is more important than ever," she told the chefs. "A major key to giving our children a healthy future will be to pass a strong child nutrition bill."

Statist power-grab insertion mentioned earlier.

“President Obama has asked Congress for a billion dollars more a year to do things like make school lunches healthier and to expand access to subsidized meals for low-income children.”

Redistribution of wealth sneaks in through the side door

“The refrigerator and pantry are often filled with food — but the family sometimes has to go to the local soup kitchen to make ends meet.”

More violins…in case you were beginning to wake up from their earlier spell. I know, I know…I’m so insensitive!!

“He says he especially doesn't like it when his mother makes Brussels sprouts for dinner.

His 14-year-old sister, Beanna, tries to explain.

"He more or less just worries about if there's going to be enough food that he likes or if we have something that he likes," she says. "He's really picky about what he wants."

I don’t know about you, but when I was growing up you ate what your parents put in front of you. I’m guessing that had my parents been on the government cheese (yeah, I said it) they would have been even less sympathetic to a picky child.

“As Beanna talks, Alex goes to the refrigerator for some chocolate. He gets upset when his sister tells him he can only have one piece.”

I can’t even comment anymore on this article. This has become so insane!!! Poor kid only gets one piece of chocolate…what has America become when a family living on government entitlements can only get one piece of chocolate. OH THE SHAME!!!

"We can't really complain that the poor are heavier, when what we're donating is our kind of castaways," she says.”

They even take the time to complain about the people who donate food to the needy. Priceless!!

Why Ron Paul Cannot Be President

As we begin to edge closer to the midterm elections this fall, an obvious pattern is beginning to develop. Anti-incumbent sentiment is at an all-time high, and rightfully so. Unfortunately, it seems that when the people of our nation are dissatisfied with the party holding power, they tend to go to extremes in the other direction (see Barack Obama). The recent success of Ron Paul in Republican polling has me, at a minimum, raising an eyebrow.

Many of my fellow, alleged conservatives, have jumped on his bandwagon and I pray it is not the beginning of a trend. I know, I know, Ron Paul is the popular choice these days, but I cannot lend my support for many reasons. First and foremost would be the obvious...he is not a conservative. Ron Paul is a Libertarian and he can run under the guise of any party he wishes, his beliefs are still Libertarian. Don't get me wrong, I am firmly on board with many Libertarian beliefs and these days the line seems to be getting blurred between conservatism and libertarianism. I wrote an article earlier this year noting my concerns over this growing trend.

Concerning Strange Bedfellows

Quite simply, we cannot allow Ron Paul to be President for one huge reason. Ron Paul is an isolationist, as are many libertarians. As much as the majority of Americans want less government intrusion into their daily lives, we must not accomplish it by neglecting the safety and defense of our nation. Too many nations detest our way of life and would like nothing more than to bring it to a conclusion. Ron Paul does not believe in getting involved in the world's conflicts. It's an easy stand to take, and no doubt garners present day support from many Americans who have not the stomach for the ongoing “war on terrorism”. However, the easy decision is not always the correct decision. It would be easy to withdraw our troops back home and stay out of these affairs. Unfortunately, if this foreign policy were adopted it would be but a matter of time before this hatred for our nation hits us within our borders again.

It's actually quite amazing how short-term our memories are when it comes to our safety. After 9/11 everyone supported the strengthening of our defenses, the beefing up of our border security, and the war on terror. It took less than two years for the anti-war lobby to regain the voice of naivety they have been for the last forty years. Do we need to be involved in every conflict which takes place on this globe? No, but isolationism is a foolish recipe for disaster. We must protect our interests at home and abroad. The failure to accomplish this weakens our nation and emboldens our enemy; who, unlike our cowardly administration, I have no problem stating is Islam.

Al Qaeda and all of it's other radical muslim splinter groups have been quite vocal that their strategy involves ongoing, debilitating attacks. They proudly claim that they know Americans do not have the stomach to see such a conflict through, and so far they are correct. We, as a nation, having once again achieved a general feeling of security within our borders and have immediately gone back to our ways of taking it for granted.

