THE MEDIA COVERAGE OF PROFESSOR GATES IS RACIALLY BIASED

Society in every state is a blessing, but government even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one; for when we suffer, or are exposed to the same miseries BY A GOVERNMENT, which we might expect in a country WITHOUT GOVERNMENT, our calamity is heightened by reflecting that we furnish the means by which we suffer. Thomas Paine

The media has spent more time on the arrest of a Black Studies tenured professor at Harvard, than they have on the sinking economy.
My question, that I would like to pose to Dr. Gates and those who claim he was arrested because he was Black, and not because he was abusive to the police who were responding to a call of a possible break in. Who in their right mind puts up a fuss when two people with guns on their hips ask to see some identification?

Will Gates be man enough to stop fanning the flames and tell the full story of how the police respectively did their jobs well and how he threw a hissey fit when asked for his I.D.? I highly doubt it which is why most Americans are weary of false allegations in regards to racical discrimination. Do not hold your breath for more than a second!

Any of us, no matter the color of our skin, should have been asked for our I.D. in the same situation. Any of us, having thrown a "hissey fit" instead of abiding by the policeman's request, should have been charged with disorderly conduct. What makes Gates so "above it all" that he thinks he's too good to be treated "fairly" by the police? If he has any integrity, he will go public and put an end to this big hubbub instead of sending America backwards and causing ill will across America. Be a man, Gates!


The policeman was doing his job. The law says that in the USA I must I D myself if the officer believes that I am commiting a crime, like opening a locked door without a key. I wonder how many times a black person feels that they have been singeled out because they are black, when it is the circumstance and not the color of their skin that is the issure.It sound too much like the hate sermons that were given periodically by the Reverend Wright when Obama was in a pew!

The police reports indicate that when asked to step out onto the porch to discuss the situation, Gates responded "I'll see your momma out on the porch". I wonder what course at Harvard he learned that..
Actually there are no "facts" in this case, just the contradictory words of men. We cannot assume all black professors never lie, or that all policemen never lie, or that there is no gray area in this case. For the President to assume that he knows what happened and to attempt to try this case in the press is absolutely irresponsible.
The only fact I know is that Gates is a professor at Harvard and Obama is a graduate of Harvard Law School!

The lefties continue to reveal their inner racism and demonstrate bully tactics. When will they come to their senses and realize what frauds they have become?

VICTORY IS THE ONLY JUSTIFICATION TO SEND OUR TROOPS TO WAR!!

VINCE LOMBARDI THE PATRON SAINT OF THE GREEN BAY PACKERS. Once said: "victory isn't
everything, it is the only thing"!

Of course Vince was a football coach, but in his mind if you put on the pads you should want and expect to win!
Unfortunately we now have a Commander in Chief of our armed forces who thinks it is perfectly all right to send our young men and women into harms way(aka war) without the objective being to attain victory!
The "meat grinder"of war has claimed 58,159 victims in Vietnam, 52,246 in Korea without a victory, and now as I said in a blog six months ago, apparently Obama wants to repeat the debacle of those two killing fields.

OBAMA has ordered 21,000 additional American troops to Afghanistan, mainly in the south where Taliban militants have made a violent comeback after a U.S.-led coalition topped them from power in late 2001. The U.S. expects 68,000 troops here by year's end, double last year's total.

When the president sends men into a war zone, peace keeping action, or United Nations police action as the Vietnam and Korean war were called. There are deaths, serious wounds to mind and body of those who are sent to fight. I think it is tantamount to dereliction of the duties of the office of POTUS, to send troops off to die unless they can be allowed to win! The words out of Obama's mouth apparently indicate that he thinks differently! As this statement illustrates:

"President Obama has put securing Afghanistan near the top of his foreign policy agenda, but "victory" in the war-torn country isn't necessarily the United States' goal, he said Thursday in a TV interview.

"I'm always worried about using the word 'victory,' because, you know, it invokes this notion of Emperor Hirohito coming down and signing a surrender to MacArthur," Obama told ABC News.

First of all, the smart and eloquent man who speaks with a silver tongue does not know that the Emperor was in his palace while the Prime Minister signed the surrender on the battleship Missouri!!
Since Obama took office 33 Americans have been killed in action. Untold number have been wounded, since the media no longer reports the statistics.But it appears 4330 brave troops have been killed in a valiant effort to win a victory over the Taliban.However, their commander in chief thinks it is not important!

Not only has the CIC said victory is not his objective, but apparently his commander in the field is more concerned with "collateral damage" than winning at all costs. He said this recently.
"We must avoid the trap of winning tactical victories - but suffering strategic defeats - by causing civilian casualties or excessive damage and thus alienating the people," McChrystal said in a recent statement.

Once again I want to state that it is criminal to send men to war unless you allow them to win!!

THE EDUCATION ESTABLISHMENT IS THREATENED WITH BLACKMAIL/EXTORTION!

The definition of extortion and it's pseudonyms is as follows per Roget's Thesaurus.
Definition: intimidation for money; money to quiet informer
Synonyms: bribe, bribery, exaction, extortion, hush money, milking, payoff, protection, ransom, slush fund, tribute

Yesterday president Obama continued his "modus operandi" of intimidating anyone who disagrees with his stated and implied policies in an interview in the Oval Office

President Obama is leaning hard on the nation's schools, using the promise of more than $4 billion in federal aid — and the threat of withholding it — to strong-arm the education establishment to accept more charter schools and performance pay for teachers.

The pressure campaign has been underway for months as Education Secretary Arne Duncan travels the country delivering a blunt message to state officials who have resisted change for decades: Embrace reform or risk being shut out.

"What we're saying here is, if you can't decide to change these practices, we're not going to use precious dollars that we want to see creating better results; we're not going to send those dollars there," Obama said in an Oval Office interview Wednesday. "And we're counting on the fact that, ultimately, this is an incentive, this is a challenge for people who do want to change."
Part of his change is the allocating of 100 million dollars to the Secretary of Education to push Obama's education agenda. More than has ever been given to that cabinet position, even in the profligate later years of the Bush administration!

The effort has helped Obama enlarge the federal role in an arena dominated by state and local governments, but there is deep skepticism about his approach. Congressional Republicans say the initiative, coupled with another $650 million for school reform under Duncan's control, is wasteful.

"We just took a big old checkbook with a $5 billion total behind it and handed it to the secretary and said, 'Write a whole bunch of checks,' " said Rep. John Kline (Minn.), the top Republican on the House Education and Labor Committee. "I'm uncomfortable that we're doing that."

Obama says the money will be distributed to states that can demonstrate results backed by data that show student scores and teacher performance are improving.

"It's not based on politics, it's not based on who's got more clout, it's not based on what certain constituency groups are looking for, but it's based on what works," he said. "Now, what we're also doing, though, is we're saying this is voluntary. If there are states that just don't want to go in this direction, that's their prerogative." Source: Washington Post
Liberal translation: MY WAY OR THE HIGHWAY!

I thought the tax money he is spending came from all states. Not just those who go along with his programs! I have no objection to his attempt to get our children better prepared for life through good education.
But the simple fact is that every time monies are appropriated for "school and education". The teachers union and bureaucrats get the lions share of the money, and student still learn more about diversity, one worldism and every thing but the basic three "R". And no amount of money will change this fact!!

State officials will lose a great deal of their authority over the financing and delivery of health care under the House and Senate health bills, particularly in the area of Medicaid.

