ThoughtRogue- Well, these videos certainly are igniting the fire within me.  How broken and out-of-control can our “government” get?  Apparently, the elite have forgotten (or more likely, have never known) about the meaning of the First Amendment to our Constitution, where it clearly states:

“Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech… or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

Hellloooo??!  Watch, and get fired up.  If you have not contacted your Congress-persons for a while, NOW IS THE TIME for them TO HEAR YOUR VOICE in Washington, DC.  If this socialized medicine [excrement sandwich] is, in the end, crammed down the Peoples’ throat, have no regrets that you exercised your Constitutional Rights to stop this abomination!

DON’T MISS THE LAST DAY!

NO COMPROMISE MEDIA

What part of “Congress shall make NO LAW”  do these congress critters NOT get?

In Defense of the U.S. Constitution and our God-Given Right to Free Speech.

International Legal Conference

on Freedom of Speech & Religion

October 28, 2009

Congressional Auditorium

U.S. Capitol Visitors Center

Washington, D.C.

Presented by

The International Free Press Society,

The Liberty Legal Project International

&

The Center for Security Policy

________________________________

Co-Sponsored by

The Horowitz Freedom Center,

The Florida Security Council &

The O’Leary Report

Program Chair: Ann Fishman

1:30 p.m. to 2:45 p.m.

Libel Tourism & Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation (SLAPPs)

Moderator: Brooke Goldstein

Dr. Rachel Ehrenfeld – US

David Harris – Canada

Adam Hasner – US/Florida

Joe Sharkey – US

Dr. Paul Williams – US

Paul L. Williams, Ph.D.

The only journalist to win three first-prize Keystone Press Awards in three different categories in the same year, and the author of such best-selling books as The Vatican Exposed: Money, Murder, and the Mafia, Osama’s Revenge: The Next 9/11, and The Day of Islam. His work as an investigative reporter and subsequent testimony before grand juries resulted in the arrest and conviction of organized crime figures.

Dr. Rachel Ehrenfeld

Director of the American Center for Democracy, author of Funding Evil, Evil Money and Narco-Terrorism, namesake of New York’s Rachel’s Law prohibiting enforcement of libel tourism judgments against New York residents.

Pamela Geller

Founder & publisher of the award winning blog Atlasshrugs.com, contributor to Newsmax and The American Thinker.

TR:  My good buddy Jefferson Paine weighs in with his ten-point plan to overhaul the “healthcare” system in a jiffy.  The reader will note that these solutions are free-market based and would be easy to implement assuming Congress-people had functioning brain cells, oh, and weren’t bought and sold by their special interests – leaving patients and doctors as the “odd men” out (pawns) here.  Note that the end result, if this plan were implemented, would result in higher quality service, for less cost, and truly cover more Citizens!  All of the things that Big Daddy is now saying you will receive through more coercion, more bureaucracy, all at higher costs!  Hellllooooo??

Jefferson Paine’s Easy HealthCare “Reform” Package

1. Deregulate Private Insurance companies allowing them to market innovative products to deal with portability, pre-existing conditions, young, uninsured, etc.
2. Ban Government from offering “insurance” which is actually Welfare.
3. Cap ridiculous “pain and suffering” awards and require the proof in major malpractice be proven scientifically beyond a higher standard than 50/50, and institute some form of “loser pays,” in civil suits.
4. Clean up all waste, fraud and abuse in MediCare / MedicAid, and plan to phase out these colossally corrupt Ponzi schemes over a few years.
5. Repeal corporate tax breaks for employer-provided medical insurance.
6. Ban all Illegal Aliens from receiving free healthcare services, and arrest and deport them when they reveal themselves at medical facilities.
7. Allow Private Insurance products to be bought and sold across State lines.
8. Ban Government issuing mandates, fines, etc. in Private Healthcare services or insurance, and ban all Government “coercion” forcing one Citizen to pay for another’s medical costs involuntarily.
9. Require Government officials and bureaucrats to buy from the exact same choices of private medical services and insurance products as available to the common peon.
10. Grant all active and retired military personnel at least the same quality of medical services as those enjoyed by Congress critters.

