It's simply not true that all American’s are in denial when it comes to funding Barack Obama’s enormous health care initiative.
The day after the Congressional Budget Office gave its blessing to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s version of the health reform bill - a Quinnipiac University poll of a cross section of voters - reported its results.
The poll question read: "President Obama has pledged that health insurance reform will not add to our federal budget deficit over the next decade.
Do you think that President Obama will be able to keep his promise or do you think that any health care plan that Congress passes and President Obama signs will add to the federal budget deficit?"
The answer: Only 19 percent of those polled think he will be able to keep his word.
9 of 10 Republicans and 8 of 10 independents said that whatever passes will add massive debt to the already over burdened deficit. Even Democrats agreed this is likely by a margin of four to three.
That fear contributed directly to the fact that the majority in this poll said they oppose the legislation now moving through Congress by a 16-point margin
The concern over the bill seems to be less about the much publicized fight over the public option or the issue of abortion coverage than it does the plausibility that the plan will be fiscally manageable.
While the Congressional Budget Office said that both the bill that recently passed the house and the Reid bill meet the Presidents goal of being budget-neutral, most experts agree currently, these bills will greatly overload an already overburdened budget.
Budget expert Douglas Holtz-Eakin says that "budget gimmicks" make it appear that Harry Reid's bill would reduce federal deficits by $130 billion by the year 2019.
One of those gimmicks is Reid's decision to postpone the start of subsidies to help the uninsured buy policies from mid-2013 to January 2014
long after taxes and fees levied by the bill would have begun.
So the health care financing games continue - but the challenge remains the same: Either find a way to make the promised savings real, or get back to the drawing board and craft a plan that really works without bleeding the country dry
Monday, November 30, 2009
Sunday, November 22, 2009
Palin? Yes, but not now
I like Sarah Palin… A lot.
I do not however like her as President – not now at least
Here’s why
I believe the most pressing issue this country is faced with is not the economy, or health care but rather international terrorism. If we are constantly under the threat of being attacked – possibly by a nuclear armed unstable nation – then all the domestic issues we face are merely a distraction.
I am completely confident the US will be hit again and I firmly believe that attack is right around the corner and quite possibly the threat could endure for years.
On domestic policy I think Sarah Palin is a gem. On issues like immigration, taxes, gun control, healthcare reform, environmental issues she falls right in line with what I believe and know to be true.
On foreign policy issues she’s a novice. And with the unstable nature of our world, the move towards globalization, a one world monetary system, the increasing attempts by many nations to grant more power to the United Nations, tension between Israel and Palestine and a whole host of other foreign policy challenges I do not think Sarah Palin has the experience to govern as the President of the United States – not yet at least.
And with the almost certainty that we will be involved in a war for probably decades to come – a President that has a firm grasp on international affairs is no longer a luxury – it is mandatory – and the Presidency is no place for on the job training – no matter how fast a learner someone is.
Imagine this:
It’s 2:15 am, 85 days into the Palin Presidency and the phone rings. 3 Russian Subs have been spotted by the Coast Guard 8 miles off the coast of Long Island NY. They do not respond to attempts to reach them by radio contact and they’re headed this way.
Or perhaps…A Muslim bomber just detonated a nitrogen and phosphorus based fertilizer bomb hidden in a rental truck. The blast caused a gaping hole and a fire ball that reached a 100 feet into the air. The bomb was set off on the lowest level of a parking deck killing dozens and trapping hundreds of people at the Riverchase Galleria in Hoover Alabama (My home town)
Is Sarah Palin really the person you want in charge?
Now?
With this crisis unfolding?
Do her views on death panels, immigration, global warming or cap and trade legislation really matter when and not if - a major international catastrophe hits this country
Sarah Plain has many of the exact same experience flaws many of us on the right said should preclude Barack Obama from being President.
How do we justify this position to our liberal countrymen?
Many Palin supporters have sound much like the giddy Obama supporters we said we’re delusional. She is taking on that same rock star persona we warned people on the left to not become drunk on.
As this point we cannot afford to become enraptured with Sarah Palin – the stakes are just too high.
I like Sarah Palin, a lot. I think she has a long, brilliant and possibly history changing political career ahead of her
We cannot afford to put her in office simply because we like her pluck or because she’s sassy.