In the House bill, "America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009" (H.R. 3200), Congress would expand Medicaid to reduce the number of people without health insurance. But this expansion will create new inequities among and between the several states that administer the program. The House version also expands the federal role in the administration of Medicaid that will reduce the states' sovereignty and position as "laboratories of democracy."
And it appears that the Obama administration will extend that reduction of equal rights for all states by restricting money for education to those who do his bidding, sounds all most DICTATORIAL!!

INDICTED ACORN TO GET MILLIONS IN HEALTH CARE FUNDS

Despite having 16 federal indictments pending for corruption. ACORN, that has already been selected to be part of the National census process,will apparently receive millions of dollars if Senator Christopher Dodd's(aka Kennedy bill) Health Care bill is eventually passed. If you can believe Senate majority leader that the bill will not be voted on before the August recess.

Washington (CNSNews.com) – Sen. Christopher Dodd (D-Conn.), the man who is shepherding the health-care reform bill through the Senate, says he doesn’t know for sure, but the controversial Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) could qualify to receive health-care grants under a provision of the bill that provides money for groups that are members of a “national network of community based organizations.”
Mr. Dodd has been filling in for his friend, Senator Edward M. Kennedy, Democrat of Massachusetts, who is battling brain cancer.

The grants are designed to fund groups that will "measure" people's health-related behavior on the community level, including whether they are gaining or losing weight, eating the right foods, getting exercise, using tobacco, or engaging in other personal behaviors targeted for federal monitoring by the secretary of health and human services.How this will contribute to reducing the cost of health care eludes me. Any results will be years in coming! Sounds like another "government job that can be pointed to as jobs created or saved by Obama and his sycophants!

Under the “Creating Healthier Communities” provision of the bill (found on page 382), grants could be awarded to only three types of "entities:" state governments, local governments and groups that are members of a “national network of community-based organizations."

But when CNSNews.com asked, Dodd could not rule out that the controversial group ACORN could benefit from this provision in his bill.

“I’m not saying yes or no, I just don’t know. I don’t think it’s a blanket thing that anyone applies necessarily,” he told CNSNews.com. “There would have to be criteria by which an organization qualifies to receive those grants.”

He reiterated: “There obviously has to be some criteria by which organizations could receive the grants, and I don’t know if there’s just a blanket (criterion) for any organization out there,” he added “That would be an overstatement.”

ACORN--a national association of community based organizations--has come under fire in recent years over voter its voter registration activities. The state of Nevada filed criminal charges against the organization in May for allegedly illegally paying canvassers to register voters before the 2008 election. ACORN has denied the charges.

The organization has also come under scrutiny because of its partnership agreement with the U.S. Census Bureau to help in the 2010 Census count.

The language of the the Senate Health committee's bill does not specify that any particular national networks of community based organizations will receive the grants that the bill would create, but leaves the awarding of the grants to the discretion of the secretary of health and human services through the director of the Centers of Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

CNSNews.com asked Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), who is a top Republican on the committee, if he knew which community based organizations would be eligible to become grantees under the Creating Healthier Communities provision. He said he did not know.

“Well, I don’t know to be honest with you,” Sen. Hatch told CNSNews.com. “I don’t know which organizations will qualify.”
It is no wonder that Senators do not know what is in the 1000 plus page bill!

Senator Orin Hatch is concerned that money in the bill will also go to fund organizations that perform abortions--like Planned Parenthood.

The grant program in question envisions that grantees, including those representing national networks of community based organizations, will work “to implement a variety of programs, policies, and infrastructure improvements to promote healthier lifestyles.”

When will the government stop trying to dictate what we eat and how much we eat. It seems to me that if women have a "right to choose" whether they have a baby or have an abortion. We ought to be able to at least decide what we put in our bodies! It appears to me that it is about power and control, not about producing better health.

POLLS SHOW PUBLIC DOES NOT TRUST OBAMACARE!!

The London Telegraph site on the Internet has this to say about Americans reaction to his attempt to "ram" through Obama Care.
"A USA Today/Gallup survey suggested that six months into his presidency, his popularity was lower than George W Bush's at the same stage of his tenure.

Amid rising unemployment and falling confidence in his economic plans, Mr Obama's job approval rating has dropped by nine points since January to 55 per cent, a point below his predecessor in mid-2001.


The Washington Post also showed Obama's job approval falling below 60 per cent for the first time since he was sworn in as the nation's first black president, with a marked drop in the last month.

The president is facing criticism about how he is going to pay for $1 trillion plans to reform the US health care system. Half of respondents in one poll disapproved of his health care policy compared with just 44 per cent who approved".

If voters at home do not already realize that Obama and the Democrats in Congress are pushing to add to the voter supporters by pushing Amnesty for illegals. This quote from the Congressional Record will illustrate how far they are willing to push US that believe in the rule of law!
"Last week, the House Ways and Means Committee defeated an amendment that would have prevented illegal aliens from using the so-called "public health insurance option." Every Democrat on the panel voted against the measure!

And to top it off the National Review is reporting; "Immigration analyst James R. Edwards Jr. reported last week that "no health legislation on the table requires federal, state or local agencies -- or private institutions receiving federal funds -- to check the immigration status of health-program applicants, so some of the money distributed via Medicaid and tax credits inevitably would go to illegal aliens." Moreover, the Senate Finance Committee plan creates a new preference for illegal aliens by exempting them from the mandate to buy insurance.
So illegals are given an exemption that allows them to not be forced into Obama Care that we citizens will not have. Who do the Congress "potentates" represent?

As for those uninsured Americans we keep hearing about, there is remarkably little interest in why they don't have insurance. It cannot be poverty, for the poor can automatically get Medicaid.

In fact, we already know that there are people with substantial incomes who choose to spend those incomes on other things, especially if they are young and in good health. If necessary, they can always go to a hospital emergency room and receive treatment there, whether or not they have insurance.

Here, the advocates of government-run medical care say that we all end up paying, one way or another, for the free medical care that hospitals are forced by law to provide in their emergency rooms. But unless you think that any situation you don't like is a reason to give politicians a blank check for "change," the relevant question becomes whether the alternative is either less expensive or of better quality. Nothing is cheaper just because part of the price is paid in higher taxes.

How do these arrogant, presumptuous politicians believe they can know enough to plan for the rest of us? Who do they think they are? Under cover of helping uninsured people get medical care, they live out their megalomaniac social-engineering desires, thus putting our physical and economic health at risk in the process.

When will the American people say "Enough!"?

SPENDING THE USA TO BANKRUPTCY

The special inspector general for TARP Niel Barofsky will testify Tuesday before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. The office of the special inspector general was created to serve as an auditor of the federal bailout by the same legislation that launched the TARP program itself.

Originally, TARP was intended, Barofsky writes, to facilitate “the purchase, management, and sale of up to $700 billion of “toxic” assets, primarily troubled mortgages and mortgage-backed securities.”

But that plan was soon rejected, and the TARP instead became a grab bag of bailout initiatives, including bailouts for GM, Chrysler and auto parts suppliers as the federal government struggled in real time to contain a spiraling economic disaster.

Barofsky reports that TARP has come to include 12 separate programs that include a total of as much as $3 trillion, “including TARP funds, loans and guarantees from other agencies, and private money.” Of the initial $700 billion allocated by Congress, Barofsky found that the Treasury has so far announced how $643.1 billion will be spent, and it has actually spent $441 billion as of June 30

Barofsky’s calculation of a $23 trillion figure took into account a wide-ranging group of federal programs set up by disparate agencies within the federal bureaucracy. Secretary of Treasury, Timothy Geitner, will probably have him waterboarded for saying things like "Yeah, nobody at Treasury even knows where the banks put all that money we gave them."
The special inspector general counted approximately 50 initiatives or programs launched since 2007 to fight the economic collapse.

