“But, uh, you know, Wen, uh… my presidency depends on your support!” 

Better yet, send me your own captions and I will print them in a future post.  

President Barack Obama meets with Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao during a bilateral at the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen, Denmark, Dec. 18, 2009. 

This official White House photograph is being made available only for publication by news organizations and/or for personal use printing by the subject(s) of the photograph. The photograph may not be manipulated in any way and may not be used in commercial or political materials, advertisements, emails, products, promotions that in any way suggests approval or endorsement of the President, the First Family, or the White House. 

(Official White House disclaimer at Flickr.com)  I am in compliance, I am not suggesting approval or endorsement of the President, the First Family, or the White House.

Share and Save

As seniors we better remember that we have to look out for ourselves because neither politicians nor so-called ‘advocacy groups’ like ASRP will.  They look out for themselves.

We see this with empty suit politicians selling their vote for the personal benefit of re-election money in the health care debate.

We see this with groups like AARP which supports the health care bill despite the fact that it will destroy Medicare by removing $500 billion from the program over 10 years, and will make Medicare payments to physicians even lower than now so even fewer of them will accept Medicare patients.

AARP is all about using their list of members to sell various kinds of insurance and other services keeping the machinery running, providing fat salaries and job security.  And they are using seniors to do it. 

They have not lobbied on behalf of seniors at all during the health care debate.  For AARP, seniors are only a group to exploit for money. 

My suggestion – get out of AARP as soon as you can. 

At 55 when they sent me the invitation to join for free, I bit.  Then the second issue of their magazine I received focused on homosexual seniors.  I called them, ended my membership, and told them to remove my name from their computers.

Share and Save

The pattern

The pattern for Hitler as well as the Soviet dictators was to reach out and grab territory that didn’t belong to them.  Then when the world complained, jumped up and down and said this can’t stand; the dictators would say, “We have interests here,” or “We were invited in.”  Under more pressure, they would say, “Let’s negotiate!”  Unfortunately, the liberals and pacifists in the U.S., Britain, and France said “Yes, negotiation is the way to go,” and began to negotiate.  The dictators would give half of the country back, and the green weenie liberals in the west would declare it a victory.  This is how National Socialism expanded under Hitler, and how the Soviet Union expanded throughout the world.

Hitler and the National Socialists 

Hitler took over Austria March 17, 1938 and the west did nothing; the Sudetenland part of Czechoslovakia without firing a shot September 29, 1938 and the west complained.  Then he violated the peace agreement he made with Poland by invading in the fall of 1939 and the west complained even more.  In 1940 he invaded France and finally the west had to get involved; he later invaded Russia. 

The Communist Dictators Lenin, Stalin, Khrushchev, Brezhnev, Andropov, Chernenko, and Gorbachev 

The Communists of the Soviet Union were allies with Britain and the U.S. during the later part of WW2.  Following the end of the war, Stalin agreed that all the nations his army occupied at the end of the war would be able to have free elections. 

That didn’t happen, of course; the ‘iron curtain’ descended around East Germany, Czechoslovakia, Poland, Hungary, Romania, Yugoslavia, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Bulgaria and Albania – all of which Stalin had agreed would have free elections.  Besides this, the communists occupied Ukraine, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, Georgia, Tajikistan, Armenia, and Moldavia among a few others. 

Then they began to covertly take over Cuba, Nicaragua, Paraguay, and other western hemisphere countries, along with the attempt to gain access to a year-round warm water port by invading Afghanistan and then going through Pakistan.  

The Obama Democrats

Now, neither the Nazis nor the Soviets are engaging in the same activity, but it worked so well for them that the policy is being followed by the Obama administration and the Democrat Party rewrite the U.S. Constitution without citizen participation; and to carry out a domestic peaceful coup of the United States.

The pattern in health care is to try to take it over 100% in two weeks.  When that didn’t happen, try to do it in the next month or so.  When that doesn’t happen, go home, hold town hall meetings and try to muscle people into giving up.  When that doesn’t work, give away the ‘public option;’ when that fails give away the community ‘non-profit cooperatives;’ when that fails, give away the government controlled private health care company; and when that doesn’t work spend the people’s money to purchase votes; and when that doesn’t work, say you will pass anything in order to declare it a victory.  And it will be a victory because all the boards, commissions, taxes, and control will still be there.

These anti-democrats do not want your input; they plan to dictate everything.  They reach out and steal what belongs to the people, and when we demand they give it back, they want to negotiate.

We have dictators in the Congress and White House; the way to deal with them is by power not negotiation.  Their thirst for power over every aspect of your life is insatiable, you cannot negotiate with dictators.  (I’m wondering if anyone can think of a better name for these people other than ‘dictators.’)  The power of the people must be used in next year’s elections, and the presidential campaign of 2013.  Follow the Nancy Reagan dictum: Just say no.

Share and Save

This from the National Weather Service on the huge storm dumping more than a foot of rain causing flooding in Florida.  

