This is The Fight

Here's a quick video showcasing the clear and powerful message of Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey. It was taken from the final moments of a Townhall in Robbinsville. Where's Robbinsville you ask? I don't know. But this video is so good. Take a gander:



Bring it!

The Lottery

It's been a while since I've posted anything here...been busy. Here's something I thought was interesting though, and I thought it was worth putting up.



Also, an old favorite of mine:



You have to appreciate what big government, heavy bureaucracy can do to us. God bless America. May we rid ourselves of this sort of crap very soon.

Nobody's lookin'...

Life gets pretty busy, but everyone once in a while, you just have to stop and think about what's going on. When I sat down this morning to look at the news, I saw our Commander in Chief chillin' with the Emperor of Japan. He's bowing...a lot. Take a gander below.

Now, I don't really condemn the man for trying to strengthen relationships abroad, but I have to wonder if this is the right way to go about it. Will he earn the respect of other nations when he shows them in the first instant that he recognizes their superiority? Will other nations look to us as an authority?

I don't think he's earning the Emperor's respect there, but rather his approval. Maybe that's all the President is seeking. Maybe he's not gotten over the High School mentality of trying to be popular and fit in with the cool crowd. And maybe he thinks Japan is extra cool because they have Sony and Toyota.

At any rate, I'd love to hear what he says about his meeting in Japan. I recall another meeting with foreign royalty. When President Obama arrived at is first G-20 summit, he met with the leaders of the world one by one for a photo op. When he came to King Abdullah of Saudi, he gave us this precious Gem:

What was the President's description of this? Well, an aide of his told everyone he was stooping down to hear Abdullah better because he's so tall.

Maybe that's what he'll say about Japan...and maybe we should all pitch in for a Presidential Hearing Aide. The card can say:

Merry Christmas Mr. President, stop making an arse of yourself, and every one of us, abroad.

Love, U.S.A.

UPDATE: Here's an interesting article from HOT AIR that sites a journalist from the NYT back in 1994 about President Bill Clinton "almost" bowing to the same Japanese Emperor. Interesting.

“If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor.”

Really? How is that going to work under the current Senate bill? Let's take a look at this flowchart brought to us by the Republicans on the Joint Economics Committee.


Does this give you a headache? It will...

The Tax Man Cometh...

I was reading some articles and blogs earlier tonight, and I found an interesting link to this video.



Taxes are truly an encroachment on our liberty. This is why so many decent Americans are taking the time out of their busy schedules to peaceably organize and protest - to show the Government that Americans know Freedom, and they're not going to relinquish any more of it without a fight.

It really bothers me there are so many on the left, especially in leadership positions, like Nancy Pelosi...and even the big O himself, that are discounting the worries and concerns of these citizens. They have called them racists, and have proclaimed on National television that "special interests" are behind the "Astroturfing" (Astroturfing is a way for the left to say that, rather than this movement being a grassroots movement, it's manufactured by the Right-Wing Special Interests). The funniest thing is that they say that, and they they get the SCIU and ACORN to recruit protesters (thugs) to go to town hall meetings and protests and intimidate, and in some cases even physically violate, the good, decent, and hard-working Americans that are fed up with the rampant and out-of-control liberal agenda that Obama and the Democratic leadership have embarked on.

Here a few videos that show footage from different protests. I think my favorite is the first one here - it's just a surveillance camera that took image captures as the crowds that ran through the streets of Washington D.C. last week steadily grew larger - it's quite amazing to me. If you're reading this and agree with me, you're not alone. If you disagree, I wonder why you're not alone either.





And here's one that shows how things got started back in February of 2009, not even a month into Obama's presidency.



Just a side note, after the inauguration Ceremony for President Obama, there was hoards of trash left on the ground everywhere. This behavior from the environment-loving liberals?

After the Washington Tea Party on the 11th, things were pretty clean. See for yourself...

This is from the Inauguration in January of this year.


This is from the Tea Party last week. I see a small difference.
I just think it's interesting that people who want the Government to leave Americans alone to be responsible for themselves are, in large measure, responsible for themselves!

This is Where They Want Us to Go!

I was reading through some articles today, and I found something truly horrific.

It's an article from the Daily Mail, and it documents an incident that happened some time ago where a baby was born at 21 Weeks and 5 days into the pregnancy. This happened in Norfolk, England. What allegedly took place after the baby was born is heartbreaking.

A word of warning; the article contains pictures of a small premature child, and I would caution anyone to use their discretion in viewing them.