The Federal Reserve, he found, has increased its balance sheet from $900 billion to more than $2 trillion, and Barofsky estimated that the total amount of support to the economy by the Fed. is at least $6.8 trillion, because it is exposed to significant losses if many of the assets guaranteed by the Fed deteriorate in value.

Barofsky points out the non-TARP programs, which are far larger than the TARP itself, do not come with the strings that the high-profile TARP money itself comes with, including executive compensation, and they don’t necessarily require congressional approval. And beyond the ability to tally their costs, Barofsky has no authority as an auditor over the non-TARP programs.

I believe that if your aim is to "remake America" as Obama has promised to do, you must first examine the following definitions. Then you will realize that the "CHANGE" is a radical turn toward socialism at the very least!

Socialism - when Government owns the means of production.
Fascism - When the Government controls the means of production.
Marxism - when the workers own the means of production

This quote by Obama illustrates that you can not judge a man by what he says, but what he has done and proposes to do.

Obama has said this: “I want to disabuse people of this notion that somehow we enjoy, you know, meddling in the private sector,” Any thoughtful person will quickly note that for a man who profess to not want to "meddle" in the private sector.His Health Care Plan, Cap and Trade, and take over of General Motors put the LIE to his protestations!
In particular, the actions in dealing with Chrysler and GM, this seems to be true. The main problem is, for those that believe in the Rule of Law, the Right to Private Property, in fairness and equality, and the free market of capitalism (which has created more wealth for more people than any other system in the world's history!), this headline from John At Powerline seems to say it all.

"The Chrysler reorganization was another milestone in the decline of the rule of law under Barack Obama. We've said for quite a while that bankruptcy is the only viable option for Chrysler and General Motors, not--as Obama claims--because they don't know how to make the right kinds of vehicles, but because their unsustainable union contracts make it impossible for them to be profitable. That reality has now been turned on its head, as the administration has tried to bully Chrysler's secured creditors into going away, while the United Auto Workers Union, solely on the basis of political clout, would be paid at an implied rate of 50 percent and would emerge owning 55 percent of the company, with the government also holding a stake.
When some of the secured creditors refused to be intimidated, Obama libeled them in the press, saying, outrageously, "I don't stand with those who held out when everyone else is making sacrifices." Actually, under Obama's plan the politically favored parties, principally the UAW, will benefit--will steal money, to put it crudely--from the parties who held out. Those parties call themselves the "non-TARP lenders", and instead of getting placed in the front of the line for re-reimbursement as the Constitution demands. Obama put them literally, "in the back of the Bus"!

Not only is this an act that shreds the Constitution, but shows how people who have the temerity to oppose Obama will be treated--intimidation!
Remember this - the Obama's Government HAS to make these Trillions of our dollars actually work or he AND the Congressional Democrats are toast! They have to have private investment to assist in order to be successful. Ask yourself this question: while the lure of profits is strong, what sensible fund manager is going to partner with the Destroyer-of-Wealth-in-Chief as long as Obama keeps throwing our money away?

There was supposed to be a midsummer budget report released a few days ago, the middle of July. But Obama has conveniently hidden it away for an extra month. Why? Health care legislation. Global warming cap-and-trade legislation. He is hiding the fact that these initiatives, futile as they are anyway, simply cannot be paid for under any scenario whatsoever. Not the best-case rosy scenario that Obama and his minions painted back in February, and certainly not under the worst-case, which is far closer to where we are. The White House has been forced to paint an economic picture that is at best smoke and mirrors, and at worst an outright fraud! Source:thebogproof;Obama

There was no stimulus in the stimulus bill. Most of the money is to be spent in 2010, an election year! The facts are in the numbers that "porkulus" was and is an utter failure. Even worse is that the actual unemployment rate is only as low as it is because many of the unemployed have simply given up on finding a job and are thus off of the statistics.Nationally we are at 105, BUT IN MANY STATES THE UNEMPLOYMENT RATES ARE APPROACHING 12except for Michigan that stands at 15%!

The nation's debt ( the total of accumulated annual budget deficits ) now stands at $11.6 trillion. In the scheme of things, that's more important than talking about the "deficit," which only looks at a one-year slice of bookkeeping and totally ignores previous indebtedness that is still outstanding.

This is supposed to be a representative government, and facts such as the mid-summer budget report should not be hidden from the population to foist upon them something they would not want if they had been informed. But that is exactly what is happening under Obama. Wasn't this supposed to be the most transparent administration in U.S. history? The only transparency here is in the seeing of the dishonesty at every step of the way. When will the electorate finally wake up? In fact, when will most of the MSM wake up? They've been in bed, with a smooth-talking Obama, and if and when the wake up.That next morning will be a doozy for them!

And as I bring this tome to a close I just learned that the Senate has voted to strip $1.75 billion on seven additional F-22 jets that President Obama said was unnecessary and would doom a $680 bill authorizing defense spending plans for the coming fiscal year.

The 58-40 vote prevents Obama from carrying out a threat to use the first veto of his presidency if senators had kept the designation in the defense bill.

Obama thanked the senators for approving the amendment that he says will "better protect our troops." Absurd statement or a Commander in Chief!

Obama said he rejected the notion that the country has to "waste billions of taxpayers dollars" on outdated defense projects.
When has the newest fighter jet, that is operational, an outdated weapon? This president is dangerous!

WHAT THEY ARE NOT TELLING YOU ABOUT OBAMA CARE!!

"The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.'" RONALD REAGAN

The way Obama is trying to ram his health Care socialisation is by telling us that if Congress does not pass by the end of summer, children will die and many people
will go bankrupt---FEAR!!
If you an get by the intimidation and fear generated by Obama and look at just what the Progressive Socialists want to slip by US. You will find some of the demands,in fact most of the proposed legislation is about control!!
In a blog short enough not to turn off any potential reader. I can not list all the negatives , but I will list a few that should make you get really angry if you are not inclined to Socialism!

"CNS News editor in chief Terence Jeffrey also reports that "the legal use of tobacco products is the only vice for which insurance companies will be able to charge their customers higher premiums," adding, "a person could have been admitted to hospitals three times for heroin overdoses, or been pregnant five times out of wedlock, or been treated for venereal diseases at least once per year for the past five years, but none of these factors could be used to charge that person a higher insurance premium." Jeffrey further notes that the bill calls for improved immunization coverage, including the use of "reminders or recalls for patients or providers, or home visits" to accomplish it. Yes, home visits.

Those who currently have private individual coverage won't be able to change it. Nor will those who leave a company to work for themselves be free to buy individual plans from private carriers." Private individual coverage will be outlawed by attrition.

During the presidential campaign, Republicans, including candidates Fred Thompson and John McCain, warned about the tax implications of electing Obama president. They were right. House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel (D-NY) announced late last Friday that Congress would pay for health care by hiking taxes on the households earning more than $350,000 per year and individuals earning $280,000. The hike would put New York's top bracket at nearly 60 percent. Rangel predicts revenue of $540 billion over 10 years. Democrats' ultimate goal is to have the highest income earners pay for health care for everyone else. But even the liberal Washington Post editorialized, "There is simply no way to close the [funding] gap by taxing a handful of high earners."