In the book Endless War by Ralph Peters he described our conflict with radical muslims by claiming, “we're playing checkers, they're playing chess.” If you dig deeply into world history and the current exploding population of Islam throughout Europe you will see that this is not a time in our history that we can support isolationism. It would simply be suicide for our nation. As much as nobody likes the idea of it, war is often necessary to defend the freedoms which this great nation provides. That, quite simply, is why we must not abandon conservatism for libertarianism.

Take a trip to Arlington National Cemetary and you will see rows upon rows of men and women who knew that if we are to maintain liberty, war is an unfortunate requirement from time to time. This will always be true as long as there is evil in our world. Those who refuse to accept these cold hard facts had better be prepared to kneel on a cold hard floor. I, for one, prefer to die on my feet than live on my knees.

The War On Freedom

Reposting this outstanding article from the Canada Free Press. Funny, our media would never print this type of truth about our own nation. Increasingly, we must go outside of the United States media to get logical information.

Political War on Freedom begins by rebranding freedom itself as selfish

The War on Freedom By Daniel Greenfield Tuesday, May 4, 2010

How do you take away the freedom of a free people without putting tanks on every street? You do it by transforming their culture. By turning the very idea of freedom into something ugly and shameful. A foul thing to be associated with extremists and other bad folk that good citizens are advised to avoid. The goal being to convince the people that their freedom is a thing they should be happy to give up, rather than having to forcibly take it away from them.

And so the political War on Freedom begins by rebranding freedom itself as selfish. In this new narrative, freedom is a lie because there is no such thing as freedom in America. The very idea of freedom is an arrogant and privileged entitlement held by “rich white males” and used to oppress “people of color” and all the other officially designated minorities by the Commissars of Political Correctness.

In place of the old fashioned idea of freedom, we have the far more “equitable” system of social justice with its myriad of organizations and departments all created to ensure that everyone does what they’re supposed to, thinks what they’re supposed to, and has as many rights as they’re supposed to.

Newspeak: Freedom becomes Slavery, and Slavery becomes Freedom

As Orwell’s 1984 accurately predicted, in Newspeak, Freedom becomes Slavery, and Slavery becomes Freedom.

As the new liberal narrative would have it, the only people who want the freedom to keep what they earn, write what they think, choose their own health care, elect their own leaders, read what they like and live lives apart from the great machinery of the state—are the White Male Oppressors, (who are simultaneously ignorant clinging to their religion and their guns and yet at the same time are part of a privileged elite). Freedom is clearly a bad thing, then. It’s a symptom of selfishness. And selfish people are the oppressors; the greedy ones who don’t want a welfare state, illegal aliens, impossibly priced products, inaccessible lifesaving medical procedures, recycling bins in every room of the house and all the other wonderful benefits of Socialism.

People who want to be free are no longer Americans. Certainly not Constitutionalists. Instead, paradoxically, they’re the new parasites, the people who refuse to be cogs in the great machine of socialism. The selfish Kulaks who hoard their wheat. The businessmen who make too much money. The hardworking housewife who won’t pay double for a “Green” labeled product. These are the worms in the apple of the socialist state. The people who refuse to contribute to what the government and the alliance of unions, left wing front groups and media pundits label as the Public Good.

The USSR began by portraying independent small farmers as greedy monsters who were responsible for the people starving because they refused to give up their land and join collective farms. Collective farms whose workers had nothing could not even travel without a permit and had to steal the food they grew in order to survive. And so war was declared on the independent farmer. Millions were shot, deported, or imprisoned in labor camps. However, by eliminating the independent farmer, the Communists also eliminated Russian agriculture. The collective farms were an abysmal failure. Within a generation, Russia was stuck importing wheat from the independent farmers of its worst enemy, the United States of America.