Sarah Capewell, the mother of the premature baby from the article, alleges that when the baby was born, the doctors and medics refused to treat him because it was against the State's guidelines to treat a baby born before 22 weeks. So, Miss Capewell's baby was just two days shy of being allowed to live...two days. I've included some quotes below.

"Miss Capewell, 23, said doctors refused to even see her son Jayden, who lived for almost two hours without any medical support.

She said he was breathing unaided, had a strong heartbeat and was even moving his arms and legs, but medics refused to admit him to a special care baby unit."

The article goes on...

"She said: 'When he was born, he put out his arms and legs and pushed himself over. A midwife said he was breathing and had a strong heartbeat, and described him as a "little fighter".

I kept asking for the doctors but the midwife said, "They won't come and help, sweetie. Make the best of the time you have with him".'

She cuddled her child and took precious photos of him, but he died in her arms less than two hours after his birth."

I encourage you to read the full article, if for nothing else, to help hit home what President Obama, Harry Reid, and Nancy Pelosi have in mind for us in America.

When the President backed down from the "Public Option" last week, I thought we might be onto something, but then I read this earlier, and I realize that these thugs will stop at nothing to force their ideology on to all of us.

From Jake Tapper's blog at ABC news (not a typically conservative gentleman):

"Both leaders told the president that despite the difficult rough and tumble of the legislative process in the last few weeks, they are optimistic that both the House and Senate can pass health care reform legislation.

What will be in the bill remains an open question, though after the meeting, Reid told reporters that 'we're going to do our very best to have a public option or something like a public option before we finish this work.'”

I've signed the petition at freeourhealthcarenow, and I've urged all of you to do so as well. Also, calling your representatives in Congress might help, unless you have someone like Harry Mitchel of AZ - who is totally useless.

Beyond that, get the word out - talk to people you meet, or to people you already know. A few weeks ago, I started a conversation with a Russian immigrant whom I worked with, and her and a coworker and I discussed both the U.S.S.R. and the current state of affairs in this nation. The lady from Russia was very serious when she said that she "smells Communism coming" and that she "doesn't ever want to go back to a State-run Insurance". If we open our mouths and shed as much light on what is happening as possible, I think we'll win the hearts of those good and decent people in this, our beloved country.

There are good people out there that just don't pay as much attention as they should, but given the truth, they'll see the light, and want to fight what's going down on Capital Hill.

I certainly hope that we can have some effect in setting this country back on the right track, or as close to it as possible.

Carry on.

Socialized Health Care..."Bring Out Your Dead!"

These past few days has been exciting to watch. There has been a true organic movement across the country of ordinary citizens confronting their representatives at town hall meetings.

One of the more awesome of these confrontation was actually at a town hall "Listening Session" for a group of retirees and their AARP representative.

Just a bit of background on AARP, or the American Association of Retired Persons. This group has held some serious lobbying power in Washington for some time now, and has always backed very left-leaning legislation coming out of Washington.

So, during this "Listening Session", something pretty interesting happened. Here's the video, it's a little long, but watch until at least to the 4:00 mark:



From what I was hearing all over the radio today, these "Volunteers" are being trained to spew their talking points out, and then shut down any counter points. That may be hearsay, but after seeing this video and others like it, I think I believe it.

So what do these retirees have to look forward to if Obamacare passes?

...(please mute the video at exactly 1:53)



Well, now that we've seen the future, we can get on with our lives.

Let freedom ring!

What We Can Do...

I often wonder what I can do to affect a change to the direction I feel this country is headed in. I found a petition online that is being advertized by several of the leading talk radio hosts in America. The website is called "Free Our Health Care Now"

Here's a video to introduce the petition, and to give a little background as to why it's important.

Please sign it when you have a chance - I think that this might be a step in the right direction.

Comparison of Leadership

Here's an interesting video taken from Hannity's America. It's a show on Fox News, the network I can only ever watch while getting a haircut because I can't afford cable. Luckily, because of this amazing invention called "The Internet", we have access to small exerpts from shows on cable - for free...actually, not for free, but cheaper than cable. Let's all take a moment of silence and thank Al Gore for "The Internet", which he invented.

Now, the video linked above shows the comparison between President Obama's response to the chaos in Iran, and President Reagan's response to the Soviet backed Polish Government's crackdown on a Trade Union Federation that was pro-Democracy back in 1981.

For what it's worth, Reagan was better.

The American Trinity: A Video Presentation

I stumbled upon this video today, it was linked from the blog on Townhall. I really enjoyed it, and if you follow the link to Youtube, you can find more related videos.

Here's the link.



God Bless America.