Not now. The stakes are just too high
I do not however like her as President – not now at least
Here’s why
I believe the most pressing issue this country is faced with is not the economy, or health care but rather international terrorism. If we are constantly under the threat of being attacked – possibly by a nuclear armed unstable nation – then all the domestic issues we face are merely a distraction.
I am completely confident the US will be hit again and I firmly believe that attack is right around the corner and quite possibly the threat could endure for years.
On domestic policy I think Sarah Palin is a gem. On issues like immigration, taxes, gun control, healthcare reform, environmental issues she falls right in line with what I believe and know to be true.
On foreign policy issues she’s a novice. And with the unstable nature of our world, the move towards globalization, a one world monetary system, the increasing attempts by many nations to grant more power to the United Nations, tension between Israel and Palestine and a whole host of other foreign policy challenges I do not think Sarah Palin has the experience to govern as the President of the United States – not yet at least.
And with the almost certainty that we will be involved in a war for probably decades to come – a President that has a firm grasp on international affairs is no longer a luxury – it is mandatory – and the Presidency is no place for on the job training – no matter how fast a learner someone is.
Imagine this:
It’s 2:15 am, 85 days into the Palin Presidency and the phone rings. 3 Russian Subs have been spotted by the Coast Guard 8 miles off the coast of Long Island NY. They do not respond to attempts to reach them by radio contact and they’re headed this way.
Or perhaps…A Muslim bomber just detonated a nitrogen and phosphorus based fertilizer bomb hidden in a rental truck. The blast caused a gaping hole and a fire ball that reached a 100 feet into the air. The bomb was set off on the lowest level of a parking deck killing dozens and trapping hundreds of people at the Riverchase Galleria in Hoover Alabama (My home town)
Is Sarah Palin really the person you want in charge?
Now?
With this crisis unfolding?
Do her views on death panels, immigration, global warming or cap and trade legislation really matter when and not if - a major international catastrophe hits this country
Sarah Plain has many of the exact same experience flaws many of us on the right said should preclude Barack Obama from being President.
How do we justify this position to our liberal countrymen?
Many Palin supporters have sound much like the giddy Obama supporters we said we’re delusional. She is taking on that same rock star persona we warned people on the left to not become drunk on.
As this point we cannot afford to become enraptured with Sarah Palin – the stakes are just too high.
I like Sarah Palin, a lot. I think she has a long, brilliant and possibly history changing political career ahead of her
We cannot afford to put her in office simply because we like her pluck or because she’s sassy.
Not now. The stakes are just too high
Friday, November 20, 2009
And the Green Hysteria crosses the pond
Under the Climate Change Act, Britain is obliged to cut its emissions by 80 per cent on 1990 levels by 2050.
This means annual CO2 emissions per person will have to fall from about 9 tons to only 2 tons. The hysteria over the as yet unproven problem of green house emissions has reached a fevered pitch prompting the head of the Environment Agency in Great Britain - Lord Smith of Finsbury to advise that everyone in that European country should be assigned an annual carbon ration and be penalized if they use too much fuel.
The plan would involve people being issued a unique number which they would use when purchasing products that contribute to their carbon footprint, such as fuel, airline tickets and electricity.
Smith said that individual carbon allowances will be administered like a bank account. A statement would be sent out each month to help people keep track of how much they are using.
If their "carbon account" hits zero, they would have to pay to get more credits.
Of course this alone raises an issue. If the emissions are bad enough that you have to curtail carbon output – why does it no longer matter as long as we pull out or checkbook?
Those who are frugal with their carbon usage will be able to sell their unused credits and make a profit. This is actually a domesticated version of President Obama’s Cap and Trade policy.
Lord Smith will call for the scheme to be part of a "Green New Deal" to be introduced within the next several years.
An Environment Agency spokesman said only those with "extravagant lifestyles" would be affected by the carbon allowances.
He said: "A lot of people who cycle will get money back. It will probably only be bankers and those with extravagant lifestyles who would lose out."
However, some have criticized the move as "Orwellian" and say it will have a detrimental impact on business.
Ruth Lea, an economist from Arbuthnot Banking Group, told the British Daily Mail:
"This is all about control of the individual and you begin to wonder whether this is what the green agenda has always been about. It's Orwellian."
Yes Ms. Lea this is exactly what the green agenda has always been about
This means annual CO2 emissions per person will have to fall from about 9 tons to only 2 tons. The hysteria over the as yet unproven problem of green house emissions has reached a fevered pitch prompting the head of the Environment Agency in Great Britain - Lord Smith of Finsbury to advise that everyone in that European country should be assigned an annual carbon ration and be penalized if they use too much fuel.