By declaring war on American small business, liberals are about to repeat the Soviet experiment in the United States

By declaring war on American small business, liberals are about to repeat the Soviet experiment in the United States. The decline of the US economy is closely tied to the war on small business. To the replacement of the businessman with the speculator, the inflation of the dollar, the destruction of the manufacturing sector and the transformation of the US into a service and sales economy, not that fundamentally different from the rest of the Third World.

But the left’s war on the small businessman is about more than just seizing wealth in order to finance their own operations. That of course is a large part of it. The left has always believed that it must live off the land. And from the French Revolution to their modern day grandchildren, the Communists and Nazis, they have always know that wealth distribution is needed to be able to live off the land. But what they never understood is that their idea of government as a robber baron practices a multi-generational form of economic destruction that there is no full recovery from. It is possible to replace lost gold and silver. But replacing an economic niche when you have wiped out the people who used to fill it, and culturally blotted it out, can be next to impossible.

Yet that is exactly what the left wants to accomplish. Its goal has always been the destruction of the bourgeoisie, the middle class, the people who are living proof that hard work and economic aspiration leads to social mobility and political freedoms. These the left considers banal, selfish and rotten. Their existence a subversion of the left’s own revolutionary ideology, because they have achieved freedom through work rather than ideology. Because they believe that those who work should be the masters of government rather than properly qualified university graduates who have spent five years penning screeds about the unfairness of having to work for a living. And so like the Kulaks, they must go.

The destruction of the economy is not part of the collateral damage from liberalism’s uncontrollable spending or nanny statism. It is the whole point
The destruction of the economy is not part of the collateral damage from liberalism’s uncontrollable spending or nanny statism. It is the whole point.

The Founding Fathers understood that economic freedom was also political freedom. That is why the Boston Tea Party played such a key role in the race toward political independence and self-government. Liberal revisionist historians typically deride the American Revolution as a Middle Class revolution, which of course was exactly the point. Distance and opportunity had made political aspirations possible in America. But economic opportunity had made them meaningful. Thus the difference between the revolt in Haiti and the one in the 13 colonies. Much as Israel’s independence differed from the independence gained by so many other former British colonies in that part of the world.

One cannot have political independence without economic independence on the national level and on the individual level. Where economic independence is compromised, political independence soon follows. And the decline of individual liberties in America can be directly traced to its split between socialism and corporatism, two seeming opposites drawn together by inertia to form one great economic black hole. A situation that the last few years of bailouts and toobigtofails, useless regulatory bodies and political power grabs should have amply demonstrated for anyone.

The War on Freedom, therefore, is geared toward portraying freedom as selfish and greedy. As a dangerous anachronism out of place in the modern day socialist country. There is no such thing as freedom, they will say. Only privilege. The idea that you could believe what you wished, say what you wished, elect your own leaders and make your own economic decisions was all part of the arrogance of the entitled. But now there will be people who will distribute that privilege equally to all, within the parameters of the public good. The public good in their eyes being indivisible from their own good, and that of the system of redistribution that they oversee. And that is how tyranny begins and freedom dies.

Freedom, real freedom, isn’t perfect. It is the freedom to make one’s own mistakes rather than having the state make everyone’s mistakes for them. At the same time. Freedom is not a selfish thing that obstructs the public good, it is the public good, because the public good is best served by individual freedom, not by a collective yoked together in the same of an impossible ideal. The tyranny of the collective has never created its heaven on earth, but it has instead produced no shortage of hells. It is left to the individual to pursue his happiness, and in the process helps others find theirs. The collective has never changed the world for the better. Only individuals have.

Liberalism insists that freedom is a shameful thing. A rebellion against their idea of the public good. Their War on Freedom is in truth a war on the individual. And it is one that we must win, if freedom is to prevail.

Socialized Healthcare is the Last Dagger in the Coffin of Our Republic!!

Once again, as is so often true, Ronald Reagan saw this on the horizon and spoke of this in his many speeches.

I cannot stress this enough. This is the week, Americans! If we stand by and allow it to happen, this is the week that will go down in history as the week our Republic died. Yes, I know...all of the optimists out there will say that the courts will come to the rescue and easily determine this bill to be unconstitutional. I believe they more than likely will, but how many years might that take? How many Supreme Court Justices might have been replaced by Obama appointees between now and the time the Supreme Court finally hears the case? We are talking about years, not months, before they will hear the case.