Unity and Debate

Last week, former Vice President Al Gore and former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich both testified before a legislative committee concerning their views on Man-Made Global Warming, as they pertain to a new bill that is being debated in committee which will create a Cap and Trade energy plan.

"Cap and Trade" refers to a system in which the Federal Government sets a limit on the amount of pollutants that a company can emit into the environment, but also issues certain credits or permits that can be saved up, sold to, and/or traded with other companies and industries so that the "Cap" can be more flexible. See illustration below for a better idea of how this works.



There are some things about this "plan" that intrigue me, but they are few and far between when I look at the system in theory, and especially when I add into the equation how our beautiful Government is going about implementing it into our society, and the inevitable effect it will have on our Economy.

When I take it all into account, a "Cap and Trade" program sounds an awful lot like a corrupt plan that will push us closer to full scale Economic Planning. "Economic Planning" pretty much describes Communism, some forms of Fascism, and Socialism - all are very similar, one way being that they all take away an individual's freedom to choose for himself what sort of life to lead and how to lead it.

Getting back to the testimonies, I wanted to point out something I found rather interesting. Al Gore was, as always, adamant about the "Fact" that Global Warming is Man-Made. When a handful of lawmakers point out that there are some very real issues that are still up for debate, and that there is no certain consensus in the scientific community, Mr. Gore compares challengers of his theories to those who think the Moon landing was staged on a studio lot in Arizona. I thought you might like to see a video of that encounter here.



Going forward with his arguments, Mr. Gore then calls for the end of division and partisanship in this crisis of Man-Made Global Warming. He pleads for us to let our differences of opinion not get in the way of saving our planet. He pleads for Unity!

Unity? What does that really mean? In this situation, it means nothing. What does Al mean when he pleads with us all to unite? He means that he wants those of us that don't want a Cap and Trade system forced on us, who don't believe that there's a crisis, to just forget all about that and accept the snake oil she's peddling.

Does Mr. Gore really want unity? No, or he'd be willing to change his position.

Is unity even possible when two or more people are at odds with their values or beliefs? It's a question I've heard asked before. I don't really think that unity, in these sort of situations, can really exist. Can Compromise occur? You bet! But unity means so much more than compromise. It's truly when our hearts and minds are on the same page with one another.

My wife and I are united, we don't really have opposing views on things. Al Gore and I...not so much. But we can be united! I mean, I really think it's possible to for Al Gore and I to see eye to eye...but only if he changes his mind and calls for an end to the Cap and Trade program!

Unity!

PS - Here's Newt!

The Freedom to Choose

By Spring

George Washington and John Adams founded this country because they were living under tyranny of England. They were being denied many freedoms, such as the freedom to worship how and where they chose. The current public school system and the push to make public schools the dominating choice takes away similar freedoms to choose, as parents, what’s best for our children. Not everyone in this nation has access to thriving, successful charter or public schools or can afford the tuition of private schools.

Think about how we are handling education and how the same concept applied to any other system in our society would be dictatorial. For example, what if instead of paying for food directly you were taxed and then given a dollar amount by the government to buy groceries. But, you can only buy groceries from a certain store depending on where you live. The food at your store is old, over processed, full of trans fats and sugars, and the store has no produce. The children eating this food are weak and sick. This would be appalling; the government would be oppressing these people and taking away their freedom to choose! This is not how it works in regards to food even when we are talking about government subsidized food stamps. With food stamps a family is given a dollar amount and they can take that money to whichever store they chose and buy the food they want for their family. But this oppressive scenario IS exactly how it works with education. In most cases, if you want your tax dollars to pay for your child’s education, you have no choice but to send her to the school dictated by the government.

There is enormous room for improvement in our educational system. Hardly any system in the United States is more backward. There is no other aspect where people who live in low-income neighborhoods are so disadvantaged as in the kind of schooling they can get for their children.(1)

About 90% of children in the US go to public schools but parents are increasingly seeing schools become an area of governmental control and are concerned about the political agendas that are being taught to their young children. The problem is that, as the system has become more centralized, power has moved from the local community (families) to the school district, to the state, and then to the federal government.

We’ve all seen the dismal result of centralized public schools controlled by bureaucrats: some relatively good government schools in high-income suburbs and communities; very poor government schools in our inner cities with high dropout rates, increasing violence, lower performance and demoralized students and teachers.

Supporters of a public education system focus on the plight of the poor. How is the education, or lack thereof, for those youth in the poorest inner cities going to help them live the “American dream”, when the quality of the education they are receiving is keeping them down.