The plan would involve people being issued a unique number which they would use when purchasing products that contribute to their carbon footprint, such as fuel, airline tickets and electricity.
Smith said that individual carbon allowances will be administered like a bank account. A statement would be sent out each month to help people keep track of how much they are using.
If their "carbon account" hits zero, they would have to pay to get more credits.
Of course this alone raises an issue. If the emissions are bad enough that you have to curtail carbon output – why does it no longer matter as long as we pull out or checkbook?
Those who are frugal with their carbon usage will be able to sell their unused credits and make a profit. This is actually a domesticated version of President Obama’s Cap and Trade policy.
Lord Smith will call for the scheme to be part of a "Green New Deal" to be introduced within the next several years.
An Environment Agency spokesman said only those with "extravagant lifestyles" would be affected by the carbon allowances.
He said: "A lot of people who cycle will get money back. It will probably only be bankers and those with extravagant lifestyles who would lose out."
However, some have criticized the move as "Orwellian" and say it will have a detrimental impact on business.
Ruth Lea, an economist from Arbuthnot Banking Group, told the British Daily Mail:
"This is all about control of the individual and you begin to wonder whether this is what the green agenda has always been about. It's Orwellian."
Yes Ms. Lea this is exactly what the green agenda has always been about
Saturday, November 14, 2009
Is the President bailing out on the bailout?
After months of pumping billions of dollars into the US economy in an attempt to stem the tide of recession and massive unemployment – currently hovering around 10% but closer to 20% according to some economists.
The White House released a statement this week that it will now shift its focus to reducing the deficits. What a novel idea!
President Obama will announce early next year that he wants to focus extensively on cutting the federal deficit in 2010 – and will downplay or eliminate altogether other domestic spending programs that are not directly tied to job creation.
But it was Obama that spent more money on new programs in nine months than Bill Clinton did in eight years, pushing the annual deficit to $1.4 trillion.
This leaves little room for big spending initiatives, and progressive social programs which we’re of course the bulwark of his campaign promises, many of which now seem in jeopardy.
But despite the appearance of a policy shift from debt creation to deficit reduction, often thought to be more the conservative approach to economics - the shift in strategy seems to indicate the President is concerned about the midterm elections and is trying to help moderate Democrats avoid some tough campaigns and, perhaps more importantly, calm the nerves of independent voters who are voicing concerns with the big spending programs.
The big question for Obama – and the country – is whether the sudden concern about deficits will be more rhetoric than reality.
All presidents promise deficit reduction – and almost always fall short. There is good reason to be skeptical of this White House, too, on its commitment.
The Wall Street Journal reported this past Thursday the White House is considering applying some money from the $700 billion financial bailout to deficit reduction, which ironically is partially responsible for creating the deficit in the first place.
But if Obama’s real political goal is to minimize tough elections, gutting domestic spending bills could mean fewer projects lawmakers can brag about back home. And history shows that that’s often an impossible sale on the Hill.
So Obama will likely find himself squeezed between economic and political pressures for much of the year, and while he attempts to strike a fine line between shoring up our economy and salvaging his first term, the rest of the country watches with startled amazement.
The White House released a statement this week that it will now shift its focus to reducing the deficits. What a novel idea!
President Obama will announce early next year that he wants to focus extensively on cutting the federal deficit in 2010 – and will downplay or eliminate altogether other domestic spending programs that are not directly tied to job creation.
But it was Obama that spent more money on new programs in nine months than Bill Clinton did in eight years, pushing the annual deficit to $1.4 trillion.
This leaves little room for big spending initiatives, and progressive social programs which we’re of course the bulwark of his campaign promises, many of which now seem in jeopardy.
But despite the appearance of a policy shift from debt creation to deficit reduction, often thought to be more the conservative approach to economics - the shift in strategy seems to indicate the President is concerned about the midterm elections and is trying to help moderate Democrats avoid some tough campaigns and, perhaps more importantly, calm the nerves of independent voters who are voicing concerns with the big spending programs.
The big question for Obama – and the country – is whether the sudden concern about deficits will be more rhetoric than reality.
All presidents promise deficit reduction – and almost always fall short. There is good reason to be skeptical of this White House, too, on its commitment.