From an economic perspective, will our nation still exist. The healthcare plan is estimated to be about a trillion (with a "T") dollars. Anyone who researches government estimations of their programs will undoubtedly know that they are never close in their estimates.

When the Social Security Program was being created, it was estimated that payouts in 1980 would be around 4 billion dollars. How close were the politicians? Payouts in 1980 were 108 billion dollars. They were pretty close, huh?

When the Medicare Program was born in 1965, it was estimated that payouts in 1990 would be 12 billion. Actual cost....110 billion!! Does anyone see a trend here? The government tends to be off by about a factor of 10 on their estimates. What does that mean? The socialized government takeover of healthcare will cost the American taxpayer about 10 trillion dollars.

With our current deficit, can the nation bear this burden without our economic system toppling over?

Taxes will be raised on working Americans to support this huge chunk of change immediately, but the program will not begin for at least four years. Hmmmmm. Is anyone else suspicious about where the money might be going for those years? Is anyone still naive enough to think it will be going into some untouchable healthcare savings account and accruing interest for the program's initiation? If you believe it will please Google "where did our social security money go?"

You, and your money, WILL be paying for abortions. Are there any other pro-lifers out their that morally refuse to support this procedure with your earned income?? I know I do!! What shall the government reaction be if a large group of citizens refuse to pay their taxes due to this moral dilemma? All questions we should be asking and considering if this bill is to become law.

I cannot overstate this. THIS IS THE LAST LINE OF DEFENSE AGAINST A TAKEOVER BY SOCIALISM OF OUR REPUBLIC!!! Yeah, I know...a lot of you are saying that I'm overreacting and it's not that big of a deal. That is precisely what the "left" is counting on...for the general population to not engage themselves enough in the issue until it is too late. This plan to convert to socialism did not begin with the election of Barack Obama. It was initiated around the beginning of the 20th century and was anchored into place by programs hatched during the Great Depression. It did not begin with the latest election, but this most certainly is the endgame if they pass this bill.

The government will then own more of the economy of this nation than the private sector, aka, "The People" who are referred to in our Constitution. In 2009, Obama's administration went on an unprecedented seizure of the private sector economy by taking control of Chrysler, General Motors, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and AIG, as well as partial control of Citigroup and Bank Of America, giving the government control of about 1/3 of the nation's economic output. The healthcare industry currently makes up about 15% of the entire economy of our nation, but estimates expect the growing industry to claim 17.7% by 2012. This final seizure by the government of private industry will spell "game over" to capitalism and our fine Republic that many brave men and women have given their lives' to preserve over the years.

We must FIGHT and FIGHT NOW!! Get on the phones!!! If you can work it out get to DC and get in the face of your elected lawmakers and make it clear that you DO NOT SUPPORT THIS BILL OR SOCIALISM!! It is a small price to pay compared to the many who have bled to death on batllefields in far-off lands for hundreds of years to preserve this opportunity for you to serve the nation in a less-dangerous, but equally-important manner. I have listed the link below to the phone numbers of every member of the U.S. House of Representatives...please call and help preserve America as a Republic.

http://clerk.house.gov/member_info/mcapdir.html

History Is Destined To Repeat Itself

This editorial cartoon was posted in the Chicago Tribune in 1934. It is incredibly eerie how the recovery plan written in the bottom left of the cartoon directly reflects the current Obama administration. If we, as a nation, cannot learn from our mistakes, I suppose we are destined to repeat them.

CONSTITUTION?? We Don't Need No Stinking Constitution...Say Dems

Democrats have taken another bold step towards dismantling the United States of America as it has been revealed that House Rules Chairman Louise Slaughter (D-NY) are attempting to pass the extremely unpopular Obamacare healthcare bill without it properly being voted on by both House and Senate.