Any questions?

ThoughtRogue:  I’ll heartily admit that Dr. Sowell is one of my personal heroes.  Hear, Hear him!  BTW – a so-called “Birther” is someone who believes the Constitution should be followed to the letter (e.g. “No Person except a natural born Citizen..”).  Those who castigate and persecute us, Birthers, should be called “Constitution Deniers!”

Think Things, Not Words

Random thoughts on the passing scene.

By Thomas Sowell

Wise Man.

Upon learning that the Constitution requires a president to be a natural-born citizen, a college student asked: “What makes a natural-born citizen any more qualified than one born by C-section?”

Airlines that keep passengers trapped for hours in planes sitting on the runway should be prosecuted for unlawful imprisonment.

When politicians propose some hugely expensive new program and are asked how the government is going to pay for it, a standard ploy over the years has been to claim that they will pay for it by eliminating “waste, fraud, and abuse.” At a recent town-hall meeting, a citizen raised the obvious question: If you can do that, why haven’t you done it already?

Marxism is an ism that has become a wasm.

What is called “universal health care” can turn out to be universal “don’t care” medical treatment, when Washington bureaucrats can overrule what you and your doctor want to do.

What ever happened to Samantha Brown on the Travel Channel? Could she have met with foul play? Where is the FBI when we need it?

The older I get, the more I learn to tolerate human shortcomings — and the less I tolerate bad attitudes.

After political crusades for “affordable housing” ended up ruining the housing market and much of the economy with it, many of the same politicians are now carrying on a crusade for “affordable health care.” But what you can afford has absolutely nothing to do with the cost of producing anything. Refusing to pay those costs means that you are just not going to continue getting the same quantity and quality — regardless of what any politician says or how well he says it.

Want to win an easy bet? Bet someone that Babe Ruth had a lower lifetime earned-run average than Cy Young, Whitey Ford, or Sandy Koufax. During his early years with the Red Sox, Ruth pitched nine shutouts in a season, which is still the American League record for a left-handed pitcher. He would have made the baseball Hall of Fame, even if he had never hit a home run.

Joe Wilson got into more trouble for telling the truth than Barack Obama got into by telling a demonstrable lie about adding millions of people to the insurance rolls without adding a dime to the deficit. As regards providing medical insurance for illegal immigrants, I doubt that the president will do that. More likely, he will legalize them first and then give them medical insurance.

The way Hollywood elites have sprung to the defense of Roman Polanski to keep him from being extradited to the United States, despite the heinous crime he is accused of, suggests that — like other egalitarians — they consider those who are “one of us” to be more equal than others.

When I contemplate the direction in which this government and this society are moving, my biggest consolation is that economists’ predictions are often wrong. I can only hope that my expectations are wrong by miles.

What is most frightening about the political Left is that they seem to have no sense of the tragedy of the human condition. All problems seem to them to be due to other people not being as wise or as noble as they are.

Oliver Wendell Holmes said, “Think things, not words.” In words, many see a need for “social justice” to override “the dictates of the market.” In reality, what is called “the market” consists of human beings making their own choices at their own cost. What is called “social justice” is government imposition of the notions of third parties, who pay no price for being wrong.

Fidel Castro, Hugo Chávez, Moammar Qaddafi, and Vladimir Putin have all praised Barack Obama. When enemies of freedom and democracy praise your president, what are you to think? When you add to this Barack Obama’s many previous years of associations and alliances with people who hate America — Jeremiah Wright, Bill Ayers, Father Pfleger, and so on — at what point do you stop denying the obvious and start to connect the dots?