The Wall Street Journal reported this past Thursday the White House is considering applying some money from the $700 billion financial bailout to deficit reduction, which ironically is partially responsible for creating the deficit in the first place.
But if Obama’s real political goal is to minimize tough elections, gutting domestic spending bills could mean fewer projects lawmakers can brag about back home. And history shows that that’s often an impossible sale on the Hill.
So Obama will likely find himself squeezed between economic and political pressures for much of the year, and while he attempts to strike a fine line between shoring up our economy and salvaging his first term, the rest of the country watches with startled amazement.
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Tea Party Express Speech
On November 9th I spoke at the The Tea Party Express rally in Birmingham AL. There were several hundred in attendance.
Here is the transcript of the speech...
DURING THE PAST 10 MONTHS THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION HAS ATTEMPTED SOMETHNG NO ADMINISTRATION IN RECENT MEMORY HAS HAD THE GAUL TO TRY – TO FUNDAMENTALLY CHANGE THE WAY OUR COUNTRY WAS INTENDED TO FUNCTION, BY CHALLENGING THE LIBERTIES GRANTED TO EACH OF US IN OUR BILL OF RIGHTS.
AND ALTHOUGH THIS ASSAULT FROM THE LEFT SEEMS LIKE A GREAT THREAT TO OUR GOAL OF LIFE, LIBERTY AND PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS –
THIS ADMINISTRATION HAS IN FACT DONE SOMETHING WONDERFUL - SOMETHING FEW OTHER ADMINISTRATIONS HAVE – EVEN IF IT WAS QUITE UNINTENTIONAL
NOT SINCE THE PROTESTS DURING THE VIETNAM WAR – LONG BEFORE MANY OF YOU WE’RE BORN – HAVE SO MANY PATRIOTIC AMERICAN’S UNITED TO FIGHT AGAINST THE MISDIRECTED POLICIES OF A MISGUIDED GOVERNMENT.
BUT UNLIKE IN YEARS PAST WHERE PEOPLE PROTESTED CERTAIN POLICIES OF THE GOVERNMENT SUCH AS WAR OR TAXATION – TODAY WE UNITE FOR A MUCH BROADER CAUSE…
TO DEFEND THE CORE VALUES WE ALL SHARE AND TO PROTECT THIS COUNTRY AGAINST THE TYRANNICAL POLICIES OF A GOVERNMENT THAT HAS LOST TOUCH WITH ITS FOUNDING PRINCIPLES AND IT’S PEOPLE.
BUT DESPITE THE BATTLE THAT LOOMS BEFORE US - I AM MORE EXCITED THEN EVER ABOUT THE FUTURE OF THIS COUNTRY.
AS CITIZENS OF THE UNITED STATES WE HAVE LONG BEEN FREE TO VOICE OUR OPINIONS - BUT, NOT UNTIL NOW HAVE WE HAD SUCH A GREAT OPPORTUNITY TO SHAPE OUR FUTURE.
DURING THE PAST SEVERAL MONTHS WE HAVE HEARD PEOPLE TALK OF STEALING OUR COUNTRY BACK
BUT THE TALK HAS CHANGED FROM STEALING IT BACK - TO STEERING IT FORWARD – FROM ALTERING THE COURSE, TO CHARTING IT.
AND AS WE WITNESSED FIRST HAND IN VIRGINIA AND NEW JERSEY – WE ARE ON THE RIGHT COURSE, WE ARE CHANGING HEARTS AND MINDS…
WE ARE WINNING!
BUT THIS FIGHT TO RECLAIM OUR NATION HAS JUST BEGUN
AND EVERYDAY THE STAKES GET HIGHER AS THE TACTICS OF THOSE THAT ARE TRYING TO FORCE RADICAL CHANGE UPON US GROW MORE DESPERATE AS WE WITNESSED SATURDAY WHEN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES PASSED NANCY PELOSI’S HEALTH CARE BILL UNDER THE CLOAK OF DARKNESS
AND AS THEIR TACTICS GROW MORE DESPERATE, WE MUST INTENSIFY OUT EFFORTS.
BUT BEFORE WE CAN HOPE TO TAKE BACK CONTROL OF THIS NATION WE MUST BETTER UNDERSTAND THE THREAT TO OUR COUNTRY.