To cover part of this deficiency, Democrats propose cutting tax breaks for hospitals because they don't provide enough charitable care to earn them any longer. According to the American Hospital Directory, fewer than half of the 5,482 hospitals in the country actually pay federal, state or local taxes. That will change. Furthermore, the hospital industry agreed this week to take $155 billion less in payments from the government, leaving the money to cover the uninsured.

Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) added an amendment to the bill that would require all health insurance companies to provide unspecified "preventive care and screenings" for "pregnant women and individuals of child-bearing age." Asked if this would include abortion, Mikulski sidestepped: "It would provide for any service deemed medically necessary or medically appropriate." Source: Patriot Post

To say that this will help all Americans is nothing less than a bold faced misrepresentation! They(DEMS.) say that there are 47 million uninsured. What they do not tell you is that over 20 thousand of this group make over 50 thousand dollars year, are under 40, in good enough health that they would rather spend their money on a new car or a bigger home!
Another 12 million are illegal aliens!

Before we allow Congress to pass this heinous legislation we should look at what is happening in Tennessee. A state that tried to run a government controlled health plan.Of course the Liberals say we can run it better than the state of Tenn. but when has the Federal government run a program better? Medicare, Social Security, Amtrak, Postal Service? I think NOT!

Tennessee is in the process of cutting about 150,000 people from the TennCare program after a reevaluation of enrollee eligibility to participate in the state-run insurance program.

TennCare, the managed care Medicaid program that began in 1994, now serves about 1.2 million people in the state and has a $7 billion budget. That’s after cuts were made.

Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) was a Tennessee state senator through much of the TennCare problems and believes it is a forecast of what would happen under federal health care “public option” plan. While supporters of the Tennessee program said it would save money, it wound up eating 38 percent of the state’s budget, she said.

“As a result of this, insurance rates for those who have private coverage were going through the roof,” Blackburn told a gathering at the conservative Heritage Foundation last week.Source:CNS NEWS

“There is no example that you can point to that shows where having private insurance in competition with the public option brings the costs down. It leads to exploding costs,” she said.
WE are already in debt up to our noses. Obama will take us to the drowning point!

FEAR IS THE BEST MEANS OF COERCION!!

There are many similarities to the way the Obama administration is approaching our economic crisis with that of the icon of Democrat politics, FDR.
The difference is that Obama is using fear to coerce the American public to get behind his Socialisation of a major portion of the economic engine of the USA.He and the Democrats are using fear to move the Socialised medicine bill through Congress by running adds on TV that tug at your heart strings. The add Includes pictures of a child who will not be treated for his/her Leukemia if we don't pass his Health Care Bill NOW!
This a complete lie! The No Child Left Behind Act. Prevents this type of catastrophe!George W. Bush used this phrase, trademarked by the CDF, in his Presidential campaign despite objections from CDF.Everything has to be done now. Nothing can wait to beread, deliberated and debated or like chicken little, "the sky will fall"!
In reality as these socialised plans see the light of day, and are analysed by honest economists without a special interest. The people will realize that what he is proposing will hurt our economy not help it!!

It is worth the time to look at history to see the comparisons and stark differences between what FDR did and what Obama is doing!
Whereas, FDR had this to say in his inaugural address in 1934. "So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear... is fear itself — nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance. In every dark hour of our national life a leadership of frankness and vigor has met with that understanding and support of the people themselves which is essential to victory. I am convinced that you will again give that support to leadership in these critical days".

FDR gave the people hope that he would turn things around, and history will show that he failed at first, but the Japanese and Hitler came to his rescue. The war made the USA and economic Juggernaut as it provided arms, material and food stuffs for Russia, England and our troops!

FDR and his wife, Eleanor Roosevelt, remain touchstones for modern American liberalism. Roosevelt's administration redefined American liberalism and realigned the Democratic Party based on his New Deal coalition of labor unions; farmers; ethnic, religious and racial minorities; intellectuals; the South; big city machines; and the poor and workers on relief. Source:Wikapedia

Beginning with his inauguration address, Roosevelt began blaming the economic crisis on bankers and financiers, the quest for profit, and the self-interest basis of capitalism:

“ Primarily this is because rulers of the exchange of mankind's goods have failed through their own stubbornness and their own incompetence, have admitted their failure, and have abdicated. Practices of the unscrupulous money changers stand indicted in the court of public opinion, rejected by the hearts and minds of men. True they have tried, but their efforts have been cast in the pattern of an outworn tradition. Faced by failure of credit they have proposed only the lending of more money. Stripped of the lure of profit by which to induce our people to follow their false leadership, they have resorted to exhortations, pleading tearfully for restored confidence....The money changers have fled from their high seats in the temple of our civilization. We may now restore that temple to the ancient truths. The measure of the restoration lies in the extent to which we apply social values more noble than mere monetary profit. ”

Historians categorized Roosevelt's program as "relief, recovery and reform." Relief was urgently needed by tens of millions of unemployed. Recovery meant boosting the economy back to normal. Reform meant long-term fixes of what was wrong, especially with the financial and banking systems. Roosevelt's series of radio talks, known as fireside chats, presented his proposals directly to the American public.

Recovery was pursued through "pump-priming" (that is, federal spending). The NIRA included $3.3 billion of spending through the Public Works Administration to stimulate the economy, which was to be handled by Interior Secretary Harold Ickes. Roosevelt worked with Republican Senator George Norris to create the largest government-owned industrial enterprise in American history, the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), which built dams and power stations, controlled floods, and modernized agriculture and home conditions in the poverty-stricken Tennessee Valley. The repeal of prohibition also brought in new tax revenues and helped him keep a major campaign promise.

The "First New Deal" (March 4th, 1933) was aimed at meeting the needs of practically all major groups, from banking and railroads to industry and farming. The New Deal innovated with banking reform laws, work relief programs, agricultural programs, and industrial reform (the National Recovery Administration, NRA), and the end of the gold standard.[3]

A "Second New Deal" (Tuesday, 14th May, 1935) included labor union support, the Works Progress Administration (WPA) relief program, the Social Security Act, and programs to aid the agricultural sector, including tenant farmers and migrant workers. The Supreme Court ruled several programs unconstitutional; however, most were soon replaced, with the exception of the NRA. The Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 was the last major program launched, which set maximum hours and minimum wages for most categories of workers.[4]
The Supreme Court ruled several programs unconstitutional and most were soon replaced, with the exception of the NRA. The Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 was the last major program launched, which set maximum hours and minimum wages for most categories of workers.

And if we think that the Media has turned hard left to help out Obama only recently
The premise is faulty as history shows that in 1937, the FSA photography project was most responsible for creating the image of the Depression in the U.S. Many of the images appeared in popular magazines. The photographers were under instruction from Washington as to what overall impression the New Deal wanted to give out.
Sound familiar?

Director Roy Stryker's agenda focused on his faith in social engineering, the poor conditions among cotton tenant farmers, and the very poor conditions among migrant farm workers; above all he was committed to social reform through New Deal intervention in people's lives. Stryker demanded photographs that "related people to the land and vice versa" because these photographs reinforced the RA's position that poverty could be controlled by "changing land practices." Though Stryker did not dictate to his photographers how they should compose the shots, he did send them lists of desirable themes, such as "church", "court day", "barns". New Deal era films such as Citizen Kane ridiculed so-called "great men", while class warfare appeared in numerous movies, such as Meet John Doe and The Grapes of Wrath.