TR:  Can’t you wait for your DMV-style Healthcare?  I don’t know about you, but there’s something so motivating, like in the pit of my stomach, when I hear such a compelling message from overpaid celebrities.  Hey, Obama’s a Celebrity and a False Idol.  Not bad for someone who can’t run a lemon-ade stand, and still refuses to release any documentation revealing WHO he really is!

ThoughtRogue:  Considering America’s now rampant economic illiteracy and widespread ignorance of history and philosophy, I wonder whether we’re now past the tipping point and the American Dream is doomed?  You’ll notice that every policy decision that our beloved, alleged President makes is to further impoverish Americans – to make them wonderfully dependent, EQUALLY impoverished.

Two excellent books that lay a rock-solid foundation in economics is Henry Hazlitt’s famous Economics in One Lesson, and Basic Economics by Thomas Sowell.  Both explain economics to the layperson, without the use of formulas, with expert precision, allowing the reader to easily dissect for themselves the plethora of economic fallacies they are bombarded with daily.  These should be required reading of all students – not to mention of all politicians especially.

Turning the American economy around is really simple:

• Reduce the taxation monstrosity
• Reduce government spending even more
• Reduce onerous regulations and restrictions
• Reduce bloated, unconstitutional programs and bureaucracies
• Reduce the shackles on individual work and innovation

But, what has the Usurper-in-Chief accomplished and/or supported at every turn?

• Increased Taxes – net jobs killer and wealth destroyer.
• Gigantic Bailouts – net jobs killer and wealth destroyer.
• Increasing Federal Spending and Debt – net jobs killer and wealth destroyer.
• Repeal of Bush Tax Cuts – net jobs killer and wealth destroyer.
• More Money and Power to Unions, Lobbyists, and Government – net jobs killer and wealth destroyer.
• The ‘Cap and Trade’ Energy Bill Boondoggle – net jobs killer and wealth destroyer.
• Support for an Ever-Increasing Minimum Wage – net jobs killer and wealth destroyer.
• The Mass Amnesty of Tens of Millions of Illegal Aliens – net jobs killer and wealth destroyer.
• The Takeover of the Medical and Insurance Industries – net jobs killer and wealth destroyer.
• The National Socialization of Banking, GM, Mortgages, Education.. – net jobs killer and wealth destroyer.

Why Big Government Doesn’t Work

by DOCTOR ZERO, HotAir.com

A person living entirely on their own produces very little, beyond the bare minimum necessities of survival. He has no real “wealth” – no surplus production, to spend on discretionary endeavors. He has few real options in life, beyond daily survival. His moments of real choice come when he gets lucky. An exceptionally fortunate hunt might feed him for a few days, and give him some precious leisure time. Otherwise, he does what he must do, and rarely has time to think about what he could do. Some people enjoy living this way, but most do not.

The situation improves somewhat in a small, voluntary collective: a partnership with a trusted friend, or a small family living on its own. Their combined efforts produce more surplus food, and they can address the necessities of life with less individual effort. They may develop skills and talents that prove valuable to each other. Some people are content to live this way, with a small and isolated family that maintains very little contact with the rest of humanity – but, again, most are not.

When families begin cooperating with each other, production and wealth explode. Communities generate tremendous amounts of surplus production, and commerce allows people access to goods and services they could never produce themselves. The amount of time required to deal with personal survival dwindles away to virtually nothing. Doubtless the reader works hard at his or her job, but your job probably has very little to do with feeding or clothing yourself, or defending yourself from predators. Instead, you produce goods and services that would be unimaginable to a more primitive society – could you explain your job to someone from the tenth century A.D.? In exchange, you earn money, which you spend to purchase what you need – and, more importantly, what you want. Even the poorest member of an advanced society has options.

An advanced society requires a method for allocating its huge amount of surplus production, and meeting the basic needs of its members. There are two general mechanisms for doing this: commerce and government. Every society uses a mixture of these methods. Even the most totalitarian government has a black market, and even the most free-wheeling capitalist society will have a government. Attempts to artificially engineer a society without either commerce or government are doomed to failure, because they will form spontaneously, no matter how strictly they are forbidden.