AS GOD FEARING CONSERVATIVES - WE ARE PREDISPOSED TO BELIEVE IN SOMETHING HIGHER THAN THE SOVEREIGNTY OF GOVERNMENT. WE LOOK BEYOND GOVERNMENT FOR DIRECTION BECAUSE IN OUR HEARTS WE KNOW THERE IS SOMETHING HIGHER THEN GOVERNMENT THAT BESTOWS OUR RIGHTS UPON US
LIBERALS ON THE OTHER HAND - THROUGH YEARS OF INDOCTRINATION AND THE ADOPTION OF SO MANY DEPENDENCY CREATING SOCIAL POLICIES HAVE BEEN TAUGHT TO BELIEVE THAT GOVERNMENT IS THE GRANTER OF ALL RIGHTS AND LIBERTIES.
TO THEM GOVERNMENT IS LORD AND MASTER. THIS IS THE BASIS OF THEIR BELIEF AND VISION FOR A SECULAR AMERICA
THE LIBERAL DEMOCRATS HAVE BECOME THE PARTY OF…
*SOCIALISM AND ENTITLEMENT
*THE DISMANTLING OF BUSINESS
*THE END OF PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS
*SANCTUARY CITIES THAT PROTECT ILLEGAL ALIENS
*PRO CHOICE
*GAY MARRIAGE RIGHTS
*THE REPLACING OF THE FAMILY OF THE CENTRAL INFLUENCE IN THE LIVES OF OUR CHILDREN.
*THEY ARE THE PARTY OF REMOVING PRAYER FROM OUR SCHOOLS AND THE GUIDING PRINCIPLES OF THE CONSTITUTION FROM OUR LIVES
BUT THE THREAT TO OUR WAY OF THINKING DID NOT ARISE OVERNIGHT AND IT WILL NOT ABATE OVER NIGHT WE CANNOT HOPE TO WIN THE SOULS AND MINDS OF THOSE WE DISAGREE WITH BY RHETORIC ALONE OR BY HOLDING TOWNHALL MEETINGS OR EVEN RALLY'S ALONE.
WE MUST RESOLVE TO TAKE A GENERATIONAL APPROACH. WE MUST COMMIT TO THE STRUGGLE FOR THE LONG TERM. WE MUST RECRUIT INTO OUR RANKS MORE PEOPLE WHO CHERISH LIBERTY AS MUCH AS WE DO. WE MUST ENCOURAGE OUR FAMILIES, FRIENDS AND COLLEAGUES TO JOIN MOVEMENTS SUCH AS THIS ONE, TO BE VOCAL, TO FIGHT FOR THE CONSTITUTION THAT HOLDS THE FOUNDING IDEALS OF THIS LAND
SO WE MUST EDUCATE OUR CHILDREN ABOUT THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS, THEIR NATIONAL HERITAGE, AND THEIR OBLIGATIONS TO PROTECT AND DEFEND BOTH BEFORE THE LIBERAL POLITICIANS SUCCEED IN INDOCTRINATING THEM.
AS CONSERVATIVES WE CAN NEVER HOPE TO ACHIEVE A LASTING RESULT IN THE PRESERVATION OF OUR COUNTRY IF WE ONLY RESPOND TO THE INTERMITTENT BAD POLICIES OF INTERMITTENT BAD GOVERNMENT.
WE MUST UNDERSTAND THAT WHAT FRUSTRATES US THE MOST IS THAT WE CANNOT UNDERSTAND WHY LIBERAL AMERICANS CANNOT SEE WHAT WE FEEL IS SO PAINFULLY OBVIOUS.
THAT THE FAILED POLICIES OF THE PAST ARE NO FOUNDATION UPON WHICH TO BUILD A FUTURE FOR OUR FAMILIES, OUR STATE AND OUR NATION.
UNFORTUNATELY MANY PEOPLE IN THE ENTITLEMENT CLASS HAVE BECOME BLINDED BY THE PROMISE OF UTOPIA.
A PROMISE WHICH HAS BEEN BROKEN TIME AND AGAIN – BUT WHICH THEY STILL CLING TO.
BUT OUR GOAL IS NOT TO PASS JUDGMENT ON THE PHILOSOPHICAL SHORTCOMINGS OF LIBERALS BUT RATHER TO EDUCATE THEM ON THE CONSEQUENCES OF BECOMING DEPENDENT UPON GOVERNMENT FOR THEIR SURVIVAL AND QUALITY OF LIFE.