We cannot predict what the weather will be like for the next 72 hours, but Obama and Al Gore think they know what it’s going to be like 50 years from now.

Share and Save

‘They say to the seers,
       “See no more visions!”
       and to the prophets,
       “Give us no more visions of what is right!
       Tell us pleasant things,
       prophesy illusions.”‘

Israel feared the Assyrians, but the leaders thought the people would rather hear falsehoods - lies about how things were going, so they demanded that the prophets tell the people lies – pleasant things, illusions; and Isaiah was exposing those leaders for their deception and destructive leadership.   ‘Quit looking for information from God – we don’t need any information; the science is settled; we have decided what the people want.  If you’re going to prophecy quit telling us the truth; instead tell us that God is urging you to say pleasant things.’  Today we have many examples of this kind of evil leadership; here – in the spirit of Isaiah - I expose two of them.

Tom Freidman

Tom Freidman, columnist for the New York Times, suggests that we should support ending carbon based industry and energy even if there’s a 1% chance that they may cause global warming; that ending America’ s economic dominance in the world is worth it.  I wonder if Mr. Freidman would consider the same element of risk or reward for his 401-K investments. 

If there was a 99% chance he would make money on an investment, would he make that investment?  If the other side was true – a 1% chance of actually losing money – would he go ahead and invest?  I guess not.

Would Mr. Freidman have married his wife if there was only a 1% chance that the marriage would have worked out?  What about his two daughters?  Would he and his wife have gotten pregnant if there was a 1% chance of the girls being born with problems of some kind?  What if there was a 99% chance everything would go well with the pregnancies and births?  Would he refuse to take that risk?  If so, he wouldn’t have any children.

Would Mr. Freidman drive to work at the New York Times if he thought there was a 1% chance he would die in an accident on the way?  Of course he would; if not he wouldn’t have a job.  But according to his logic on global warming, he would refuse to drive to go to work at all – the risk is just too great.  Ending up in poverty would be better than taking the 1% risk.  Can’t be too careful, you know.

Barack Obama

What would Barack do?  What if it was revealed that those who were working the health care numbers for him had actually fudged the numbers and lied to him; that they had deleted their original work that supported what the president was now publicly proposing making him look like a fool; that they had conspired to hide information from him that would have helped him make a well-informed decision instead of an embarrassment; that they had worked to prevent other people with information from getting that information to him so he could make good decisions before going public?  Would he still support it?  Apparently so.

What if he was checking up on Michelle when he first saw her, and they began talking, telling him about herself, her family, and what she wanted in life?  What if they were discussing children, politics, friendships, what they liked and didn’t like and it turned out that Michelle had been lying?  What if she was creating a fictional character in Barack’s mind – that the real Michelle was much different than they one she was presenting? 

What if she told him she was liberal in her politics, and was a big fan of Dr. King; that she wanted to make a positive difference in the world?  What if she said she was going to law school so she could stand up for the downtrodden and disenfranchised; but it all turned out to be a lie?  What if she was actually very conservative in her politics, that she hated the Democrat party for their 160 year support of slavery, Jim Crow, poll taxes and lynching of blacks; for their poor support for the Civil Rights Act of 1964; and for destroying initiative among the black population by addicting them to welfare programs?  What if she actually was motivated by making money instead of working to help the poor?  What if she actually was already married? 

Would Barack feel deceived, or would he go ahead with the marriage because he preferred to believe that she really was a liberal, compassionate Democrat?  Would he go ahead with the marriage because he thought those who told him these things about her were Michelle deniers, and that he had already made up his mind about who is the ‘real’ Michelle; that the issue was settled?

Well, I guess we know the answers to these questions.

Share and Save

We show up at rallies only to be called an unwashed mob, Nazis, obstructionists; we show up at town hall meetings with our elected representatives and are pushed out of the meeting by union thugs, delayed until the room is filled with supporters only, ignored, denounced, degraded, treated like junk.  We are considered evil by the mainstream media outlets even as they are going broke for loss of audience share.  Without doubt we terrify the assorted communists, fascists, socialists, pinkos, bureaucratic totalitarians, and new age relativists in power now; we would ruin their (almost completed) takeover of American cultural, economic, political, and religious life.  We point our that their vaunted new clothes are only imaginary, and their naked hatred of the human condition is unsightly.

We are aghast at why they insist on instituting programs that stifle the human spirit; why they think the imposition of their utopian ideas is a better approach than the principle of liberty.  We are baffled by their naïve, child-like approach to evil wherever it exists in the republic itself or the world at large. 

For 23 years I did talk radio in Portland, Oregon, and one of my most memorable interviews was with British philosopher Dr. Roger Scruton regarding his book The West and the Rest, ISI Books 2001.  Recently Dr. Scruton wrote a brief essay titled “Totalitarian Sentimentality” you can (and should) read the essay here.   Purchase the book at a discount here.