One of the most promising way to fix this serious problem is school vouchers. A school voucher is a certificate issued by the government by which parents can pay for the education of their children at a school of their choice, rather than the public school to which they are assigned because of their address.(2) Parents take the tax money that is to be spent on their child’s education and use it to pay for the school of their choice. The money follows the child. Every child in America receives a voucher, every child receives an education, and every parent is given the freedom to choose.

What would happen if this sort of system were to be put into place nation wide? It would promote free market competition among schools of all types, which would provide schools incentive to improve. Successful schools would attract students, while bad schools would be forced to reform or close. The goal of this system is to localize accountability as opposed to relying on government standards. You would no longer have to be forced, whether you like it or not, to accept the service of the public schools, functioning as a monopoly; and public schools in many areas of this country are by definition monopolies.

The business community has a major interest in expanding the pool of well-schooled potential employees and in maintaining a free society with open trade and expanding markets around the world. Both objectives would be promoted by the right kind of voucher system.

Finally, as in every other area in which there has been a transfer from government to public control, the privatization of schooling would produce a new, highly active and profitable private industry that would provide a real opportunity for many talented people who are currently deterred from entering the teaching profession by the dreadful state of so many of our schools. This means, in general, better, more qualified teachers.

Just imagine if you had the FREEDOM to choose from several different, well functioning schools that were teaching in a way that you felt your child would thrive. You could choose a school where morals were taught and it would be paid for by your tax dollars.

Vouchers would reduce division of society according to class, they would build competition, and they would restore control to the people most competent to decide on children’s education: their parents!(3)

Among the strongest critics of the voucher program are public school teachers’ unions, most notably the National Education Association (the largest labor union in the USA) which has spent millions litigating and lobbying against vouchers. Simple reasoning tells you these unions are working for teachers—not kids and not YOUR kids. Teachers' unions are bitterly opposed to any reform that lessens their own power, and they have acquired enormous political and financial strength that they are prepared to devote to defeating any attempt to adopt a voucher system. It would result in a loss of their control. Public schools are NOT free and are not paid for by the government! It is paid for with taxpayers money; our money. We are paying for the education our children receive through the public school system and on top of that, subsidizing the education of children whose parents don’t pay taxes. We happily do so to ensure that every child in this great nation receives the blessing of an education. We have the right to choose how OUR money is being spent on the education of OUR children.

There are many places in the US where the voucher system is being used. The city of Milwaukee, Wisconsin led the way in 1990 and now has nearly 15,000 students using vouchers. The 2006-2007 school year will mark the first time in Milwaukee that more than $100 million will be paid in vouchers. Twenty-six percent of Milwaukee students will receive public funding to attend schools outside the traditional Milwaukee Public School system.

Utah voted on a state-wide universal school voucher system providing a maximum tuition subsidy of $3000 which was passed in 2007, but voters repealed it in a statewide referendum before it took effect. Education advocacy groups from all over the country poured campaign funds into Utah, where voters were to cast ballots in a referendum to repeal school vouchers. It's sickening to sick to think that Utah was so close to doing something so revolutionary that would lead our nation in a movement that would change so many children’s lives for good and finally brake the poverty cycle: so close. The teachers’ unions fought hard for the referendum; they do not want to lose their power and control. If Utah passed this other states would see its success and want to adopt a similar program. The union also fought hard to shoot down similar attempts in California and Florida as well as many other places. As soon as there is a desire from parents for better education, through school vouchers, like an iron fist, with all its strength, the teachers’ unions pound out any threat to weaken their monopoly.

Every child in this country has a right to receive an education; it is one of the things that makes America the greatest nation on this earth. We don’t have to blindly send our children to public schools as the only option to supporting education for all children. This country was founded on government of the people, by the people, and for the people. We cannot let groups that don’t have any children’s best interest at heart strong arm those who do. We can and must let our voices be heard on this nonpartisan issue and make the education system in America better for all children… our children.

As resourceful parents we can make the most of our educational system. We can volunteer in the schools; we can supplement our children’s public education at home. If you live in places like Utah or Arizona you may have access to good charter and public schools. If you feel like you don’t want your child in the public school you can homeschool. But, what about the truly impoverished families and children in America? They don’t have thriving charter schools in their inner cities, they can’t afford private schools. What about the parents who are working two jobs and can’t volunteer at school or the single mom who is working to make ends meet and doesn’t have any other options? The only choice they have is to send their precious child to a failing school full of drugs, sex, and violence. They are helpless, these children are helpless. What about them? There is a better way. We can stand up for these children and we must. That is the American dream!