IN THE WORDS OF ABRAHAM LINCOLN…
”THE STRUGGLE OF TODAY IS NOT ALTOGETHER FOR TODAY BUT FOR VAST FUTURE ALSO"
MAY GOD BLESS YOU AND MAY HE BLESS THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Here is the transcript of the speech...
DURING THE PAST 10 MONTHS THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION HAS ATTEMPTED SOMETHNG NO ADMINISTRATION IN RECENT MEMORY HAS HAD THE GAUL TO TRY – TO FUNDAMENTALLY CHANGE THE WAY OUR COUNTRY WAS INTENDED TO FUNCTION, BY CHALLENGING THE LIBERTIES GRANTED TO EACH OF US IN OUR BILL OF RIGHTS.
AND ALTHOUGH THIS ASSAULT FROM THE LEFT SEEMS LIKE A GREAT THREAT TO OUR GOAL OF LIFE, LIBERTY AND PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS –
THIS ADMINISTRATION HAS IN FACT DONE SOMETHING WONDERFUL - SOMETHING FEW OTHER ADMINISTRATIONS HAVE – EVEN IF IT WAS QUITE UNINTENTIONAL
NOT SINCE THE PROTESTS DURING THE VIETNAM WAR – LONG BEFORE MANY OF YOU WE’RE BORN – HAVE SO MANY PATRIOTIC AMERICAN’S UNITED TO FIGHT AGAINST THE MISDIRECTED POLICIES OF A MISGUIDED GOVERNMENT.
BUT UNLIKE IN YEARS PAST WHERE PEOPLE PROTESTED CERTAIN POLICIES OF THE GOVERNMENT SUCH AS WAR OR TAXATION – TODAY WE UNITE FOR A MUCH BROADER CAUSE…
TO DEFEND THE CORE VALUES WE ALL SHARE AND TO PROTECT THIS COUNTRY AGAINST THE TYRANNICAL POLICIES OF A GOVERNMENT THAT HAS LOST TOUCH WITH ITS FOUNDING PRINCIPLES AND IT’S PEOPLE.
BUT DESPITE THE BATTLE THAT LOOMS BEFORE US - I AM MORE EXCITED THEN EVER ABOUT THE FUTURE OF THIS COUNTRY.
AS CITIZENS OF THE UNITED STATES WE HAVE LONG BEEN FREE TO VOICE OUR OPINIONS - BUT, NOT UNTIL NOW HAVE WE HAD SUCH A GREAT OPPORTUNITY TO SHAPE OUR FUTURE.
DURING THE PAST SEVERAL MONTHS WE HAVE HEARD PEOPLE TALK OF STEALING OUR COUNTRY BACK
BUT THE TALK HAS CHANGED FROM STEALING IT BACK - TO STEERING IT FORWARD – FROM ALTERING THE COURSE, TO CHARTING IT.
AND AS WE WITNESSED FIRST HAND IN VIRGINIA AND NEW JERSEY – WE ARE ON THE RIGHT COURSE, WE ARE CHANGING HEARTS AND MINDS…
WE ARE WINNING!
BUT THIS FIGHT TO RECLAIM OUR NATION HAS JUST BEGUN
AND EVERYDAY THE STAKES GET HIGHER AS THE TACTICS OF THOSE THAT ARE TRYING TO FORCE RADICAL CHANGE UPON US GROW MORE DESPERATE AS WE WITNESSED SATURDAY WHEN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES PASSED NANCY PELOSI’S HEALTH CARE BILL UNDER THE CLOAK OF DARKNESS
AND AS THEIR TACTICS GROW MORE DESPERATE, WE MUST INTENSIFY OUT EFFORTS.
BUT BEFORE WE CAN HOPE TO TAKE BACK CONTROL OF THIS NATION WE MUST BETTER UNDERSTAND THE THREAT TO OUR COUNTRY.
AS GOD FEARING CONSERVATIVES - WE ARE PREDISPOSED TO BELIEVE IN SOMETHING HIGHER THAN THE SOVEREIGNTY OF GOVERNMENT. WE LOOK BEYOND GOVERNMENT FOR DIRECTION BECAUSE IN OUR HEARTS WE KNOW THERE IS SOMETHING HIGHER THEN GOVERNMENT THAT BESTOWS OUR RIGHTS UPON US
LIBERALS ON THE OTHER HAND - THROUGH YEARS OF INDOCTRINATION AND THE ADOPTION OF SO MANY DEPENDENCY CREATING SOCIAL POLICIES HAVE BEEN TAUGHT TO BELIEVE THAT GOVERNMENT IS THE GRANTER OF ALL RIGHTS AND LIBERTIES.