“Conservatives recognize that social order is hard to achieve and easy to destroy, that it is held in place by discipline and sacrifice, and that the indulgence of criminality and vice is not an act of kindness but an injustice for which all of us will pay.  Conservatives therefore maintain severe and – to many people – unattractive attitudes.  They favor retributive punishment in the criminal law; they uphold traditional marriage and the sacrifices that it requires; they believe in discipline in schools and the value of hard work and military service.  They see welfare provisions as necessary, but also as a potential threat to genuine charity, and a way both of rewarding antisocial conduct and creating a culture of dependency.” 

“Liberals are of course very different.  They see criminals as victims of social hierarchy and unequal power, people who should be cured by kindness and not threatened with punishment.  They wish all privileges to be shared by everyone, the privileges of marriage included.  And if marriage can be reformed so as to remove the cost of it, so much the better.  Welfare provisions are not rewards to those who receive them, but costs to those who give – something that we owe to those less fortunate than ourselves.”

For liberals, “Far preferable to the hard life in which disciplined teaching, costly charity, and responsible attachment are the ruling principles is the life of sentimental display, in which others are encouraged to admire you for virtues you do not possess.  This life of phony compassion is a life of transferred costs.  Liberals who wax lyrical on the sufferings of the poor do not, on the whole, give their time and money to helping those less fortunate than themselves.  On the contrary, they campaign for the state to assume the burden.  The inevitable result of their sentimental approach to suffering is the expansion of the state and the increase of its power both to tax us and to control our lives.”

 Read this essay; read the book – you’ll love them both.

Share and Save

Increased Costs 

1. Mr. Obama has decided to reward his home state by making Illinois the home of the biggest nest of terrorists this side of Tora Bora.  Yes, the Obama has decided to bring the world’s worst terrorists to America.  

A few years ago when the state was flush with money, they built a new state prison for $145 million.  Then they ran into recession problems and didn’t have enough money to actually house prisoners – they are currently using about 10% of the prison’s capacity.  Obama has agreed to purchase the prison from the state of Illinois. 

Attorney General Eric Holder promises that they will pay to “harden” the prison making it, “the most secure prison in America.”  Yeah, Gitmo is already Geneva Convention, and Red Cross approved; already hardened,  It is the most secure prison in the world – we spent tens of $millions making it that way.  No matter; the Obama plans to let it grow weeds while he spends more of your money hardening yet another prison right in the heart of America.  

Today, Illinois officials and U.S. Senators were crowing about creating $1billion worth of jobs for Illinois residents, and they surely need that!  They didn’t say much about duplicating what we already have in Gitmo.  Heck, let’s create some more jobs! 

Legal Problems 

1. Once these terrorists (and alleged terrorists) set foot on U.S. soil they get all the same rights you have.  (You should be encouraged that you will be doing your part by footing the bill for $millions in legal fees provided at no cost for these animals.) 

A failure to convict any of these guys would require that they be released into the U.S. population.  Sure hope they stay in Illinois. 

2. The 2005 Real ID Act bars aliens who have been members of terror organizations, or who have had training in terror camps from entering the U.S.  Oh well, Mr. Holder will find a way around that.  But that could set a precedent permitting more known terrorists into the U.S. couldn’t it?

3. The Obama administration already proposed the idea of releasing Gitmo guys into the U.S. population, and of course we couldn’t expect them to get by without knowledge of the language or any income so they would have to be given welfare benefits.  How’s that hope and change working out for you?  President Bush wanted to attack the enemy while they are on foreign soil to prevent them from coming to the U.S. Barack Obama trumpets the announcement that he wants to BRING the terrorists into the U.S. and roll the dice on whether or not they can be convected of criminal activity!  Whole lot of change; not much hope.

4. Some U.S. judges will be sympathetic to detainees who have been held for years, and will be inclined to dismiss the charges on the basis that the prisoner’s (now) Constitutional right to a speedy trial has been denied, and set him free.

Increased Danger 

1. Most of the lawyers elbowing each other to try to defend these terrorists are ACLU radicals who use our legal system to ruin the country.  (If you think I’m making it up, read about the founder Roger Baldwin.) 

The ‘Blind Sheikh’ Omar Abdul Rahman was convicted of facilitating the 1993 World Trade Canter bombing and is serving time in a federal penitentiary.  His defense lawyer Lynne Stewart is also serving time in the federal pen. (The ACLU represented her, but lost in federal court.)  

She was convicted of passing messages from Rahman to his terrorist organization in Egypt – while he was in federal prison.  She had unrestricted access to him as his lawyer. 

Every one of the 200-odd detainees brought into the heart of our country will have numerous lawyers – each of whom will have unlimited access to their clients providing ample opportunity for more facilitation of terror in the U.S. 

2. Obama and Holder say the federal system needs more beds anyway, and the prison in Illinois has 1600 of them.  They are planning to house dangerous U.S. criminals in the same prison with some of the best terror recruiters in the world.  What could go wrong? 