Government and commerce don’t just co-exist in an uneasy truce. They need each other. Commerce, the free exchange of money for goods and services, produces wealth through choice. Remember the example of the man living alone: the poverty of his existence comes from his lack of choices. The value of money flows from the way it allows consumers to express their choices. For a simple illustration of this principle, compare a ten-dollar restaurant gift certificate to a ten-dollar bill. The ten dollar bill is more valuable than the gift certificate, because you have more choice in how to spend it. A government increases the wealth of its citizens by providing security – stable currency, secure borders, protection from criminals, respect for property rights, and legally enforceable contracts, to name a few of government’s duties. This has the effect of increasing the citizens’ wealth, by increasing the choices available to them. A ten-dollar bill has more value in a large, lawful city than on a tiny island where few goods are available, or a den of thieves where nothing can be bought with confidence.

Consider the example of the impoverished loner versus the citizen of a prosperous society again. The citizens’ money represents wealth, thanks to his many choices, but it represents something else of enormous value: extra time. The loner spends most of his waking hours staying alive, and seeing to his minimal needs. The wealthy citizen spends almost no time on these things – he uses it for economically productive work, self-improvement, and leisure. A ten-dollar bill will purchase you a shirt that you probably don’t know how to make yourself… and even if you had the knowledge, it would most likely take you longer to make the shirt than it takes you to earn ten dollars.

Government allocates wealth through top-down commands, imposed by force. There would be no need for massive tax and spending bills if everyone was freely choosing to spend their money the way the government wants them to. Capitalism has priorities, while government has imperatives. Capitalists fulfill their ambitions through competition, which increases the choices available to consumers. The ambitions of the working class lead them to work harder, and engage in increasingly valuable and productive labor, to earn a better living for themselves and their families. This system is not perfect – there will always be people who try hard but don’t get ahead, and people who don’t make a very productive contribution to society – but over the long run, and measured against a population of millions, free market commerce will tend to produce increased choices, improved technology, and greater value through competition.

Government fulfills its ambitions through compulsion, which reduces choice. Sometimes compulsion is necessary – you can’t fund national defense by passing around a collection plate. When government exceeds the minimal functions necessary to provide stability and security, and begins interfering in the economy for the benefit of certain constituencies, by definition it reduces the overall choices available to its citizens. It doesn’t matter if the government’s intentions are noble – every law it passes to redistribute wealth inevitably reduces wealth, because it reduces choice.

In an economy dominated by the government, the ruling class fulfills its ambitions by serving faithful constituencies at the expense of others. It tries to address its failures by increasing control, which reduces wealth even further, in a downward spiral. It’s not in the nature of government to abandon failed programs, because if government was intelligent and morally superior enough to assert control over a situation in the first place, it will not see the logic in surrendering that control to inferior free-willed citizens. Instead, it will redouble its efforts.

In this environment, the citizens can best fulfill their ambitions by joining favored constituencies if possible, and becoming adept at petitioning the government for greater benefits. This tends to be more successful than working hard, as there is little competition in a state-run economy for the most skilled and productive workers. There are always exceptions – people who give 100% effort out of compassion, personal drive, or a religious calling. There will be politicians who are truly selfless, and sincerely wish to act as wise stewards for the resources of society. Exceptional people cannot be relied upon to power a society of millions. In the long run, and projected over a vast population, the incentives of a government-dominated economy produce stagnation, and strife between warring groups of citizens, who can only gain more benefits at each others’ expense.

That is why Big Government never works. It can’t address conflicting priorities efficiently. The ambitions of its masters are best served by catering to the demands of small, energetic groups, or big corporations who wish to compromise its rightful duty to ensure free trade. Its citizens are not rewarded for exceptional effort, or taking great risks. Worst of all, every single action it takes destroys the very wealth needed to improve the lives of its citizens. Big Government pounds on every problem with a hammer that crumbles in its hands.