Notes:

1. Public Schools: Make Them Private CATO Briefing Paper

2. School Voucher Wikipedia

3. School Vouchers-The Next Great Leap Forward WSJ, July 9 1998

Where's Milton Friedman when you need him?

The other day, as I was reading through some online articles, I stumbled upon a short clip of Milton Friedman on the Donahue show back in what looked like the early '80s. As I watched Dr. Friedman explain his point to Mr. Donahue, something happened inside of me. I was absolutely fascinated by what I was listening to. I'd never heard a public figure make so much sense. That night, I watched over 2 hours of YouTube videos on Milton Friedman. I know, that's absolutely ridiculous, but what can I say? I've shared this find with a few of my friends, but thought it would serve us all well to place it in this venue. I have embedded the first clip I saw here, and if you are so moved, as I was, you can follow that link to find more Milton goodness.

The subject that they discuss in the video is Greed. It's very timely right now, as the majority of public leaders are discussing the failings of Capitalism and how we must move toward a more "fair" society (see Socialism). I hope that you enjoy this.



I truly wish I could be like this man, so articulate in common sense. I hope we all will try and stand up for our values with a similarly calm and confident manner as Dr. Friedman did.

An Observation

There are plenty of people out there that rail against the NRA and gun owners in general. It doesn't help any that every now and then there is some sort of shooting rampage in Middle America. I don't want to seem callous, I'm just making an observation. Here's another observation: I think we hear a lot more about the rampages that occur vs. the ones that don't.

For example, you may or may not have read about the shooting spree that occurred in Alabama some weeks ago, it was on every major news station and in all sorts of other forms of media. Heck, it even showed up in the UK! What didn't show up everywhere, however, was this story, or this one, or this one either...

I wonder why these stories of prevented criminal violence weren't nationally heralded like the shooter in Alabama was? Could it be that the stories of how guns save lives and discourage violent criminal activity could have an effect on the national public opinion of gun ownership and the Second Amendment?

It's pretty darn important for all of us that the Second Amendment, the right to bare arms, is protected. These are turbulent times we're living in, and the world is truly in commotion. Would it not be prudent to have some food storage and some sort of meaningful protection against invaders of both our homes and our country?

Critics will disagree with my observation and site the danger of owning guns in the home. Or, they'll bring up that there must be more regulations for buying guns.

Let me address the latter suggestion first - Cars kill more people than guns do each year, domestically. How easy is it to get a driver's license and a car registered? The car basically has to be in good mechanical shape and then you're good. Why do we make honest people that wish to own guns for their own protection/enjoyment go through crazy hoops? Does anyone think that the criminals intent on doing harm have the same hoops to jump through?

Concerning the danger of owning a gun, I've added a quote from "Freakonomics", which is a great book written by Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner:

"What's more dangerous: a swimming pool or a gun? When it comes to children, there is no comparison: a swimming pool is 100 times more deadly.

In 1997 alone (the last year for which data are available), 742 children under the age of 10 drowned in the United States last year alone. Approximately 550 of those drownings — about 75 percent of the total — occurred in residential swimming pools. According to the most recent statistics, there are about six million residential pools, meaning that one young child drowns annually for every 11,000 pools.

About 175 children under the age of 10 died in 1998 as a result of guns. About two-thirds of those deaths were homicides. There are an estimated 200 million guns in the United States. Doing the math, there is roughly one child killed by guns for every one million guns.

Thus, on average, if you both own a gun and have a swimming pool in the backyard, the swimming pool is about 100 times more likely to kill a child than the gun is."

Clearly we're fed a line from not only the liberal politicians in Washington, but the mainstream media. Both parties wish, for one reason or another, to slowly take away our right to bare arms, as provisioned in the Second Amendment. We can fight this in a few different ways, that I know of. We can buy a gun. We can support the NRA, which actively lobbies in Washington against the liberals. We can write to our congressmen/congresswomen. And, we can spread the word to everyone we can. Go and tell it on the mountain!

May we all be vigilant in our freedom, for should we fail in this, we won't have it much longer.

Welcome to the Circus!

This has been a pretty brutal couple of days for a few choice politicians, as well as the AIG team.

Earlier this week, news broke of the bonuses that AIG was paying to a handful of execs totaling $168M (final amount still in dispute). Now, AIG is the recipient of, to my best estimate, approximately $187B in stimulus money(so the bonuses are .09% of that), which is being funded by us taxpayers. Naturally, because of that last fact, not too many people are excited the aforementioned bonuses. A wave of public outcry ensued, which was followed by strong denunciations from The White House, as well as both branches of Congress.