Recruitment of disaffected, hardened, angry criminals will undoubtedly occur.  Remember that communication between Jeremiah Denton, John McCain, and other prisoners occurred in Vietnam despite them being isolated from each other for years.  Expect more domestic terror as a consequence of Obama’s stupid decision. 

3. Recently Richard Reid, the “shoe bomber” terrorist who tried to blow up an airliner full of civilians by igniting explosives in his shoe was moved.  Yes, he is serving time in a federal penitentiary after conviction, but he and his lawyer said Mr. Reid’s First Amendment rights were being violated because he couldn’t have communal prayer with other Muslim inmates.  Do you think a federal judge would deny Gitmo detainees the same?  Me either.  Think of this as a growth opportunity.

4. Each of these terrorists (and alleged terrorists) Obama insists on bringing into our home will have access to Muslim spiritual leaders for counsel.  Do you really think a federal judge will deny freedom of religion in a federal prison to a Muslim?  Yeah, right. 

This will also provide opportunity to facilitate communication between terror inmates since the spiritual leader will have access to more than one inmate.  It will also give them the opportunity to carry messages into and out of the prison for the terrorists. 

Cases dismissed 

Without doubt many of the terrorists from Gitmo will be turned loose into the U.S. population.  This is true because they can’t be convicted in a civilian court.  They will not be given the right to face their accusers because the accusers are CIA undercover agents, or other undercover law enforcement personnel.  In addition, none of these terrorists were given their Miranda warnings, and the U.S. government will refuse to testify if it means that sources or methods will be compromised. 

Conclusion

Obama says these problems can be handled by conducting certain prosecution witnesses interrogation in camera.  How stupid!  Would you expect secrecy when you have radical lawyers sitting in the room to defend their clients?

If you can’t provide prosecution witnesses because they fear for their life; and you can’t reveal how the prosecution got the information; and if you can’t prove that the defendant was warned about his (now) Constitutional right to not testify against himself; and if you can’t show how some of the information was generated because of enhanced interrogation, how can a jury find for the prosecution?  Many of these guys will not be convicted.

There will be some of the detainees who will never even have charges brought against them because the evidence that they were engaged in terrorist activities is insufficient to prove in a civilian trial.  They will be released into the U.S. population because that is what the court will require. 

Granting radical lawyers access to some of the world’s worst criminals; putting these terrorists in the company of deadly, angry criminals permitting conversion; and permitting the terrorists to ‘pray’ together because a denial of it would violate their (now) Constitution right is a recipe for disaster.  You will see terror recruitment and terrorists activities increase in the U.S.  During the election next year you will have the chance to respond to the political party who thinks we are better off with terrorists IN the U.S. instead of somewhere else.

Share and Save

Well.  The Democrats have spent enough of your tax dollars to purchase 60 votes to bring the Senate health care bill to the floor for debate.  Odds are it will cost hundreds more $millions to pass it.  Too bad the president is busy lecturing Afghanistan on corruption to deal with it here.

We know that the health care bill isn’t about improving health care; lowering the cost of health care, or improving delivery of health care.  We know this, because the legislation does none of these.  

It’s not about improving health care 

The best health care system in the world is about to be junked.  Soon it will be run like Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and Amtrak. 

Bubba says the one who pays the fiddler calls the tune.  That means neither you nor your doctor will be deciding anything  about your health care.  Bureaucrats will be telling doctors what they can and can’t do.  Standard of care indeed; a much lower standard of care.  Spread the misery.  

Government employees making your health decisions: think incompetent, obnoxious, factotums with power – the Transportation Security Administration Agents at the airport looking out for your “air safety”.  Think IRS agents helping to insure you are doing your part to preserve liberty.  Soon all doctors and hospitals as extensions of the government will be delivering the same friendly, high-quality service for your breast and prostate exams.   

Yeah, you can keep your doctor.  If he’s still practicing medicine in the asylum. 

It’s not about lowering the cost of health care 

The argument is that we are spending too much on health care because those with health insurance have to pay for the cost of those who don’t have the insurance just go to the emergency room.  So the Democrat Party’s answer to this problem is to require those who have insurance pay for the health insurance of those who would otherwise just go to the emergency room.  For liberals the problem IS the solution!  Neat. 

In order to accomplish this brilliant maneuver they want to create more than 100 new boards, and give government employees access to all your medical information.  (We know how careful government employees are with your private information: remember Dan the Plumber, remember the Pentagon Papers, remember CIA leaks on the front page of the New York Times?)  Give bureaucrats not doctor’s decision-making power over who gets which procedures, and spend another $2 trillion over the next ten years.  What could go wrong? 

It’s not about covering everyone with health insurance 

Mr. Obama says he can cut $425 billion in waste and fraud in Medicare over the next 10 years.  Hooah!  Let’s do that now.  That would save us $42.5 billion a year. Then let’s add the $54 billion a year we can save through tort reform limiting junk medical malpractice awards making the total available now to $96,500 billion.  A year. 