One thing different from the way the Obama administration is going about there alleged attempt to end the failing economy is the The Economy Act, drafted by Budget Director Lewis Williams Douglas, was passed on March 14, 1933. The act proposed to balance the "regular" (non-emergency) federal budget by cutting the salaries of government employees and cutting pensions to veterans by fifteen percent. It saved $500 million per year and reassured deficit hawks such as Douglas that the new President was fiscally conservative. Roosevelt argued there were two budgets: the "regular" federal budget, which he balanced, and the "emergency budget," which was needed to defeat the depression; it was imbalanced on a temporary basis.The Democrats had not yet abandoned the concept of spending only within the ability of the taxpayers to pay for their spending!

Not unlike the Obama administration's actions when their support began slipping. The Roosevelt Administration was under assault during FDR's second term, which presided over a new dip in the Great Depression in the fall of 1937 that continued through most of 1938. Production declined sharply, as did profits and employment. Unemployment jumped from 14.3% in 1937 to 19.0% in 1938.Conservatives said it was caused by attacks on business and by the huge strikes caused by the organizing activities of the Congress of Industrial Organizations (CIO) and the American Federation of Labor (AFL).FDR was solidly backed by the unions. Sound familiar?

Roosevelt rejected the advice of Morgenthau to cut spending and decided big business were trying to ruin the New Deal by causing another depression that voters would react against by voting Republican. It was a "capital strike" said Roosevelt, and he ordered the Federal Bureau of Investigation to look for a criminal conspiracy (they found none). Roosevelt moved left and unleashed a rhetorical campaign against monopoly power, which was cast as the cause of the new crisis. Ickes attacked automaker Henry Ford, steelmaker Tom Girdler, and the superrich "Sixty Families" who supposedly comprised "the living center of the modern industrial oligarchy which dominates the United States."[45] Left unchecked, Ickes warned, they would create "big-business Fascist America—an enslaved America." The President appointed Robert Jackson as the aggressive new director of the antitrust division of the Justice Department, but this effort lost its effectiveness once World War II began and big business was urgently needed to produce war supplies.
I believe Obama and his inner circle are following FDR's "play book"!

Not unlike today's poll numbers,when the Gallup poll in 1939 asked, 'Do you think the attitude of the Roosevelt administration toward business is delaying business recovery?' the American people responded 'yes' by a margin of more than two-to-one. The business community felt even more strongly so"
Treasury Secretary, Henry Morgenthau, angry at the Keynesian spenders, confided to his diary May 1939: "We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work. And I have just one interest, and now if I am wrong somebody else can have my job. I want to see this country prosper. I want to see people get a job. I want to see people get enough to eat. We have never made good on our promises. I say after eight years of this administration, we have just as much unemployment as when we started. And enormous debt to boot."
I believe we are heading in the same direction as Morgenthau believed!

EUGENICS HAS APOSITION IN THE WHITE HOUSE

Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.” —Ronald Reagan

Yesterday, Obama gave a speech to the 100th anniversary meeting of the NAACP. In his speech he stressed that racism is still alive in the USA.First of all this is strange for the first Black president to say as he was elected not by the Blacks(although they contributed heavily) but by a predominantly white population.
And he said all during his campaign that he wanted to heal a divided country.
All his speech did was make the point that Black people should hate white people and the RICH!

It would be a good idea for him to look at whom he appointed as the head of his Office of Science and Technology a little closer.
This man is a modern day equivalent of Margaret Sanger. The originator of eugenics. The science of weeding out the "undesirable and infirmed population via abortion and sterilization! And while he is examining those in government who believe in eugenics. He should read what the far left Supreme Court Justice, Ruth Bader Ginsberg had to say about Roe and abortions.
In an interview last week, Ginsburg said that she thought "at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don't want to have too many of."
I wonder what race of people she was talking about? Apparently she thinks like the Left wing Democrats who tried to block the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Pub.L. 88-352, 78 Stat. 241, July 2, 1964), a landmark piece of legislation in the United States that outlawed racial segregation in schools, public places, and employment.

Conceived to help African Americans, the bill was amended prior to passage to protect women, and explicitly included white people for the first time. It also created the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. And it was passed despite the fact that President Johnson realized that supporting this bill would risk losing the South's overwhelming support of the Democratic Party. Both Attorney General Robert Kennedy and Vice President Johnson had pushed for the introduction of the civil rights legislation. Johnson told Kennedy aide Ted Sorensen that "I know the risks are great and we might lose the South, but those sorts of states may be lost anyway."[17] Senator Richard Russell, Jr. warned President Johnson that his strong support for the civil rights bill "will not only cost you the South, it will cost you the election."[18] The South indeed started to vote increasingly Republican after 1964.Source: Wikapedia

In "Woman and the New Race," Sanger insisted that women create an enormous "debt to society by creating slums, filling asylums with the insane, and institutions with other defectives.Poverty and the large family generally go hand in hand.The most merciful thing that a large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it."

Of blacks, Sanger wrote, "We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members."

She advocated policies that ensured "more children from the fit, less from the unfit" in order to "to create a race of thoroughbreds." (Remember this quote the next time a liberal tells you that Fascists and Socialists have nothing in common.)

Sanger was certainly the 20th century's most noted American proponent of racist eugenics. However when we remind our liberal friends of the origins of Planned Parenthood, they sputter on about Sanger's support for eugenics being an anomaly of another time and context.

But Sanger's advocacy for the extermination of the "unwanted" is the basis of today's culture of death. Indeed, one of the adherents of eugenics now directs BHO's White House Office of Science and Technology Policy and is the co-chair of Obama's Council of Advisers on Science and Technology.

John Holdren may not be openly advocating racial selection, but he clearly advocates mass sterilization and abortion in order to control human impact on the environment. This is nothing but a contemporary interpretation of Sanger's eliminating "human weeds" and "reckless breeders.
In writing with Paul R. Ehrlich, Holdren claimed that, "if the population control measures are not initiated immediately, and effectively, all the technology man can bring to bear will not fend off the misery to come." In 1973 Holdren encouraged a decline in fertility to well below replacement in the United States, because "210 million now is too many and 280 million in 2040 is likely to be much too many".

Holdren's modern day eugenics program is outlined in a book he co-authored, "Ecoscience," in which he calls for "a comprehensive Planetary Regime [in order to] control the development, administration, conservation and distribution of all natural resources."

One solution, writes Holdren, is "adding a sterilant to drinking water or staple foods" which would help weed out those "who contribute to social deterioration."

As for the constitutional authority, Holdren writes, "Indeed, it has been concluded that compulsory population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing Constitution if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society."

Holdren concludes, "This may be the last opportunity to choose our own and our descendants' destiny. Failing to choose or making the wrong choices may lead to catastrophe. But it must never be forgotten that the right choices could lead to a much better world." Source: Mark Alexander, Patriot Post

So what is Obama doing? He is stirring the pot of race hatred. An old trick of Communists and Socialists to gain more power. Blacks have advanced more in the last 30 years than they ever did for the 40 years that Congress was under control of the Democrats. Even the courts have bent over backwards to advance people of color, as evidenced by the Sotomayor decision in the New York fireman's law suit!

WHILE OUR ECONOMY LANGUISHES CHINA ROARS!!

From the USA Today news report we learn that some economists believe the U.S. economy is expected to emerge from the recession sometime around mid-2009.
Until that happens, the economy will remain mired in one of the deepest and longest downturns the nation has seen in decades.