This is all pretty standard. Whenever there's a public outcry, there's a political one as well. This is most commonly referred to as demagoguery, when a leader or group of leaders makes use of a popular position only to gain power.

I realize this is just a claim, but my reasoning for feeling this way is this: If people like Congressman Barney Frank, the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, or Senator Chris Dodd, the chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, were sincere, they'd be stepping down first and offering up an audit trail of all of their indiscretions, but they're not. They're just calling for the firing squad to open up on AIG because it's politically expedient.

How dare they call on anyone to step down from leadership while they themselves enjoy their power, influence, and multitude of perks, all at the taxpayer's expense, while they also spend us into bondage at an unprecedented rate. It's not just those two, it's anyone calling AIG out. This includes almost every politician in Washington, including the President.

Now, I'm not a fan of AIG, I think that giving bonuses out to execs that ruin your company is not only ethically wrong, but really stupid. Add on top of that the fact that they received such a large amount of tax $$ and it's worse. But, strictly speaking, these bonuses were legal, and were made possible by an amendment which was added to the stimulus package that passed in February that not one of the congressmen or senators who voted for it read. It was added to the bill by Chris Dodd, and was approved to go in by a conference between a Senate sub-committee and the White House, according to Nancy Pelosi.

Yes, Nancy placed the blame on the Senate, and the White House, even though she rammed this bill down the throats of every member of her House, making them vote on a 1,000+ page bill within 7 hours of seeing for the first time.

The Dodd amendment gave a loophole to any institution that gave bonuses to its employees or executives as long as the bonuses were planned and contracted out prior to February 2009. So, when pressed on this amendment last week, Chris Dodd lied and said he didn't have anything to do with it, then recanted his lie two days later, but added that the White House told him to lie.

Hmm.

This is a disaster. It's situations like this that make it clear that the leadership in Washington is completely incompetent. These people that couldn't even get their story straight when the media lights are on, are the same people that would love to run our country's Health Care, and that would like to discourage charitable giving so that they, the Government, could take on a more "responsible" role there (see: "Strings attached").

When are we going to stand up to this group of underachievers?

Which way the wind will blow...

Sometimes it's hard to live up to your predecessor, but more often than not, in politics at least, it's even harder to live up to your own rhetoric.

A little history is in order.

All throughout President Obama's campaign, he and John McCain spoke and debated on the need to "curb" the excessive pork barrel spending (pet projects attached to a piece of legislation by any given lawmaker that will directly benefit his/her constituency and/or special interest) that was being added to good bills that was essentially adding billions of dollars each year to our deficit. After his election, and subsequent swearing-in, the President continued his rhetoric of fiscal responsibility, chastising both Washington and Wall Street for reckless spending and greed.

Here's where things get cool. During Obama's tenure in the senate, which was extremely brief, he was #2 in Pork spending. Furthermore, all of the rhetoric coming out against fiscal irresponsibility was spewing forth during his pitch to approve the most intensely huge spending bill in the history of the world - also laden with all sorts of crazy pork, courtesy of the democratic congress of the United States of America.

So, if you're the President, at this point, you're probably asking yourself, "how can I come across as more fiscally responsible here?" The light bulb would then come on and you could do what the President did starting last week, and announce that you will, indeed, curb pork spending.

On Wednesday, Barack Obama signed another spending bill brought before him by Congress to the amount of $410 Billion. This bill is laced with all sorts of crazy stuff - all Democrat pork.

So, what gives?

Oh, wait - in an explanation to reporters, Mr. Obama corrected skeptics by saying that he only said he would "curb" spending, not "eliminate" it. Read here for more.

Okay, that's actually awesome!

So, our President, the fearless and flawless Barack Obama, is actually disingenuous...now who would've known?

Wait, there's more. After criticizing the Bush administration for implementing hundreds of signing statements by declaring them to be unconstitutional, Barack Obama issued one of his own. FYI, a signing statement is basically a way for the President to veto certain line items on any given bill without having to flush the whole thing. It's sort of like me picking the raisins out of my trail mix. Go figure.

So, you can see that it's a tough job to be President. It's even tougher when you have to remember where you stand on certain things, or where you're supposed to stand as dictated by special interests, and what lies you've told.

For more on the nature of political rhetoric, please click here.