Simple math; divide $96,500 million a year by the highest possible estimate of people in the U.S. without health insurance – 35,000,000 – and you get $2,757 per person.  This amounts to $11,028 to pay for health insurance for a family of 4 covering every individual in the United States said to be without health insurance.  How much will this cost in addition to what we already pay?  Zip.  Why not do it this way?  Because the Democrat health care plans are not about lowering the cost of health care.  They would rather spend a couple $trillion for other reasons.  It’s all about control. 

Government-provided health care – the loss of freedom

Rationing will happen because the government will budget a specific amount for health care services; and then in order to approximate the budget they will deny, delay, and dilute medical services based on their budget, not yours. 

We have already seen how a government panel will use the new Democrat health care legislation – if passed and signed by the President – as a means to denying access to health care; they recommended delaying access to mammograms for more than a decade, then using the diagnostic tool only half as frequently as in the past. 

Screening for breast cancer is a preventative measure; denying and delaying it INSURES more cases of breast cancer.  Denial or delay of treatment is bad enough, but taking steps to guarantee more women get cancer is just too much.  But there’s a reason for it.

More cases of breast cancer and more deaths, means that by killing off more people the Democrats will save hundreds of $millions on health care now; and hundreds of $billions later by not having to provide Medicare and Social Security for so many people.  A twofer money saving tactic.  This is how liberals do cost-cutting. 

Rationing of health care in the U.S. will become an issue of bureaucratic fiat rather than personal economic decision-making. 

The Democrat plan removes choice.   You cannot choose what you want so it fits your own situation; and you do not have the choice to purchase only what you can afford.  Nor can you choose to use any procedure available to treat your diagnosis.  

Possible consequences 

Since the government will be in control of what is covered, they may choose not to pay for the birth of Down Syndrome babies.  It’s their choice, not yours. 

Physicians and hospitals will have no choice but to comply with what the bureaucrats want because the government writes the checks.  Doctors apparently will keep the choice to go into another profession.  The doctors who would stay in such an enterprise for a long term will probably come only from the same bottom 20% of the graduating class as public schoolteachers.  Probably produce the same result as well. 

Delay PSA tests, deny physical examinations, deny coverage for certain prescriptions that are too expensive, control which citizens get fined or jailed for non-compliance, raise the amount of the fines, raise the taxes on ‘Cadillac’ health plans, lower the amount that constitutes a ‘Cadillac’ plan and so on.  God, please let the fools who think someone else is going to pay for this survive long enough to lament the day of their folly. 

The Second Amendment will be controlled by the health care apparatchiks at the National Institutes of Health, because guns can cause damage to people, and therefore is a health issue.

What you eat will also come under the control of bureaucrats, and these decisions will be made politically.  Just wait until the international agri-business corporations get to work on various Representatives and Senators to set out what constitutes a good diet.  They will be in the position of forbidding certain products for sale; and placing taxes on stuff they don’t like.  Got to look out for your health, you know. 

They already do as much as the law allows – tobacco taxes fund all kinds of things the government wants to do.  They don’t want people to quit smoking; they just want to use the industry as a money generating machine to fund what the Democrats want to impose.  Got to keep the money coming in.  Next it will be soft drinks, whole milk, ice cream, coffee.  See part two of this series to look at the kinds of taxes the government already imposes on your freedom. 

The kind of car or truck you drive will become a health care issue.  How fast you can drive, and where.  Air quality will be a health care issue meaning that the backyard barbecue will alternatively be taxed, or forbidden altogether. 

You can expect that government inspectors will be arranging to come into your home to insure safety.  If they’re going to pay for it, they have the right to control it.  They will be checking your stairs for safety, how hot the water heater is, the deck, cleaning chemicals – all of it.  Think of it as your personal visit by an OSHEA bureaucrat.  This has already begun in England; expect it here when the Democrats get the control over your life they have been seeking since FDR. 

The government will control your fireplace, and your dryer exhaust, how warm or cool you can keep your home, how large it can be, and how it is insulated – all health issues you understand. 

So what how much you weigh, and how much of the health care budget you consume will all be controlled by the federal government.  Goodbye state and local government. 

What will it really cost (besides $trillions)? 

Consider: when the federal government was able to predict the cost of anything?  They can’t tell in advance how much it will cost to purchase a toilet seat, a hammer, a jet, a boat – nothing.  When they have undertaken to set the expected cost of any piece of legislation, they have been universally wrong – always.   

Guess – did they estimate the cost too high, or too low?  Silly question.  It depends on what they are predicting.  If it’s bad news, the estimates are low, if it’s good news, the estimates are always too high. “Unemployment (may rise to 8% from 6% without our Stimulus plan.”  Actually it rose from 6% to 10.2% so far with the Stimulus plan.  Do you actually think they would lie?  A crucial question is: why would any single person in the U.S. believe government estimates about how much health care will cost. 