ThoughtRogue:  There seems to be some great confusion about the term “Natural Born” Citizen.  Most people and politicians, who also happen to be Constitutionally illiterate, confuse this with “Native Born” – which means one is born on U.S. soil – sorry, but not good enough alone to be eligible for the Presidency. 

Wake Up, America! WAKE UP!

To be “Natural Born” one must be born by U.S. Citizen PARENTS, and be born on U.S. Soil – as was John McCain – and every previous President (apart from a few Founders who are covered by their own clause).  To be a “Naturalized” citizen, is yet something else; it is where people who are not U.S. citizens go through a legalization, or “naturalization”, process to become a Citizen.

A Constitutional requirement to serve as a U.S. Senator is to be a U.S. Citizen – naturalized or otherwise.  The U.S. Presidency, however, as outlined in Article II, Section 1., contains a higher standard – the pre-requisite of being a Natural Born Citizen.  Can an illegal alien invade the U.S., give birth to an illegal “native born” baby, and that child later be eligible for the U.S. Presidency?  No.  That child’s NOT a natural born citizen – even if they legally become a citizen later.

Barack Hussein Obama II, by his own auto-hagiographical admission, cannot possibly be eligible to legally serve as President of the U.S. because his father was a Kenyan National and British colonial subject – no matter where he happened to be born (a birthplace which has NEVER been publicly confirmed).  Thus, BHOII is an illegal Usurper of the office of the President of the United States (POTUS).

Thank GOD our Forefathers had the wisdom to have our U.S. Military Officers swear allegiance, NOT to the POTUS, but to our U.S. CONSTITUTION and to protect it against all enemies – both foreign and Domestic.

Have you asked yourself yet, or asked your family and neighbors, just why the Usurper of the United States, BHOII, has hugged and bowed before every vicious dictator, king, and tyrant on the planet?  Or why he has back-handed every one of our traditional allies – such as berating the State of Israel even while ordering her what to do upon their OWN LAND?!

How can BHOII recite Islamic phrases in Arabic with a near-perfect accent? – a feat according to Islamists.  Just why did BHOII skip out on the National Day of Prayer in which all modern Presidents have participated?  BHOII stated emphatically recently that, not only was our nation NOT a Judeo-Christian nation, but he announced to the world that the U.S. is one of the “largest Islamic nation’s” on earth!  Note:  Barack Hussein Obama II, inherited his name from his Islamic Kenyan father, and went to Muslim primary school in the Muslim nation of Indonesia where he lived with his Muslim step-father while growing up.

After his sudden disassociation from “Rev.” Wright’s radical, racist, “Black Liberation Theology” “church”, the Obama family has curiously and completely run out of luck in finding a “Christian” church anywhere within the District of Columbia which suits their “faith”.

Then, as do all Marxist radicals, BHOII has been hell-bent on cutting the legs out from under our great military.  He has cut the cutting edge F-22 air-superiority fighter program where they produced only a fraction of the originally requested number.  Not to worry they say, the much cheaper JSF will act as a better replacement.  Uh, only one small problem, though – the JSF fighters are not even being produced in numbers in their final form yet!

BHOII ordered the Pentagon to ratchet back our national ballistic missile shield immediately in the wake of North Korea test-firing several missiles in celebration of our Fourth of July festivities last summer.  Now he has scrapped the ballistic missile shield that had been promised to Poland and our Eastern European allies – leaving them to twist in the wind before a resurgent Russian threat.  Is it sheer coincidence that BHOII announced his betrayal of Europe on the 70th anniversary of the Soviet invasion of Poland?  Who was that message for?