Article 1, Section 7 of the constitution is clearly states how a bill must be passed:

Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States; If he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his Objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the Objections at large on their Journal, and proceed to reconsider it. If after such Reconsideration two thirds of that House shall agree to pass the Bill, it shall be sent, together with the Objections, to the other House, by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two thirds of that House, it shall become a Law. But in all such Cases the Votes of both Houses shall be determined by 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. If any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten Days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the Same shall be a Law, in like Manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their Adjournment prevent its Return, in which Case it shall not be a Law.

Or, if you don't wish to read all of that above I have conveniently inserted the Schoolhouse Rock, simplified explanation which I thoroughly enjoyed as a child.

This is, by far, the biggest 'in your face' smackdown of the Constitution, which congressional members swear to uphold, that has been undertaken by the Obama administration. It has been obvious for some time that two of the branches of our government are corrupt. If the statist liberals persist in this unconstitutional behavior, it will soon be up to our third branch of government (judicial) to prove that they are not corrupt. Some very difficult decisions will have to be made by Americans if all three branches prove to no longer be a representative republic.

Welfare Mom Explains Why Obama is Greatest President Ever

Below I have listed a copy of a "hate mail" letter sent to my good friends at The Liberal Heretic. In the letter a welfare mom takes them to task for belittling her career choice of living on the taxpayers dollar. Let's read and then go over a few definitions.

I thought you were a bitch when I read your sight.
Now I think you are a bitch and living in anohter world.

You said people should be responsable
For themselves. Well all I wanted was some help raising my son, whose
father walked out on me when he was 9. I deserve that
much. Thats why i voted for President Obama. He re[resents
people like me.

The courts gave me child support, but they didn't make
my ex to see my son, or to see me. He was a good dad, I
won't lie. He picked our son up every weekend and spent
time with him, and i made the courts take my child support
right out of his check so i always got tht.

In the mean time, I worked for a while at a restrant,
and I didn't like it. I figured I was smart so
I could go back to school and be a teacher or something. I
went to school for a while and actually became a certified
substitute teacher. Everything went good
until the county (I'm not naming) set up drug
testing and I failed because I sometimes smoked some pot
when I got home, just to relax, but never when my son was around.
That county was full of shit. It couldn't have been in
my hair sample because I hadn't smoked any of it in
weeks. And its not like i would smoke it at school. So there
is alot of injustise around and thats why we all voted Obama.

So anyways, my friend sends me your site and I listen
to a radio show of yours where you make fun of welfare
moms, and i want to tell you its not nice. I had to go
on welfare because my sons father walked out on me, and
I didnt do anything to deserve it. He owed me way more
than child support but the corupt judge said that since
we wernt legally married I couldnt get that. So ya I took
money from the goverment instead. It isnt like its money
from yourpocket or any other right wingnut.so quit
complaining about Obama. He is the best President we have
ever had, and no matter what people like you say, it wont
change that. he is going to help all of us who need help.
You dont so just quit wining.

We would be here all day if I went over all of her misspellings, so I will skip that and just go over a few definitions from The New American Welfare Mom Dictionary:

bitch- One who takes offense to another living off their hard earned money.

restrant- A temporary job one works at before they realize they're smart

certified substitute teacher- a certification which requires no knowledge of grammar or spelling.

injustise- when a substitute teacher is fired for smoking pot...soon to be eliminated by Obama.

welfare- money you get from the government when your babies daddy leaves you and a "corupt" judge doesn't award you all of his money...and you get fired from your teaching job for smoking pot...the money is "magical" in that it apparently doesn't come out of working Americans pockets, who evil wingnuts rumor are the employers of the government.