Lyndon Johnson began the War on Poverty trying to convince us he could end the problem.  Today in means tested poverty programs including Social Security and Medicare amount to $17,939 per person below the poverty level.  This would be $64,756 for a family of four to eliminate poverty.  The aggregate money spent on poverty programs since the 1960’s is $15.9 trillion; and we still have the poor with us.  Do you believe the government’s estimates of the cost of health care? 

It will cost more; it will do less; it will take control of almost every aspect of your individual life.  Why would you permit them to do this to you?

Share and Save

John Marshall the 4^thChief Justice of the Supreme Court wrote in 1819 in McCulloch v. Maryland that “The power to tax involves the power to destroy.”  Since the apparatchiks who work for and run the federal government levy and collect taxes they need to operate the projects and pursue the ends that make them happy, it follows that the people who are taxed have their happiness destroyed.  Our right to pursue “life, liberty, and happiness” is cancelled so the happiness of the ruling class can be pursued.  (I have posted about our pampered and overpaid bureaucrats here.  Since the power to tax can destroy, the government uses it specifically to destroy things.  I mention smoking, alcohol consumption and other “sin taxes;” gas taxes to force people into public transportation, energy taxes to force us to quit consuming energy, (remember Mr. Obama’s announced intention to make your energy costs “skyrocket”), ”government option health care” for us, but not for them.  They’re happy; we’re not. 

So, for all our posturing about the principles of freedom and personal happiness we once held, the thick, heavy layers of taxation and bureaucracy of the federal government are actually much more suffocating than the political milieu our forbearers experienced under monarchies in England the Europe.  In fact, our taxes are higher, the regulations are heavier and more numerous, and government knowledge of our private affairs much more extensive than under any monarch, tyrant, of dictator in history.  Our allegiance to our founding principles is, at this point in history, no more than an empty symbol of what used to be.  The thin gruel of liberty permitted us by today’s ruling class in America is intended only to keep us from awakening and throwing off our present oppression to regain the liberty we created at the beginning. 

This is the second installment of my series on Nationalizing Health Care: The Path to Total Control.  This time, I deal with the question of whether or not it is wise to spend any tax revenue to expand government control of the nation’s economy given the history of taxation in the country.  You will be astounded at what has happened to us as a result of committed leftists promising utopia. 

I show here that giving the government access to large amounts of money only feeds the beast enabling it to demand even more.  The federal government is an insatiable money eating machine; it consumes an infinite amount of our money, makes its employees fat with salary, benefits, and early retirement with unsustainable incomes; and expels some stunted, malodorous waste product demanding that the people who pay for their excesses eat it.

The taxes we pay

FYI, here are federal government taxes now being collected (not including state, regional, county, or city taxes). 

Cigarette tax, large cigar tax, small cigar tax, pipe tobacco tax, chewing tobacco tax, snuff tax, cigarette papers less than 6.5 inches long tax, cigarette papers more than 6.5 inches long tax, cigarette tubes less than 6.5 inches long tax, cigarette tubes more than 6.5 inches long tax, pistol tax, rifle tax, ammunition tax, liquor tax, gas tax, diesel tax, inland waterway fuel tax, non-commercial aviation fuel tax, wagering tax, bow and arrow taxes, fishing rod tax, other fishing equipment tax, outboard motor tax, non-long distance telephone tax (designed to pay for the Spanish –American War ended in 1889.  The war cost $6 million, the phone tax has raised hundreds of $millions over the decades.), insurance policies issued by foreign companies tax, personal income tax, corporate income tax, capital gains tax, Social security tax, Medicare tax, self-employment tax, gas guzzler tax, truck tax, semi-trailer tax, trailer tax, millionaire tax, ship passenger tax, coal tax, natural gas tax, chemical tax, floor stocks tax on ozone-depleting chemicals, transportation taxes, airport travel security tax, wireless communication tax (check your wireless phone bill), air transportation tax, beer tax, wine tax, naturally sparkling wine tax, artificially sparkling wine tax, hard cider tax; and then there are import duties that you pay in the price of certain goods imported from certain countries, and all manner of fees that are not considered taxes – licenses to drill for oil, and the like. 

The progressives needed two things to impose their hegemony over the American people: money, and power.  The former creates the latter.

The 16th Amendment and the decline of America

The 16^th amendment, passed in 1913, changed the U.S. Constitution permitting the federal government to levy taxes on individual incomes.  We need to understand what has happened as a result.  This move gave them the money; they would soon gain the power. 

The federal deficit is the difference between what the government receives in revenue and what it spends in a single year.  As the annual deficits pile up, they accumulate and are known as the federal debt.  Understanding the difference is critical. 