If the recession continues past the spring, as many economists predict, it will be the most prolonged one since the Great Depression. Employers are expected to continue to shed jobs at a rapid pace. Consumers will pull back spending. Businesses will cancel equipment purchases. Unsold, empty homes will dot city blocks.

However, once the massive amount of fiscal stimulus currently being crafted by lawmakers and aggressive action by the Federal Reserve kicks in, the economy is expected to improve, according to several economists and business owners.

"We all just need to hang on," says Allen Sinai, president of Decision Economics, an economic consulting firm. "By late in the year, the economy will be moving up, and 2010 should be a recovery year."
The outlook for jobs is probably the worst aspect of the economy in 2009. Employers are expected to trim payrolls until the end of the year, shoving the jobless rate above 8%, according to forecasts from Barclays Capital, John Hancock Financial Services, Citigroup, Mission Residential, Wachovia and National City.

That excludes those who have given up on finding jobs or who work part time because they can't get full-time work. The jobless rate was 6.7% in November, the highest in 15 years.

Job losses could be particularly brutal in the first half of the year. Last month, 60% of U.S. CEOs said they expected to cut workers in the next six months, according to the Business Roundtable. A number of companies, including Bank of America and United Airlines, have already announced layoffs for early 2009.

Even after the economy stabilizes, job losses will probably continue for a while. That's common in recovery periods as wary businesses await more evidence that the economy is on solid footing. Employers cut jobs for nearly a year after the 2001 recession ended, for example.
Tuesday, the Fed slashed interest rates to near zero and vowed to keep them low while also pledging to plow money into the financial system to unlock lending and boost the economy.
Source:USA TODAY
The Wall Street Journal has a report from Moscow in which the former economic minister of the USSR KGB predicts that in 2010 the USA economy will self destruct. I do not put much credence in what former KGB operatives say, but it is worth considering how others who watch our economy from afar believe we are heading.

"There's a 55-45% chance right now that disintegration will occur," he says. "One could rejoice in that process," he adds, poker-faced. "But if we're talking reasonably, it's not the best scenario -- for Russia." Though Russia would become more powerful on the global stage, he says, its economy would suffer because it currently depends heavily on the dollar and on trade with the U.S.

Mr. Panarin posits, in brief, that mass immigration, economic decline, and moral degradation will trigger a civil war next fall and the collapse of the dollar. Around the end of June 2010, or early July, he says, the U.S. will break into six pieces -- with Alaska reverting to Russian control".
Americans hope President-elect Barack Obama "can work miracles," he wrote. "But when spring comes, it will be clear that there are no miracles."

The article prompted a question about the White House's reaction to Prof. Panarin's forecast at a December news conference. "I'll have to decline to comment," spokeswoman Dana Perino said amid much laughter.

For Prof. Panarin, Ms. Perino's response was significant. "The way the answer was phrased was an indication that my views are being listened to very carefully," he says.

The professor says he's convinced that people are taking his theory more seriously. People like him have forecast similar cataclysms before, he says, and been right. He cites French political scientist Emmanuel Todd. Mr. Todd is famous for having rightly forecast the demise of the Soviet Union -- 15 years beforehand. "When he forecast the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1976, people laughed at him," says Prof. Panarin.
Source:Wall Street Journal

On the other side of the Pacific Ocean where the largest holder of our National Debt
finds China's economy roaring at a rapid pace.
A boost in domestic demand fired China to 7.9% growth in the second quarter, making it the world's best performing economy.

A resurgence in bank lending and increased government spending were also credited with lifting GDP from 6.1% growth the previous quarter.
An ongoing slump in international trade was offset by banks offering more loans and lower interest rates, encouraging private companies to invest more.

The Chinese economy is still shy of the double-digit growth it had experienced over the two decades prior to the global financial crisis.
But the pick-up in domestic demand has fuelled hopes that one of the world's largest economies has seen the worst of the recession.

Dong Xian'an, an economist at Industrial Securities in Shanghai, said: "The Chinese economy has posted a V-shape recovery driven mainly by domestic demand. That trend will not reverse in the short to medium term."
He added: "It's more likely that China will have high growth and mild inflation next year."
China owns more than $1 trillion in U.S. debt and is growing twice as fast in a bad year as the U.S. grows in a great one. China even won more gold medals than the U.S. at the Olympics!

And it appears that Obama is determined to make the Russian professor's prediction come true! With an over one trillion dollar Obama health Care Bill pending, and the Cap and Trade Bill moving fast through Congress. The taxes that these two abominations will require will certainly hit the middle class who own small businesses the hardest, even though the lying Democrats insist that their proposals will only tax the rich.
If a small business person doesn't make a taxable income of over 350,000 dollars. He is a mom and pop store, and there are not many of those left in the USA.
Apparently the Russian understands the motives of our president better than the Americans do. He realizes as I do, that Obama wants to bankrupt the free enterprise system, so he can proceeded with his Progressive socialism where the government tells you how to live and when to die!

Americans wake up!!!!

THE WHY OF ALL OF OBAMA'S PROGRAMS, IS TO ASSURE RE-ELECTION

A wise man once said that you can judge a man by what he does, not what he says. I will attempt to make an argument that everything that president Obama is doing is not for the good of the country that he governs, but to solidify his voting base and reassure his re-election in 2112.

Today he appointed a replacement for his first Czar. The car czar, Steve Rattner,the former New York investment banker, resigned yesterday under a cloud of scandal involving his regular job before he took the position of Car Czar.In April details of alleged influence-peddling surfaced, thus yesterday he announced his resignation yesterday." Source: NewsBusters
The new Car Czar,Ron Bloom, a Harvard Business-trained banker turned United Steelworkers official, will “assume leadership of the Task Force's activities as the government transitions its role away from day-to-day restructuring to monitoring this vital industry and protecting the substantial investment the American taxpayers have made in GM, Chrysler, and GMAC,” Secretary of The Treasury Tim Geithner said today.
This solidifies his base of voters within the Unions who contributed a combined total of 60 million dollars to Obama's election campaign!
And if you doubt any connection with Unions and Obama this quote from a speech Obama gave to an Iowa government union of 20,000 members, while on the campaign trail, should erase all doubts.
"DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) — Democrat Barack Obama is telling union activists he would walk a picket line as president if organized labor helps elect him in 2008.

The Illinois senator also criticized President Bush’s policies toward working people.

`We are facing a Washington that has thrown open its doors to the most anti-union, anti-worker forces we’ve seen in generations” Obama said in remarks prepared for delivery Saturday night. “What we need to make real today is the idea that in this country we value the labor of every American. “I stood on the picket line and marched with workers at the Congress Hotel in Chicago last week” Obama said. “I had marched with them four years earlier and I told them when I left that if they were still fighting four years from now, I’d be back on that picket line as president of the United States.”

Then there is the Cap and Trade bill, or as many call it, The tax and control Trade bill. This act will satisfy those who voted for Obama because as his wife, Michelle infamously said: "she was not proud of her country until....". They are not happy with the free enterprise system and would rather see this country socialised!
This bill will also satisfy and secure the votes of the Environmental activists who have made "mother earth" their new Deity.

Former candidate for Vice-President Sara Palin so aptly described why she feared the Cap and Trade bill, and The following is an excerpt from the op-ed she wrote this week .

"I am deeply concerned about President Obama’s cap-and-trade energy plan, and I believe it is an enormous threat to our economy. It would undermine our recovery over the short term and would inflict permanent damage.