The list goes on, and on, even as BHOII admits he knew LAST YEAR of Iran’s second secret underground nuclear facility (which he somehow failed to mention in his recent feckless U.N. speech), he continues to try to back Israel into the corner of nuclear Armageddon – an apocalyptic set-up of our former ally which couldn’t be more “transparent”.

Folks, it is high time to ask yourself regarding this “President” of the U.S.:  WHAT IN GOD’S NAME IS GOING ON HERE?!

Obama Risks a Domestic Military ‘Intervention’

By John L. Perry, Newsmax

There is a remote, although gaining, possibility America’s military will intervene as a last resort to resolve the “Obama problem.” Don’t dismiss it as unrealistic.

America isn’t the Third World. If a military coup does occur here it will be civilized. That it has never happened doesn’t mean it wont. Describing what may be afoot is not to advocate it. So, view the following through military eyes:

• Officers swear to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” Unlike enlisted personnel, they do not swear to “obey the orders of the president of the United States.”
• Top military officers can see the Constitution they are sworn to defend being trampled as American institutions and enterprises are nationalized.
• They can see that Americans are increasingly alarmed that this nation, under President Barack Obama, may not even be recognizable as America by the 2012 election, in which he will surely seek continuation in office.
• They can see that the economy — ravaged by deficits, taxes, unemployment, and impending inflation — is financially reliant on foreign lender governments.
• They can see this president waging undeclared war on the intelligence community, without whose rigorous and independent functions the armed services are rendered blind in an ever-more hostile world overseas and at home.
• They can see the dismantling of defenses against missiles targeted at this nation by avowed enemies, even as America’s troop strength is allowed to sag.
• They can see the horror of major warfare erupting simultaneously in two, and possibly three, far-flung theaters before America can react in time.
• They can see the nation’s safety and their own military establishments and honor placed in jeopardy as never before.

So, if you are one of those observant military professionals, what do you do?

"Yes You Can, Iran. It's All Set Up."

Wait until this president bungles into losing the war in Afghanistan, and Pakistan’s arsenal of nuclear bombs falls into the hands of militant Islam?

Wait until Israel is forced to launch air strikes on Iran’s nuclear-bomb plants, and the Middle East explodes, destabilizing or subjugating the Free World?

What happens if the generals Obama sent to win the Afghan war are told by this president (who now says, “I’m not interested in victory”) that they will be denied troops they must have to win? Do they follow orders they cannot carry out, consistent withtheir oath of duty? Do they resign en masse?

Or do they soldier on, hoping the 2010 congressional elections will reverse the situation? Do they dare gamble the national survival on such political whims?

Anyone who imagines that those thoughts are not weighing heavily on the intellect and conscience of America’s military leadership is lost in a fool’s fog.

Will the day come when patriotic general and flag officers sit down with the president, or with those who control him, and work out the national equivalent of a “family intervention,” with some form of limited, shared responsibility?

Imagine a bloodless coup to restore and defend the Constitution through an interim administration that would do the serious business of governing and defending the nation. Skilled, military-trained, nation-builders would replace accountability-challenged, radical-left commissars. Having bonded with his twin teleprompters, the president would be detailed for ceremonial speech-making.

Military intervention is what Obama’s exponentially accelerating agenda for “fundamental change” toward a Marxist state is inviting upon America. A coup is not an ideal option, but Obama’s radical ideal is not acceptable or reversible.

Unthinkable? Then think up an alternative, non-violent solution to the Obama problem. Just don’t shrug and say, “We can always worry about that later.”

In the 2008 election, that was the wistful, self-indulgent, indifferent reliance on abnegation of personal responsibility that has sunk the nation into this morass.

You better side with Obama or else!

by Mr. H

I came across an article on the Right Kilk a few hours, and I am speechless.

It now seems; according to those aligned with “Organizing for America”; that if you are not in alignment with Mr. Obama or his National Health Care policies, then you are to be considered a Right-Wing Domestic Terrorists; all because you do not share the same views in which they do. So much for tolerance they seems so fond of claiming to live by whenever it suits their agenda.