For 59 of the first 124 years of the Republic, the federal government spent only what it received in taxes, it borrowed money to cover emergencies, then paid the money back.  During that time we had many challenges, and were able to deal with them all.  We expanded into the west developing many new states and territories, and we fought 7 wars, some of them lasting for years, and sometimes more than one war at a time.  No legal income taxes. 

During the next 94 years – 1913 to the present, only 24 years were on-budget years.  The progressives have been spending us into oblivion ever since. 

Taxes as a percent of our national wealth

In 1902, before corporate or personal income taxes were levied, the entire federal budget amounted to 1.3% of the nation’s entire output (GDP).  This meant that most of the money was privately reinvested making the nation a formidable economic giant.  For the last 30 years, the government has spent an average of 18.5% of GDP.  This represents an 1,800% increase in the amount of the nation’s wealth the government extracts from the citizens and spends depriving us of the freedom to spend that wealth on what we think is appropriate, and slowing economic growth and job creation. 

Federal spending is overtaking our entire economy.  By 2050, Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid alone will consume 100% of all federal revenue if things continue as they are. 

In 1913 when personal income taxes began, only 1% of the American population paid any tax at all.  After deducting interest expenses, and all business expenses and losses, and after a $20,000 exemption, the tax rate was 1% of income from $20,000 to $50,000.  From $50,000 to $75,000 the rate was 2%.  At $500,000 and up, the rate was 6%.  But this wasn’t enough for the progressives; they wanted more. 

By 1916, the lowest rate was doubled to 2%, and the top rate was 15%.  In three years, they doubled the tax rates, now 5% of the population paid income taxes. 

By 1936 the lowest rate was 4% (a 400% increase in the rate from when the tax began) the top rate was 79% and federal spending had risen from 1.3% of GDP to 6.8%.  These increases in government economic hegemony are breathtaking; but it wasn’t enough for the progressives. 

“Spreading the wealth around”

“Redistribution of wealth” has always been a central part of the progressive program.  If we don’t insure that people have a family wage or sufficient income, they will steal and plunder.  Besides, some people have too much anyway.  Progressives think it’s better for all if the government takes what they have earned and give it to people who didn’t earn it.  They refer to this theft as “fairness.”  The idea that people steal because their heart is corrupt isn’t part of their reality; it can only be because they are hungry, or someone else has too much.  In this way, envy is rewarded.

You need to now that this “redistribution of wealth,” concept is more formally stated; “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.”  This is a direct quote from Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels in their book, “The Communist Manifesto.” Mr. Obama announced his intention to fulfill this plank of the Manifesto when he said he thought it was a good thing to spread the wealth around.  Perhaps we have a red president.  

The $trillions the federal government has taken from us in income taxes that were forbidden for the first 124 years of our nation is not enough for them.  The progressives have to borrow even more to carry out their vision of the good. 

Increasing the debt

The Second Liberty Bond Act of 1917 established a statutory limit on federal debt, and Congress has had to raise it many times over the years because theywant to impose their vision, but don’t want to admit how much it costs.  The current legal limit the federal government can borrow is $12.1 trillion.  Presently we are approaching the $12.1 limit, and if they don’t increase it, the government (gasp) would have to live with the actual revenue coming in. 

Without question, they will have to raise the debt limit over and over again in the coming months and years.  During George Bush’s last year in ofice – 2008 – the accumulated federal debt (not the deficit) was equal to 70.2% of GDP – $9,986 billion.  In the first year of the Obama administration it has risen to 91% of GDP, and by 2011, by Mr. Obama’s own calculations the country will have more debt – $15,674 billion – than GDP during that same year.  During October 2009 alone, the federal debt rose by $176.36 billion; that is, they spent $176 billion more than the revenues that were received in one month.  Do not try this at home! 

Tapping into everyone’s private affairs in order to confiscate money from your personal income has given them more than they could ever spend.  But they managed to squander it anyway.  But they have squandered another $12 trillion in addition, and are promising $14 trillion more in borrowed money over the next 10 years raising the debt to $25 trillion by 2019.  But wait, there’s more!  Taxing us into poverty, and borrowing unimaginable sums of money aren’t enough for these people.

Raising new taxes and raising old ones

The progressive mental defect so confuses the mind that when they get all of the above, it still isn’t enough.  So as I write they are planning new ways to tax the citizens to impose their utopia – VAT tax, financial transaction tax, income tax surcharges, taxes on your health care plan, taxes on medical devices  – pacemakers, artificial joints, needles for diabetics, catheters, feminine napkins, toothbrushes, and God only know what else. 

Presently because of 17.5% unemployment government revenues are down 34%  in October over the same month last year.  This is the largest single monthly decline in monthly revenue since 1932 in the depth of the Great Depression. 

Unfunded mandates

Beyond all the taxing; beyond all the borrowing, the progressives running our government require that state governments and private businesses carry out their agenda through “unfunded mandates.”  This amounts to an “off-budget” item that moves toward the progressive wet dream of cradle to grave welfare provided by laundering the nation’s wealth through government, and cetting into bed with business.  Business have already found that when you get into bed with the government, you wake up with social diseases.  Nevertheless, this particular leftist approach to governance is mor in keeping with facism than communism.  So we see progressives have been sucking at both teats.