Obama- The best President we have ever had, who is going to help all of us who need help

This is a classic example of how Obama was elected. This is from an obviously undereducated woman who has no idea how the government and/or the courts work in our nation. She honestly thinks Obama and the liberals like him want to help her. On the contrary, they count on a continuing cycle where she and others like her will remain dependent on the same government programs their entire lives, thereby creating an uneducated class which will blindly vote them back into office so they can continue to receive their "government cheese" without having to work for it themselves. It's time to clean house this November Americans

Obama Loves His Navy "Corpse-Men"

Imagine if George Bush had said this...it would be plastered on every headline in the State Run Media!! Remember when Dan Quayle spelled potato wrong? How many days did the media run with that? Yet when the almighty grand poobah Obama disrespects the military and the brave corpsmen (kôr'mən) of our Navy by calling him a corpse-man...crickets. Maybe the white house should invest in teleprompters which list pronunciations beside those words deemed most difficult for Harvard grads.

Jon Stewart On Obama's 6th Grade Class Teleprompter! Very Funny!

You know it's bad when well known liberals are poking fun at your incompetence.

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Obama Speaks to a Sixth-Grade Classroom
http://www.thedailyshow.com/
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Health Care Crisis

Concerning Strange Bedfellows

In my daily attempt to shed light on the liberals statist agenda that seeks to convert our fine republic into a socialist doormat for the world, I come across a great many characters with quite a few interesting viewpoints.

Throughout 2009, as President Obama and the liberal congress made it increasingly obvious that the oath they swore to uphold the Constitution of The United States meant nothing to them, a movement began which has been dubbed the “Tea Party Movement.” As the movement grew and gained popularity as a strong attempt to reclaim conservative values based upon the Constitution, fiscal responsibility, limited government, and free markets, many different viewpoints and, in some cases “fringe” elements have attempted to attach their causes to the coattails of this movement. Let’s examine some of the different schools of thought I come in contact with daily:

Those that contend the President and the liberal-run congress support policies that are socialist in nature, and therefore are not supported by our Constitution. I would say the vast majority of conservatives, myself included, believe this is true.

Those that contend the President and the liberal-run congress are enacting reckless spending policies on purpose in order to cause a catastrophic failure of the free market in order to enact a new socialist government…see Cloward/Piven Strategy. Quite a few are beginning to accept this theory, and I consider it to be a possibility. Whether you believe this is true or not, the problem here is that this thought process begins to lend itself to the conspiracy theorist crowd, which loves to take a small fact or truth, and run with it to the point that it becomes laughable.

The libertarian school of thought has been more widely accepted as of late, and a great many conservatives find themselves having “common ground” with the libertarians’ strict views of limited government and personal liberty. The problem with becoming too cozy with libertarian philosophy is the broad spectrum it encompasses. Some libertarians take limited government and go so far as to desire the abolition of the state completely. This school of thought seems to vilify all government representation as evil and an enemy of individual rights. Their “live and let live” philosophy is a close cousin to pacifism, which is typically espoused by liberal fringe groups…thus, completely perverting the initial belief system 180 degrees, and allowing persons who do not represent conservatism in any way a perceived voice in the discord.

For example, I have made many friends in the last year writing my blog and have utilized facebook as a mechanism for keeping up with these alleged like-minded thinkers. I recently witnessed disturbing articles and videos from some of these self-avowed fellow tea party patriots which were in no way based in conservatism or the Constitution. Everything from anti-war veterans speaking of how evil corporate fatcats forced them to take part in unjust wars to schizophrenic 9/11 “truthers” were included. Needless to say they are no longer on my friend list.

Overall, the Tea Party Movement has done a great deal to fight the statist policies that threaten to bring this wonderful republic to its knees. I am a staunch supporter of it and would march in every event they coordinated if my status as a U.S. Marine allowed for it. My concern in this article is to point out that as this movement continues to grow at such a brisk pace, it will be important to ensure that the leaders of the movement are policing the ranks for those that would misrepresent the principles the movement stands for.


Tomorrow I will go more in depth on Pacifists, as I have some very strong viewpoints on this crowd.

In Response to Christmas Attack, Obama Appoints New Czar

Pictured above are the newly assigned "Underpants Czars" who have been given their position based on their vast experience with unmentionables. Good luck gentlemen!!