American prosperity has always been driven by the steady supply of abundant, affordable energy. Particularly in Alaska, we understand the inherent link between energy and prosperity, energy and opportunity, and energy and security. Consequently, many of us in this huge, energy-rich state recognize that the president’s cap-and-trade energy tax would adversely affect every aspect of the U.S. economy.

There is no denying that as the world becomes more industrialized, we need to reform our energy policy and become less dependent on foreign energy sources. But the answer doesn’t lie in making energy scarcer and more expensive! Those who understand the issue know we can meet our energy needs and environmental challenges without destroying America’s economy.

Job losses are so certain under this new cap-and-tax plan that it includes a provision accommodating newly unemployed workers from the resulting dried-up energy sector, to the tune of $4.2 billion over eight years. So much for creating jobs". Source:Sister Toldjah

National Health Care satisfies all those who have wanted socialised medicine since Andrew Biemiller tried to introduce a bill to socialise medicine in the 1950's. Biemiller was a congressman from Wisconsin who served in the Wis.state legislature as the leader of the LaFollette Progressive Party before being elected to congress.
Thus, the progressive(aka socialists) will feel they finally have control of America's medical sector of the economy that is a 1.7 trillion dollar industry.

Just as the giving the auto workers union 55% of Chrysler, solidified the auto union votes. The Stimulus has been used to bail out Bankers and special interests companies like Goldman Sachs ,GE,
and brokers who have heavily invested in the CO2 credit exchange.
Thus ensuring the votes of the "filthy" rich on Wall Street and their minions across American landscape.

Tuesday he announced that he will seek stimulus funds for students who attend junior colleges, and those who cannot now attend because of lack of funds will also be eligible for this hand out.
According to George Fogel, Rasmussen College, Inc. Vice President of Compliance and Financial Services, the new stimulus plan will benefit college students directly in several ways.

"The stimulus plan includes a $17 billion of additional funding for [Pell, which increases the amount that an individual student may receive. Beginning July 2009, students will be eligible for up to $5,350 per academic year, which is up from $4,731. Additionally, in July 2010, Pell will go up again to a maximum of $5,550," Fogel said.

Fogel explained the Higher Education Tax Credit as a tax credit plan that gives students a $2,500 tax credit every year for paid tuition, which is 40 percent refundable. Thus solidifying the young peoples vote.

He has already assured himself of the government employees and the teachers union votes with his propensity to allow them special treatment, even to exclude them from his socialised health plan and remain in their more "rich" union plans.And let's not forget the Card check proposal to allow the "goons" force non-union employees to vote for a union. This certainly is not done for any reason other than a pay back to the Union movement!

The Amnesty bill will satisfy the Hispanic voters, and the confirmation of Sotomayor
to the supreme Court will motivate those Hispanics who are not for illegals getting the easy way to all the goodies of citizenship, to vote for Obama.

And finally there is in the table the heinous bill to force Catholic hospitals and Catholic doctors, who think that abortion is a mortal sin, to perform abortions. This will make the feminists dance for joy and be sure to pull the lever for Obama in 2112!

If he pulls all this off the Conservatives will have a very difficult time prying him out of the Oval Office in 2112!!

WAKE UP OBAMA YOU ARE PRESIDENT NOT EMPORER OR KING!

One of president Obama's favorite phrases is, "you are put on notice" or variations on that type of order. Perhaps it is true what one political sage has said about Obama.
"What Obama's radicalism tells us is that he is not a man who is moved by rational discourse. He is not a man who is willing to be convinced that he is mistaken." --Center for Security Policy Senior Middle East Fellow Caroline Glick

It is not the duty or the prerogative of an elected official of the Federal government, even the president, to give orders to the people who elected him!
He has the constitutional right to give orders to the military commanders as their Commander in Chief, but there is nothing in the Constitution that gives him the right to order the populace to do anything except in a time of declared war. Then he can declare martial law that essentially dictates what his electorate can or cannot due.

This country fought a long and costly war to throw off the dictates and abuses of England's King George.Problems began when England passed the Writs of Assistance, which gave British officials the right to seize illegal goods, and to examine any building or ship without proof of cause. This was a powerful weapon against smuggling, but most importantly to the Colonists; it allowed the invasion of their privacy. This was crossing the line and violating the rights of an English man. During the Seven Years War, the British sent over ten thousand troops to America to deal with property problems at the "frontier". This cost a large amount of money, and Britain did not want to see the sum come out of its own pocket. To pay for some of the expense, Britain began to pass acts to tax the colonists and lighten the severe debt the empire was facing.

If this sounds familiar it is. What has happened since Obama took office is that he has run the national debt to an estimated 1.3 trillion dollars. The largest national debt in our history, and to add fuel to the conflagration that Obama and his henchman have created. He tells us Americans, 49% of us did not vote for him, that like it or not he will have National health Care. As he says "you are put on notice that we will have National Health Care"!

In 1765 the British passed a stamp act that required the colonies(America to be)to use specially stamped British paper to print all legal documents and even playing cards. This was because the previously passed Sugar Tax had failed to raise enough money to pay for the troops stationed in the colonies.

The Colonists were angered because they believed that the British Parliament did not care about or understand them and therefore did not have the American people's best interest at heart. The acts imposed by England to try to control and monitor America only succeeded in furthering its Independence. The Colonists were left with two options as a result of the Stamp Act, neither of which were very appealing; either confront parliament, and risk a fight with the much larger and more powerful mother land of England, or succumb to the act without complaining and possibly give up the right to self govern for good.

We Americans are facing legislation in the three hallmarks of Obama's march to socialism. Cap and Trade, Obama Health Care and his economic stimulus that has been estimated at between $700bn and $1 trillion.
If this is not a call to a peaceful revolution against a tyrannical government that appears to not care what type of legacy they leave for coming generations. Nor do they think of the burden that all this debt will cause to the taxpayers who trusted them enough to send them to Washington!

The royalty in Washington, who will never have to face the hardship that their "Spendulus" will bring to the American tax payers, who trusted them to look out for their(voters) interests, have put our interests behind the fear of offending their "messiah"!
Obama is no King, no Emperor and no Messiah except to those who want to see America brought to it's knees and the free enterprise system destroyed. And they will get their wish if voters do not revolt at the polls in November 2010 and throw the "betrayers" out!

WHY IS AARP SO SILENT ON THE THREAT OF OBAMA CARE?

There are as of this moment 306,904,829 people alive and living in the USA.Of these rapidly approaching 400 million people just under 13% are 65 years or older!
This is equal to the total Black population in the USA and just two percent less that the Latino population according to the latest census reports.

My question, being in the age group over 65, is why do we not hear more alarm bells from the organisation that claims to represent seniors.
Many of the 41 million Americans with Medicare feel betrayed by AARP.

The Washington leadership of the powerful senior citizens' organization has opted to join forces with the White House to steamroll legislation through Congress. It is legislation that may irrevocably damage Medicare.

Most of the 35 million people who belong to AARP are drawn to the group's insurance programs, prescription drug deals and hotel discounts. These and other businesses bring AARP hundreds of millions of dollars annually in revenue. Despite this membership, it isn't clear that many older Americans have retained AARP's Washington politicos to serve as their political voice. We have not. AARP is a big business; it shouldn't pretend to represent its members' political interests, few of whom have been asked their view of this dangerous Medicare overhaul.With a revenue of $1.08 billion in 2006, and expenditures of 1.14 billion AARP is a lot like the Federal government. They spend more money than they have!