No, these are not my words, but the words from those that penned the statements on Mr. Obamas Organizing for America website.

To quote them directly:

All 50 States are coordinating in this – as we fight back against our own Right-Wing Domestic Terrorists who are subverting the American Democratic Process, whipped to a frenzy by their Fox Propaganda Network ceaselessly re-seizing power for their treacherous leaders.

This is the exact type of tactics dictators use to make sure their agenda is met. They demonize anyone who disagrees with any of their views of ideologies.

DO YOU WANT to ensure passage of the Public Plan? Since 75% of Americans support it, I guess it’s time for us Seventy-Five Percenters to be heard. Why Public Plan? = Because It’s American To Take Care Of Our Own!

Then they further spew their rhetoric and lies without any facts to back up their claims. In the end all they resort to is name calling and opinions with nothing to back them up; nothing more, nothing less.

America I hope you are not buying into Obama or his carnage of change!

To read the story go to Right Kilk for the article titled:

• Team Obama vs. Right-Wing Domestic Terrorists

Make sure that we the people, who still believe in the Constitution of this nation, fight back in order to make sure that we will not let them get away with this any longer. So please I urge, I beg you to call your senators and congressmen and make sure you let them know that AMERICANS DO NOT WANT Obamacare, SOCIALIST do!

Dictatorship in the USA?

by Mr. H

First let’s listen to the concerns of Mr. Ron Paul

Things to think about

1. min 0:25 Martial law can be declared for as little as to restore public order.
2. min 0:47 New law allows president to circumvent the restrictions of both laws.
3. min 1:07 Martial law can be declared for:
   • Natural disaster
   • Public health reason
   • Terrorist Attacks
   • Or vague reason called other conditions
4. min 1:25 President can call national guard without congressional approval or the government’s approval and even send state guard troops to other states.

Now we will turn our ears to the concerns of Glenn Beck.

Aired today, August 27th 2009.

Glenn Beck asks, no one answers

Questions asked

1. Now let’s listen to what Obama has to say, min 1:00; Civilian National Security Force just as strong and well funded as the military.
2. min 2:05 Why is a force needed when you have internal threat?
3. min 2:35 Who are we fighting?
4. min 3:00 Not the border.
5. min 3:13 Not Islamic extremist as according to Obama we are not a war with Islamic extremist anymore.
6. min 3:54 Is it us, we the people; people that believe in the Constitution?
7. min 7:20 Who builds an army against an unknown threat? Who?

Well folks, these are the issues, now will someone from the White house please give us, the citizens of the United States of America, the answers.

TR:  Never before has our White House been occupied by this level of radical Leftist revolutionaries.  Will we survive with the American Dream intact? – or should we be contemplating the formation of a new confederation, The Free Republics of America, neighboring but independent of this burgeoning Progressive hegemony (mostly, the East and Left coasts along with the NE and Great Lake states)?

Obama and ‘Redistributive Change’

Forget the recession and the “uninsured.” Obama has bigger fish to fry.

By Victor Davis Hanson, National Review

Vision becoming Krystal Clear.

The first seven months of the Obama administration seemingly make no sense. Why squander public approval by running up astronomical deficits in a time of pre-existing staggering national debt?

Why polarize opponents after promising bipartisan transcendence?

Why create vast new programs when the efficacy of big government is already seen as dubious?

But that is exactly the wrong way to look at these first seven months of Obamunist policy-making.

Take increased federal spending and the growing government absorption of GDP. Given the resiliency of the U.S. economy, it would have been easy to ride out the recession. In that case we would still have had to deal with a burgeoning and unsustainable annual federal deficit that would have approached $1 trillion.

Instead, Obama may nearly double that amount of annual indebtedness with more federal stimuli and bailouts, newly envisioned cap-and-trade legislation, and a variety of fresh entitlements. Was that fiscally irresponsible? Yes, of course.