TO THEM GOVERNMENT IS LORD AND MASTER. THIS IS THE BASIS OF THEIR BELIEF AND VISION FOR A SECULAR AMERICA
THE LIBERAL DEMOCRATS HAVE BECOME THE PARTY OF…
*SOCIALISM AND ENTITLEMENT
*THE DISMANTLING OF BUSINESS
*THE END OF PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS
*SANCTUARY CITIES THAT PROTECT ILLEGAL ALIENS
*PRO CHOICE
*GAY MARRIAGE RIGHTS
*THE REPLACING OF THE FAMILY OF THE CENTRAL INFLUENCE IN THE LIVES OF OUR CHILDREN.
*THEY ARE THE PARTY OF REMOVING PRAYER FROM OUR SCHOOLS AND THE GUIDING PRINCIPLES OF THE CONSTITUTION FROM OUR LIVES
BUT THE THREAT TO OUR WAY OF THINKING DID NOT ARISE OVERNIGHT AND IT WILL NOT ABATE OVER NIGHT WE CANNOT HOPE TO WIN THE SOULS AND MINDS OF THOSE WE DISAGREE WITH BY RHETORIC ALONE OR BY HOLDING TOWNHALL MEETINGS OR EVEN RALLY'S ALONE.
WE MUST RESOLVE TO TAKE A GENERATIONAL APPROACH. WE MUST COMMIT TO THE STRUGGLE FOR THE LONG TERM. WE MUST RECRUIT INTO OUR RANKS MORE PEOPLE WHO CHERISH LIBERTY AS MUCH AS WE DO. WE MUST ENCOURAGE OUR FAMILIES, FRIENDS AND COLLEAGUES TO JOIN MOVEMENTS SUCH AS THIS ONE, TO BE VOCAL, TO FIGHT FOR THE CONSTITUTION THAT HOLDS THE FOUNDING IDEALS OF THIS LAND
SO WE MUST EDUCATE OUR CHILDREN ABOUT THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS, THEIR NATIONAL HERITAGE, AND THEIR OBLIGATIONS TO PROTECT AND DEFEND BOTH BEFORE THE LIBERAL POLITICIANS SUCCEED IN INDOCTRINATING THEM.
AS CONSERVATIVES WE CAN NEVER HOPE TO ACHIEVE A LASTING RESULT IN THE PRESERVATION OF OUR COUNTRY IF WE ONLY RESPOND TO THE INTERMITTENT BAD POLICIES OF INTERMITTENT BAD GOVERNMENT.
WE MUST UNDERSTAND THAT WHAT FRUSTRATES US THE MOST IS THAT WE CANNOT UNDERSTAND WHY LIBERAL AMERICANS CANNOT SEE WHAT WE FEEL IS SO PAINFULLY OBVIOUS.
THAT THE FAILED POLICIES OF THE PAST ARE NO FOUNDATION UPON WHICH TO BUILD A FUTURE FOR OUR FAMILIES, OUR STATE AND OUR NATION.
UNFORTUNATELY MANY PEOPLE IN THE ENTITLEMENT CLASS HAVE BECOME BLINDED BY THE PROMISE OF UTOPIA.
A PROMISE WHICH HAS BEEN BROKEN TIME AND AGAIN – BUT WHICH THEY STILL CLING TO.
BUT OUR GOAL IS NOT TO PASS JUDGMENT ON THE PHILOSOPHICAL SHORTCOMINGS OF LIBERALS BUT RATHER TO EDUCATE THEM ON THE CONSEQUENCES OF BECOMING DEPENDENT UPON GOVERNMENT FOR THEIR SURVIVAL AND QUALITY OF LIFE.
IN THE WORDS OF ABRAHAM LINCOLN…
”THE STRUGGLE OF TODAY IS NOT ALTOGETHER FOR TODAY BUT FOR VAST FUTURE ALSO"
MAY GOD BLESS YOU AND MAY HE BLESS THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Saturday, November 7, 2009
Goldwaters Wisdom
Barry Goldwater said…
Those who seek absolute power, even though they seek it to do what they regard as good, are simply demanding the right to enforce their own version of heaven on earth. And let me remind you, they are the very ones who always create the most hellish tyrannies. Absolute power does corrupt, and those who seek it must be suspect and must be opposed.