Ronald Reagan Presidential Christmas Address

How far we have come as a nation since Ronald Reagan's address in 1981. Has President Obama even made a Christmas address? If he does, I am guessing it will be called a "holiday address" and will not speak of Bethlehem, a manger, or Jesus. Merry Christmas and Happy Hanukkah to everyone. If I find an Obama christmas address I will post it. I'm surprised there isn't one yet since the almighty Obama usually makes any excuse to post himself on all of our network channels so he can pontificate to his followers.

ALWAYS WATCH WHAT THE LEFT HAND IS DOING…LIBERALS ARE AMBIDEXTROUS!!

The last two weeks have been incredible! As posted earlier, I’ve really started to regain my faith in the people of this country. It has been wonderful to see the banding together of conservatives and the rallying cries of Americans who still believe in the Constitution of this great land. The townhall meetings have been, and continue to be a great demonstration of freedom and democracy in action. Three months ago I feared that our country was going to sink into socialism without so much as a whimper. I am happy to say that I was mistaken.

With everyone currently focused on defeating this “hostile takeover” of our freedom to choose healthcare for ourselves, we need to ensure we are watching what President Obama’s left hand is up to. I have noticed when liberals have all of us so focused on one issue, they tend to quietly be up to no good in another area, hoping we won’t notice.

Last month President Obama named Mark Lloyd the associate general counsel and chief diversity officer at the Federal Communications Commission. Okay, first things first…chief diversity officer?!?!?! Really?? Seriously??? That is an actual title for a real occupation?? That is such an incredibly stupid title that I am physically laughing out loud as I am typing this. What do you do Ron? I am the chief diversity officer for the Marine Corps. What a joke! Speaking of the USMC, there is no more diverse organization in our country than the US military. We are recruited from all cultures, backgrounds, financial classes, races, and ethnicities. We accomplish the most difficult of tasks that are physically and mentally exhausting, in environments much more demanding than any boardroom, and we do it successfully every day without the need for any chief diversity officer, but apparently the FCC needs one.

I apologize for ranting away from the point I am wanting to make, but really…CHIEF DIVERSITY OFFICER!!! Okay, I am laughing by myself again. I’ll get back to the point.

President Obama appointed Mark Lloyd to this position with the FCC. You know...the FCC, the government entity that controls the airwaves. Now it is already well known to all Americans that the mainstream television media is very biased…Say it ain’t so!!! No, really, they are just a tad bit biased towards the left. So let’s look at the history behind the latest Obama czar (substitute “stooge” for “czar” if you prefer) to determine what direction he may look to take the FCC as it’s CHIEF DIVERSITY OFFICER…hahahaha!! Step aside everyone!! Make way for the CDO!!

In 2007, Mark Lloyd co-authored a report titled, “The Structural Imbalance of Political Talk Radio” which you may read the contents of at:

http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2007/06/pdf/talk_radio.pdf

In this report Mr. Lloyd…sorry, I mean CHIEF Lloyd, stated some very troubling things…unless, of course, you live in a country like North Korea, China, or Venezuela, where the state controls what the media is allowed to report to the people. I have included some of the quotes from this report below:

“Our conclusion is that the gap between conservative and progressive talk radio is the result of multiple structural problems in the U.S. regulatory system”

Yes, this genius…I mean CHIEF, has concluded that the 10 to 1 ratio of conservative talk radio programming to statist, I mean progressive talk radio is caused by the lack of government regulation of the airwaves…Oh yes he did!!! Chief Castro over here doesn’t recognize the rule of supply and demand, he only recognizes the need for more government enforcement over our freedom to listen to what we want to as Americans. But he goes on…

“This analysis suggests that any effort to encourage more responsive and balanced radio programming will first require steps to increase localism and diversify radio station ownership to better meet local and community needs. We suggest three ways to accomplish this:

Restore local and national caps on the ownership of commercial radio stations.

Ensure greater local accountability over radio licensing.

Require commercial owners who fail to abide by enforceable public inter­est obligations to pay a fee to support public broadcasting.”