The Great American Ponzi Scheme

Bernard Madoff is expected to plead guilty on Thursday to charges that he defrauded investors in one of the largest ponzi schemes in US history.  This scheme is second only to our current Social Security system scheme (or shall we say Social InSecurity). By pleading guilty, Madoff is not required to tell prosecutors where all the money is.  So, thousands of investors will both not receive the interest promised them...they won't receive the principle that they invested.  Pretty sad...these unfortunate souls are in some cases out their retirement savings.  

Luckily they can still count on the retirement promised by the greatest American Ponzi scheme ever: Social InSecurity!  

Social InSecurity was part of FDR's New Deal and was implemented "supposedly" to eliminate the rising number of older adults living in 

poverty.  (It is worth noting that much of the New Deal was tossed out by the  Supreme Court as unconstitutional, but that Social InSecurity was not because FDR stacked the courts with New Deal judges who would support his "policies.")  The idea that Social InSecurity would pay for the retirement of all Americans is a farce, since the retirement age at conception of the program was greater than the average life expectancy for Americans.  

This means that for every American who actually lived to the age of retirement and started collecting benefits, there were ample workers paying into the system.  As we get closer to a 2:1 

ratio of workers to retirees, we can expect to see Social InSecurity taxes increase and benefits cut-great fun for the whole family :)  (I'd like to send a shout out to FDR for creating unconstitutional programs to treat a temporary ailment, while making that ailment last for over a decade while at the same time creating even worse problems in the future!)

But wait, that is my money that I paid into the system...shouldn't I be able to get the benefit of my investment?  Well...no, you shouldn't according to the courts, no one has any legal right to Social InSecurity.  This means that you can be denied benefits, or worse yet, if the system were to go belly up and Congress can say, "Oh well, thanks for the years you payed in, see you at your new greeter job at Walmart."  

To put this in perspective, if you think that you are going to get a better retirement from investing in Social InSecurity you are like Phyllis Weaver from the greatest 80's movie ever made by Weird Al: UHF.  

Phyllis Weaver has just won a Red Snapper on Wheel of Fish...and this is how the rest of the scene goes down:

Kuni (karate instructor and host of Wheel of Fish): Ahhh, a red snapper.  Mmmmm, very tasty. Okay, Weaver, listen carefully.  You can hold on to your red snapper...[Hiro-San emerges, carrying a table with a box]...or you can go for what's in the box that Hiro-San is bringing down the aisle right now!  What's it gonna be?

[Phyllis Weaver has difficulty in choosing as the audience point to the box]

Phyllis Weaver:  I'll take the box.  The box!

Kuni:  You took the box?  Let's see what's in the box!

[Hiro-San opens the box; the audience gasps.  There is silence]

Kuni:  Nothing!  Absolutely nothing!  STUPID!  You're so STU-PIIIIIIID!

We are all so STU-PIIIIIIID for thinking that Social InSecurity will provide a quality retirement for us.  Chances are that it will be 

defunct, and you will be living in a spare bedroom at your oldest daughter's house.  That's because we are following the crowd in giving our very tasty red snapper to the Government for what is inside the box...you know the rest!  

Also, we allowed ourselves to be lulled into the entitlement mentality that everyone has the right to idle away the golden years sitting on some beach somewhere...or in some rocking chair in a living room in Sun City, AZ.  

So, it looks like we were all duped into believing in a system that's a sham...but wait, messiah was just elected president!  He and only he can fix Social InSecurity, provide universal healthcare, magically create universal education from birth through college, and save the world from global warming!  On second thought, he has the substance and experience that is found inside Hiro-San's box: NOTHING!!!!  He represents the worst of the entitlement movement which would give each American the "right" to claim financial support from every other American.  

How did we get to this point?  The thought used to be that parents work hard to provide more for their children than they had growing up.  Now, in the twisted Bizzaro World, parents are claiming the future earnings of their children so they can sustain their own standard of living. In Bizzaro World we recently passed the "American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009." In the real world, this is known as the "American Robbing from our Kids While Calling it a Reinvestment Act of 2009 Which is Soon to be Followed by a Similar Act of Stealing from our Kids Act of 2010."  So, in honor of such acts, I propose that for the next few years at each child's birthday, we give little Johnny or Jane their own Hiro-San's box of nothing, and buy ourselves a new pair of leather shoes or something else "we deserve."

Oh yeah!  Let's do something about Social InSecurity too before we get left out in the cold by the greatest ponzi scheme in American history.

Possible solutions: personal retirement savings (although this doesn't look too attractive right now with the way the markets are responding to Obama's financial moves), families taking care of their elders, charitable organizations which assist the elderly, or working till you die (FDR did). 

To Tax, or not to Tax...