Unfunded mandates are largely unconstitutional requirements for states and businesses to pay for some of the dreams that progressives have for all of us: how much you have to pay an employee, how many hours a day he can work, how many day he has to have off in a given year, how many days off for childbirth and family time, which companies must provide health insurance, Medicaid a mandate on state governments, and so on. 

The beauty of unfunded mandates for deceptive progressives is that this $1.2 trillion annual expense for their utopian programs is part of somebody else’s budget!  This is what is driving states into bankruptcy, and business to charge more for their products and services. 

What to expect if we don’t change directions

The situation they have created is so idiotic, that by 2080, three programs – Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid – alone will consume 25% of GDP.  If taxes remain the same as a percent of GDP, and benefits remain the same for these programs, by 2052, these three programs will consume 100% of all federal revenues.   The consequence is that all federal spending for federal employees, all White House Executive expenses, all Congressional salaries and overhead, all federal court and federal prison expenses, all Defense Department expenses, all federal retiree benefits – everything.  Of course things will not stay the same, they will either change who receives Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, or they will raise taxes and borrow more money.  In any event this burden will be politically distasteful, and will make the U.S. a very large third-world country economically.  Thank your nearby Democrat. 

How do the appratchicks respond?

So what do these people do in circumstances like this?  They write a 2,000 page bill outlining how they want to take over medical services in the U.S. and spend $trillions more! They want to include more millions of people in government health care because the vision is that they are helpless and must be looked after.  They will pay for it by delaying of medical services, denial of medical services, and dilution by limiting what they will pay for and withholding treatments for the elderly.  Besides this, they will raise $trillions in new taxes to pay for the scheme.  Utopianism is truly a mental disease.

The next phase of their paternalistic nonsense has already been passed in the House; Mr. Obama lobbied long and hard for it.  Democrat Senate Majority leader Harry Reid is pushing to pass a similar bill in the Senate immediately because the president wants this done before the end of the year.  

This stupidity has to be stopped.  Here, I have dealt with the economic reasons it must be stopped cold.  In the next, I will tell why the legislation as now constituted will give the government total control over your life. 

What you need to do

The House has already passed this legislation, so call your two Senators and tell them to oppose the proposed health care proposals as now constituted and support things that will help solve the problem.  Permit real competition by letting insurance companies sell policies across state lines; forbid junk lawsuits against doctors and hospitals, and set reasonable limits for actual malpractice; let individuals and sole proprietors deduct the cost of health insurance the way businesses deduct it as a cost of doing business; consider forbidding companies to offer health insurance to employees forcing people to shop for what is truly a competitive policy rather than shielding them from the actual cost of healthcare.

Share and Save

Yes, the Obama-Pelosi-Reid government put into office last January has passed legislation in the House during the dark of night last Saturday that includes fines of up to $500,000 and prison sentences of up to 5 years for failure to purchase something you may not want or need. 

When we first mentioned this, many in the media were flabbergasted, called it stupid, not true, and those who would say such a slanderous thing are crazy.  

Here are two authentic, unimpeachable sources that prove the Democrats are prepared to send you to jail if you don’t purchase a commodity they want you to pay for. 

First, the Congressional Joint Commission on Taxation affirms the truth of the legislation here; and Nancy Pelosi is asked about jail time for not purchasing something she wants you to buy by a journalist from KOMO during a press conference, and she admits that such a provision is in the legislation, and says, “The legislation is very fair in this respect.” 

The people voted for change without bothering to consider what kind of changes Mr. Obama had in mind.  How’s that hope ‘n change working out for you now? 

May I suggest that you be in touch with your Senators and ask them to tell you where in the Constitution it gives them the authority to spend government money to provide health care for anyone since the Constitution is a document that grants only specific powers to the federal government.  

They will almost universally go to the “general welfare” clauses in the Preamble, and in Article 1; Section 8; clause one, “The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States.” 

If they cite this provision, tell them that they can levy taxes for the general welfare of the United States, not the individual citizens of the United States; two very different entities.  In addition, the 9^th and 10^th Amendments – part of the Bill of Rights – state explicitly that the powers of the federal government are limited, enumerated, and it has no powers other than those specifically granted to it in the Constitution, with all other rights belonging to the states or the people themselves. 

If they want to change the Constitution, tell them to do it legally.  They must stop this treasonous, perverted power grab.  The Democrat coup must be stopped.  Medicare isn’t Constitutional, Social Security isn’t Constitutional, federal money for education isn’t Constitutional – in fact most of the money our federal government spends is not permitted by the U.S. Constitution.  If that sounds radical, just read the thing for yourself. 

The health care bill passed by the House is 2,000 pages long; 9,000% longer than the Constitution.  That ought to tell us something.

Share and Save