The first paragraph is just the everyday typical liberal mush…”to better meet local and community needs” is their pompous attitude that they know better than we do what we need on the radio. Doesn’t capitalism as well as the rule of supply and demand take care of that already? If a local community really, really wanted more liberal (funny they call it “progressive” throughout the report) programming in their area, wouldn’t a smart business person see the income potential and put such a station on the air?

Uhh, yes, his first idea is honestly to have the government control who can and cannot own a radio station…no conflict of interest there!!!

Yes, your eyes are correct…the last idea is to assess fines for radio station owners that do not air the programming the government wants them to. Not only that, they will take the money from the fines and give the money to public broadcasting (NPR). So it’s broadcasting’s version of “redistribution of wealth.” It makes all the sense in the world. Take money from successful business owners who provide a product in high demand from the American people, and give the money to failing, government owned radio stations that nobody listens to.

Mr. Lloyd, like President Obama, is on the record as saying they are not interested in re-instituting the Fairness Doctrine. Well, of course they aren’t! Enough Americans have heard of the Fairness Doctrine by now. It wouldn’t be popular to support it. But if we take the Fairness Doctrine out of its packaging, rename it; say, the DIVERSITY in Broadcasting Act, or something similar…and re-attach the same regulations as before, the American people would support that, right? After all, it’s DIVERSITY!! Anything with the word “DIVERSITY” in it has to be good, right? Anything with diversity in the title has to be supported, lest the protestor be labeled a racist.

I could go on a rant all day about this but the point I’m making is we have to be great multi-taskers. At the same time we are organizing our resistance to this unconstitutional healthcare fiasco, we have to pay attention to the other maneuvers being initiated by the statists in Washington, lest we end up bamboozled (I love that word and try to use it whenever possible)

THE ASSEMBLING OF "ENFORCERS" TO QUIET THE PEOPLE‏

It should disturb any freedom loving American to hear that labor unions(SEIU) and special interest groups such as ACORN are mobilizing their members and busing them to townhalls to disrupt, intimidate, and even assault, any Americans who would dare voice their concern or disagreement with the Obama healthcare plan.

I am disturbed, but not surprised that these tactics are taking place. After all, The democratic leaders, if not directly giving the order for this to take place, at a minimum have encouraged it by their rhetoric towards anyone who would dissent from their self-professed wisdom.

Nancy Pelosi made the bogus claim that protestors attending townhall meetings were "carrying swastikas" to the meetings. She has also called the protestors "un-american" in an op-ed column this week. It should be noted that comrade Pelosi likes to throw around the "un-american" accusation. She earlier this year labeled police raids on companies known to be employing illegal immigrants as "un-american."

Senator Harry Reid called the townhall protestors "evil-mongers."

Chris Matthews went a few steps further by identifying townhall protestors as racists. On his Tuesday show he was quoted as saying, "I think some of the people are upset because we have a black president."

Michigan Congressman John Dingell (D) appeared in a TV interview this week comparing the ongoing nationwide town hall protests to the 1960's opposition to the Civil Rights Act by the Ku Klux Klan.

This is just the type of behavior I would expect from these liberal statists. Even though the polls (not that I'm big on poll numbers) would support that a majority of Americans are against this healthcare legislation, these holier-than-thou leftists will, rather than admit they are wrong about anything, force the legislation down our throats, because in their pompous fantasy world, they certainly know what is better for us than we know for ourselves.

Continually dismissing a majority of the voting population as "fringe" is not very intelligent on their part, as they must face election in coming years. But then again, I'm sure they can count on their "enforcers" to help swing the vote in their favor with another nationwide fraudulent voter registration program. Maybe they can mobilize more Black Panthers to be present at voting locations to intimidate voters. After all, as long as their candidate gets elected they will not be prosecuted for the behavior.

It is no longer time to get angry about these type of incidents. It is time to take action with the tools guaranteed to us in the U.S. Constitution. All Americans who value their liberty and independence must get actively involved now, before we wake up one morning and wonder where our freedom went.

"Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children what it was once like in the United States where men were free." President Ronald Reagan (1911-2004)