President Obama has proposed a tax increase to all couples, individuals, and small businesses earning $250,000 or more per year. This tax increase isn't just a rate hike on the top, but also lurking within is a reduction on the amount of deduction these folks can take on all of their charitable giving. So, let's just soak that in. One can only assume, from this, that the federal government is now trying to discourage the wealthy from giving to charities.

According to the speech that Obama gave to Congress last week, the tax hikes are to fund a plethora of long-standing Democratic goodies, but none more at the forefront than...UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE!!! I just heard that Psycho music playing in my head. Did you hear it? The cool thing is, the president is using this tax hike as a "Down Payment" on the health care plan. Guess what the plan is. Oops! There's no plan yet! President Obama is taking money from the top layer of American earners to pay for something that he's all but admitted doesn't exist! Is this reprehensible to anyone else?

So, if you're not one of the people making $250K per year, you're probably thinking...I'm good. Wrong. Something else that President Obama has planned on for some time now is letting the "Bush Tax Cuts" expire in 2010. This means, of course, that if you pay taxes, you'll be suddenly paying a lot more when they expire. Even though the president knows this, he chooses to not call this a tax increase because it's just a policy change, an expiration of old tax policies.

Don't you see the difference? I sure don't.

To make it clearer, here's a tax rate table I picked up, for a nice average salary of $50K/year. Before you read it, keep in mind, President Bush had two tax cuts, and both will expire this year.

Tax Rates - and the Obama Increase - $50,000/year Taxable Income

	2000 Tax Tables	2003 Tax Tables	2004 Tax Tables	2010 Tax Tables - (Bush Tax Cuts have Expired)	Increase with Obama Tax Increase*
Taxable Income	$50,000	$50,000	$50,000	$50,000	$50,000
Tax: Single	$10,581	$9,304	$9,231	$10,581	$1,350
Tax: Married - Filing Joint	$8,293	$6,796	$6,781	$8,293	$1,512
Tax: Married - Filing Separate	$11,143	$9,304	$9,231	$11,143	$1,912
Tax: Head of Household	$9,424	$8,189	$8,094	$9,424	$1,330

So, looks like President Obama is being straight with the American people about wanting to tax the rich, but totally lying about not taxing anyone else.

I understand that Taxation is necessary, to a certain extent, but this is out of hand. The American people are good people, working hard to feed their families and make ends meet. $1,000 would feed a family of 6 for two months. It could fund a couple months of college tuition (undergrad of course) for someone seeking further education. For the President of the United States to so flippantly take this money to further liberal agendas is immoral.

We Are Conservatives!

What does being a conservative mean? This question is being kicked around a lot lately, particularly by those that would have all of America think that the conservative movement is a thing of the past. We defy those critics, and would like to use this forum to declare that, for us, conservative principles fall under the following general values:

• Individual Responsibility - Less Government
  
• Liberty
• A deep respect for the Constitution

Individual responsibility is an antonym of Government largess. As the new administration begins this new era of big government, the welfare state will grow along with it, thus creating a culture of dependency. A dependency on nothing less than being "taken care of." Mitt Romney put it best in saying "Dependency is death to initiative, risk-taking and opportunity. Dependency is culture killing. It's a drug. We've got to fight it like the poison it is." As the democrats seek to tax the wealthy, they'll find, as in many times past, that it won't be enough to satisfy the cost of their agenda, and they'll continue to invade our lives with intrusive policies.

Liberty is at the forefront of each and every new policy debate since January. What's being debated, what's being raised as outrageous, is the lack of liberty that we as a country afford to the prisoners we hold in various detentions centers. Prisoners that were taken captive as they were attacking US citizens. What is not outrageous to the Liberals, is their agenda to take our right to bare arms. Liberals don't mind taxing us, taking our money, our guns, our ability to live the American dream on fair terms, our freedom to choose which schools to send our children to, or which news outlet we'd like to listen to/read (yes, those last two are actual agendas that have been debated in Congress) but they wouldn't dream of offending terrorists.

The Preamble to the Constitution sums it up best. "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America." It's all there, isn't it? Why try and change it? There has been a steady barrage of law suits, as well as prospective legislation, that have sought to overturn, distort, and otherwise deface the Constitution of the United States of America. Rather than support judges who seek to rewrite the Constitution, we support Legislators and Executives who will appoint judges who seek to uphold it, by the letter of the law.

We've chosen this topic as our first post in order to clearly state what we believe. We could probably go on and on, but that would spoil the surprise. Thank you for reading this, we hope that it got you thinking!

Sincerely,

Sons of Liberty