Health care costs are escalating out of controi. Families are finding it.-harder .to obtain needed medical care. Spending on health care is taking a huge and growing bite out of federal and local government budgets, and the recession has made those budgets tighter. The spread of AIDS, the need for beper treatment of drug and alcohol diction, a chronic shortage of doctors in rural areas and an aging population are imposing further burdens on the nation's health system calls for. health care reform thus are growing. Faced with demands for more government spending on health care, but with limited or dec1ining to meet those demandsd, a number of governmerq commissions are busy studying the mounting health care problem.
Both in and out of government, critics complain there is too much waste in the system. They say it is too bureaucratic; that doctors make too much money; that they perform too many ,unnecessary tests and procedures.
A snapshot of America's health care crisis? No, it is a description of the heath care debate in Canada-the very same Canada to which some American look to for a solution to America's health care problems!

So just how bad is the Canadian Health Care system. This report from a Canadian doctor should give you some insight as to what Obama care will be like if we let it pass!
"Taxes are very high in Canada. I worked 2 months last year and 20% of my earnings were withheld specifically for Canada health and pension. This can be as high as 33-42%, not counting the infamous PST and GST charges for everything and every service you purchace.
2. There is a huge medical bureaucracy that laymen rarely see-it is highly discouraging to any new doctors to the country.
3. It is much more expensive. There are no $4 Walmart prescriptions, the cheapest generic med starts around $20. Most notably not paid for are long term meds after heart attacks and chemotherapy.4. Waiting lists decide who gets health care. There are about 10-12,000 people here in a city about the size of Greeley who do not even have a family doctor to get them onto a list as there are not enough family doctors. There are no cardiologists or neurosurgeons for over 400 miles. The local orthopedists and ophthalmologists are full and will not take any more referrals.
5. See above. The orthopedists closed their waiting lists as they are 2-3 years behind.
6. Canadians not only go to the US for medicine, they go to Germany and Mexico.
7. Doctors are paid less than $30 each to see a patient who is in for a visit. Average time spent by a Canadian doctor with a patient: 6 minutes.
8. See #4, also Toronto Sun newspaper last week, headlines where Nova Scotia ERs to close this summer for lack of doctors.

This letter to the editor of the Denver Post illustrates what type of problems come with beauracrat controlled medicine!
"If you really want to know about the nightmare of Canada's health-care system, you just have to study the Natasha Richardson case. She died because Quebec had no Flight-For-Life helicopter system, no nearby hospital that had a trauma center or neurology department, and after being taken to a hospital with neither of these, she then had to be driven to the nearest trauma center, which was 50 miles away. All the while, she was bleeding in her brain during a needless 2.5 hour delay. According to Tarek Razek, the director of trauma services for six hospitals in the Montreal area, "Our system isn't set up for traumas and doesn't match what's available ...in the States".

Natasha Richardson died because she decided to go skiing in a country with a Third World health-care system. Would you be willing to take that kind of risk?

As the Canadians as so fond of saying, SORRY, but this is the way medicine is in Canada.
So, I ask the question again. Where are the AARP people demanding that any change in our great health care system, even though expensive, does not include the same odious restrictions and problems that Canada has?

THE GORE SCAM COMES WITH A HEFTY PRICE TAG!!

Despite the fact that more scientists deny that the treat of Global Warming is actually a threat, and that we are entering a period of global cooling. People like Al Gore and president Obama are still pushing scare tactics, to what end very few people actually understand.

Is it the quest for wealth and power or is it the new religion of those who have tried their best to destroy Americans belief in the real GOD, and substituting the "mother eath" as their diety.

Perhaps the speech that Al Gore, the pied piper of global warming, gave to the faculty and students at Oxford University in England, will enlighten those of you who are credulous about the minds of people like myself who say there is an evil purpose behind this ecological movement.

"Former Vice President Al Gore declared that the Congressional climate bill will help bring about “global governance.”

“I bring you good news from the U.S., “Gore said on July 7, 2009 in Oxford at the Smith School World Forum on Enterprise and the Environment, sponsored by UK Times.

“Just two weeks ago, the House of Representatives passed the Waxman-Markey climate bill,” Gore said, noting it was “very much a step in the right direction.” President Obama has pushed for the passage of the bill in the Senate and attended a G8 summit this week where he agreed to attempt to keep the Earth's temperatures from rising more than 2 degrees C.

Gore touted the Congressional climate bill, claiming it “will dramatically increase the prospects for success” in combating what he sees as the “crisis” of man-made global warming.

“But it is the awareness itself that will drive the change and one of the ways it will drive the change is through global governance and global agreements.” Source: Marc Romano, Climate Depot

In addition,there are calls for a global carbon tax that have been urged at recent UN global warming conferences. In December 2007, the UN climate conference in Bali, urged the adoption of a global carbon tax that would represent “a global burden sharing system, fair, with solidarity, and legally binding to all nations.”

“Finally someone will pay for these [climate related] costs,” Othmar Schwank, a global tax advocate, said at the 2007 UN conference after a panel titled “A Global CO2 Tax.”

Schwank noted that wealthy nations like the U.S. would bear the biggest burden based on the “polluters pay principle.” The U.S. and other wealthy nations need to “contribute significantly more to this global fund,” Schwank explained. He also added, “It is very essential to tax coal.”

The 2007 UN conference was presented with a report from the Swiss Federal Office for the Environment titled “Global Solidarity in Financing Adaptation.” The report stated there was an “urgent need” for a global tax in order for “damages [from climate change] to be kept from growing to truly catastrophic levels, especially in vulnerable countries of the developing world.”Once again pushing catastopy if we fail to agree to what they want us to do!!

The tens of billions of dollars per year generated by a global tax would “flow into a global Multilateral Adaptation Fund” to help nations cope with global warming, according to the report.

Schwank said a global carbon dioxide tax is an idea long overdue that is urgently needed to establish “a funding scheme which generates the resources required to address the dimension of challenge with regard to climate change costs.”

'Redistribution of wealth'

The environmental group Friends of the Earth advocated the transfer of money from rich to poor nations during the 2007 UN climate conference.

"A climate change response must have at its heart a redistribution of wealth and resources,” said Emma Brindal, a climate justice campaigner coordinator for Friends of the Earth.

Schwank is a consultant with the Switzerland based Mauch Consulting firm. Schwank said at least “$10-$40 billion dollars per year” could be generated by the tax.

In other words, in the manner of hypocritical power grabbers the world over, the method in which they gain the purse strings is less important than the results of gaining control of said purse strings. Source:News Busters

The environmental group Friends of the Earth, in attendance in Bali, also advocated the transfer of money from rich to poor nations.
“A climate change response must have at its heart a redistribution of wealth and resources,” said Emma Brindal, a climate justice campaigner coordinator for Friends of the Earth.

I think a more honest name for Brindal's group would be Friends of Taxing the US to Give Money to the Unaccountable UN. The real goal of all these so-called climate change advocates is the taxation of rich nations so that they can transfer money to poor nations- socialism in action.

MIT climate scientist Dr. Richard Lindzen warned about these types of carbon regulations earlier this year. "Controlling carbon is a bureaucrat's dream. If you control carbon, you control life," Lindzen said in March 2007. In addition, many critics have often charged that proposed tax and regulatory “solutions” were more important to the promoters of man-made climate fears than the accuracy of their science.

I wish I could be optimistic about the possibility that any member of the national press corps will actually write in a negative manner about this attempt. Instead of defending their country against unaccountable bureaucrats and 'activists', it seems to this blogger that they are too busy trying support a President who will assist in the process of giving away US sovereignty!