Those who seek absolute power, even though they seek it to do what they regard as good, are simply demanding the right to enforce their own version of heaven on earth. And let me remind you, they are the very ones who always create the most hellish tyrannies. Absolute power does corrupt, and those who seek it must be suspect and must be opposed.
Monday, November 2, 2009
Obama's Vision of America
In 1966 Columbia University professors Richard Cloward and Frances Piven who wrote an article for “The Nation” magazine that laid out what is now known as the ‘Cloward-Piven Strategy’.
The plan calls for the destruction of capitalism in America by swelling the welfare rolls to the point of collapsing our economy and then implementing socialism by nationalizing many private institutions.
They hoped to accomplish this end by educating the poor of their rights to welfare assistance, encouraging them to apply for benefits and, in effect, overloading an already overburdened bureaucracy."
The pair studied Chicago Community Organizer Saul Alinsky who is considered to be the founder of modern community organizing in America.
An article in the New York Times in 1970 investigated the welfare system and discussed the impact of the Cloward-Piven strategy.
Howard Phillips, chairman of the Conservative Caucus, was quoted in 1982 as saying that the strategy could be effective because "Great Society programs 'had created a vast army of full-time liberal activists whose salaries are paid from the taxes of conservative working people.
Additionally "Robert Chandler observed, "The socialist test case for using society's poor and disadvantaged people as sacrificial “shock troops,” in accordance with the Cloward-Piven strategy, was demonstrated in 1975, when new prospective welfare recipients flooded New York City with payment demands, bankrupting the government.
Other components of the plan include:
Flooding government with impossible demands until it slowly cranks to a stop. Overloading electoral systems with successive tidal waves of new voters, many of them questionable – as evidenced by ACORN
Shaking down banks, politicians in Congress, and pressing the Department of Housing and Urban Development for affirmative-action borrowing, Pulling down the national financial system by demanding exotic, subprime mortgages for low-income Americans with little hope of repaying their loans.
Sound familiar?
It’s a mistake to believe the Cloward Piven Strategy is scheme cooked up by academic Marxists of “New Left” bent dedicated to the destruction of capitalism in the name of some sort of vaguely defined humanitarianism.
In fact, “the destruction of capitalism in America by swelling the welfare rolls to the point of collapsing our economy and then implementing socialism by nationalizing many private institutions” is a meticulous plan on the part of the global elite to consolidate power and as can be confirmed by the history books a very real threat to the future of America
The plan calls for the destruction of capitalism in America by swelling the welfare rolls to the point of collapsing our economy and then implementing socialism by nationalizing many private institutions.
They hoped to accomplish this end by educating the poor of their rights to welfare assistance, encouraging them to apply for benefits and, in effect, overloading an already overburdened bureaucracy."
The pair studied Chicago Community Organizer Saul Alinsky who is considered to be the founder of modern community organizing in America.
An article in the New York Times in 1970 investigated the welfare system and discussed the impact of the Cloward-Piven strategy.
Howard Phillips, chairman of the Conservative Caucus, was quoted in 1982 as saying that the strategy could be effective because "Great Society programs 'had created a vast army of full-time liberal activists whose salaries are paid from the taxes of conservative working people.
Additionally "Robert Chandler observed, "The socialist test case for using society's poor and disadvantaged people as sacrificial “shock troops,” in accordance with the Cloward-Piven strategy, was demonstrated in 1975, when new prospective welfare recipients flooded New York City with payment demands, bankrupting the government.
Other components of the plan include:
Flooding government with impossible demands until it slowly cranks to a stop. Overloading electoral systems with successive tidal waves of new voters, many of them questionable – as evidenced by ACORN
Shaking down banks, politicians in Congress, and pressing the Department of Housing and Urban Development for affirmative-action borrowing, Pulling down the national financial system by demanding exotic, subprime mortgages for low-income Americans with little hope of repaying their loans.
Sound familiar?
It’s a mistake to believe the Cloward Piven Strategy is scheme cooked up by academic Marxists of “New Left” bent dedicated to the destruction of capitalism in the name of some sort of vaguely defined humanitarianism.
In fact, “the destruction of capitalism in America by swelling the welfare rolls to the point of collapsing our economy and then implementing socialism by nationalizing many private institutions” is a meticulous plan on the part of the global elite to consolidate power and as can be confirmed by the history books a very real threat to the future of America
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