But I think the key was not so much the spending excess or new entitlements. The point instead was the consequence of the resulting deficits, which will require radically new taxation for generations. If on April 15 the federal and state governments, local entities, the Social Security system, and the new health-care programs can claim 70 percent of the income of the top 5 percent of taxpayers, then that is considered a public good — every bit as valuable as funding new programs, and one worth risking insolvency.

Individual compensation is now seen as arbitrary and, by extension, inherently unfair. A high income is now rationalized as having less to do with market-driven needs, acquired skills, a higher level of education, innate intelligence, inheritance, hard work, or accepting risk. Rather income is seen more as luck-driven, cruelly capricious, unfair — even immoral, in that some are rewarded arbitrarily on the basis of race, class, and gender advantages, others for their overweening greed and ambition, and still more for their quasi-criminality.

“Patriotic” federal healers must then step in to “spread the wealth.” Through redistributive tax rates, they can “treat” the illness that the private sector has caused. After all, there is no intrinsic reason why an auto fabricator makes $60 in hourly wages and benefits, while a young investment banker finagles $500.

Or, in the president’s own language, the government must equalize the circumstances of the “waitress” with those of the “lucky.” It is thus a fitting and proper role of the new federal government to rectify imbalances of compensation — at least for those outside the anointed Guardian class. In a 2001 interview Obama in fact outlined the desirable political circumstances that would lead government to enforce equality of results when he elaborated on what he called an “actual coalition of powers through which you bring about redistributive change.”

Still, why would intelligent politicians try to ram through, in mere weeks, a thousand pages of health-care gibberish — its details outsourced to far-left elements in the Congress (and their staffers) — that few in the cabinet had ever read or even knew much about?

Once again, I don’t think health care per se was ever really the issue. When pressed, no one in the administration seemed to know whether illegal aliens were covered. Few cared why young people do not divert some of their entertainment expenditures to a modest investment in private catastrophic coverage.

Warnings that Canadians already have their health care rationed, wait in long lines, and are denied timely and critical procedures also did not seem to matter. And no attention was paid to statistics suggesting that, if we exclude homicides and auto accidents, Americans live as long on average as anyone in the industrial world, and have better chances of surviving longer with heart disease and cancer. That the average American did not wish to radically alter his existing plan, and that he understood that the uninsured really did have access to health care, albeit in a wasteful manner at the emergency room, was likewise of no concern.

The issue again was larger, and involved a vast reinterpretation of how America receives health care. Whether more or fewer Americans would get better or worse access and cheaper or more expensive care, or whether the government can or cannot afford such new entitlements, oddly seemed largely secondary to the crux of the debate.

Instead, the notion that the state will assume control, in Canada-like fashion, and level the health-care playing field was the real concern. “They” (the few) will now have the same care as “we” (the many). Whether the result is worse or better for everyone involved is extraneous, since sameness is the overarching principle.

We can discern this same mandated egalitarianism beneath many of the administration’s recent policy initiatives. Obama is not a pragmatist, as he insisted, nor even a liberal, as charged.

Rather, he is a statist. The president believes that a select group of affluent, highly educated technocrats — cosmopolitan, noble-minded, and properly progressive — supported by a phalanx of whiz-kids fresh out of blue-chip universities with little or no experience in the marketplace, can direct our lives far better than we can ourselves. By “better” I do not mean in a fashion that, measured by disinterested criteria, makes us necessarily wealthier, happier, more productive, or freer.

Instead, “better” means “fairer,” or more “equal.” We may “make” different amounts of money, but we will end up with more or less similar net incomes. We may know friendly doctors, be aware of the latest procedures, and have the capital to buy blue-chip health insurance, but no matter. Now we will all alike queue up with our government-issued insurance cards to wait our turn at the ubiquitous corner clinic.

None of this equality-of-results thinking is new.

Read the rest of this entry »