Arizona SB1070 – Real Change That Gives America Hope

April 25, 2010

By David A. Black, Sr.

On Friday, Governor Brewer, from Arizona, signed SB1070.  Instantly, the critics went ballistic.

President Obama used the swearing in ceremony of new citizens to criticize Arizona legislators saying, “Our failure to act responsibly, at the Federal level, will only open the door to irresponsibility by others, and that includes, for example, the recent efforts in Arizona.”

Brian Williams, on NBC Nightly News, said on Friday, “A central question in the news tonight, ‘is it legal, is it right, for a police officer to come up to you and ask you to produce I.D. if you’re suspected of entering the country illegally?  This is playing out tonight in the State of Arizona.”

Jose Diaz Balart of TeleMundo in Phoenix reports, “Late this afternoon, Governor Jan Brewer signed the controversial Bill, the toughest State Law against illegal immigration in the country. With her signature, Arizona is in direct conflict with the White House…  The law makes illegal immigration a State crime and requires local police to check the status of anyone they believe is here illegally.”

Actually, if any of the critics had taken five minutes and read SB1070, instead of simply adopting liberal talking points, they would have found that, contrary to the ‘leftist’ talking points, Law Enforcement Officers may only inquire about an individual’s immigration status during “lawful contact”.  Additionally, any complaint of illegal immigration status, levied by one person against another and found to be frivolous, is punishable by monetary fines against the accuser.

Does potential questioning of an individual’s immigration status invite racial profiling?  It could, although the Bill contains specific language banning ‘racial profiling’.  Then again, most of those opposed to SB1070 support affirmative action which is based on racial profiling.  Why is it, that the practice is welcomed on one hand, and demonized on the other?

To solve for this, if Law Enforcement Officers adopts a ‘standard operating procedure’ of simply using the same line of questioning with every person, of whom they request identification, questioning legal immigration status becomes just another question.  No prejudice, no malice, no racial profiling.  Regardless, Governor Brewr is calling for additional training of Law Enforcement to ensure against racial profiling and to maintain respect of the peoples rights.

Of course, President Obama, who can never pass up on an opportunity for societal divisiveness, instructed the Justice Department to ‘closely monitor’ activities in Arizona for ‘Civil Rights Violations’.

Governor Brewer emphasized, “Racial Profiling is illegal.  It will not be tolerated in America, and it certainly will not be tolerated in Arizona.”

“This Bill,” Governor Brewer continued.  “The ‘Support Our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act’, strengthens the laws of our State.  It protects all of us, every Arizona citizen, and everyone here, in our State lawfully, and it does so while ensuring that the Constitutional Rights of all, in Arizona remain solid, stable, and steadfast.”

Nonetheless, cries of the Bill being unconstitutional rang out from almost every protest.  Is this the same Constitution they were willing to throw under the carpet, as if hiding dust and debris from visitors, when backing the passage of the Healthcare Reform, or bailing out the financial, housing, and auto industries?

Why is it, every time legislation to protect our country and our citizens is passed, it is immediately deemed unconstitutional, yet laws and programs that clearly are not in accordance with the Constitution receive accolades?

So the question arises, is Arizona SB1070 constitutional?

We all know Article I, Section 8, Clause 4, states, “Congress shall have Power… To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization.”

However, Section 13 of SB1070 refers to the Bill’s ‘Short Title’ as the “Support Our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act”.  There is no reference in the title, nor anywhere in the Bill, to “Rule of Naturalization”.  That makes SB1070 a “Public Safety Law”, not an “Immigration Law”.

Upon reading the Bill, the language of the Bill does not even allow the State’s Legislature, Law Enforcement, or any member of the State’s Judiciary the Authority to determine any individuals ‘immigration status’.  Rather, all questions, regarding immigration status, are immediately deferred to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).  The last time I checked, ICE is a Federal Agency.

Arizona SB1070 does not even give the State the Authority to deport anyone.  Any person found to be in the country illegally, is to be transported to Federal Custody, and if said transportation includes removing an individual to a location outside the boundaries of the State, the State must first receive a Court Order to do so.

Clause 15, of Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution says, “Congress shall have Power… To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions.”

All enforcement activities in SB1070 defer to existing Federal laws.  One could argue that Law Enforcement is the ‘active duty branch’ of the ‘State Militia’, and that the constant flow of illegal immigrants could be considered a form of societal invasion.

Furthermore, Article VI, Clause 2, stipulates, “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the Law of the Land.”

Because SB1070 consistently defers to Federal Authorities, it should be deemed as being “in Pursuance” of the Constitution, where we have established Congress has a duty to create “Rules of Naturalization”.

Article VI, Clause 3, clarifies that, “The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution.”

That means that, by passing SB1070 into law, the Arizona Legislature is actually executing their duties under the Constitution.  I am willing to bet you are wishing we could say that about Congress.  Instead, Congress is too busy taking over the financial industry, the auto industry, the housing industry, the healthcare industry, increasing taxes, passing laws that do not pass constitutional muster, and spending our way into oblivion, to actually perform the duties obligated to them by the Constitution.

In fact, we should applaud the Arizona Legislature.  Now residents, and those of us who are asked for our I.D. while visiting their great State, can announce with great pride,

I AM AN AMERICAN!


President Obama’s Biggest Failure and Success

March 3, 2010

Approximately one year ago, Rush Limbaugh countered Barack Obama’s continuing mantra of “Hope and Change” with a Hope of his own, that President Obama’s Socialistic agenda fails.

Although Mr. Limbaugh articulated his message clearly, the “left” could not break the habit of misconstruing his words, and soon there was an all out media blitz.  With the simplest of ease, any grade-schooler could have put together a seemingly endless montage of media ‘talking-heads’ stating; “Rush Limbaugh says he hopes the President fails.”  Very few in the media defended Mr. Limbaugh’s statement.

Even the First Lady, Michelle Obama, jumped on the ‘Rush-bashing’ bandwagon, obviously suffering from willful ignorance, when she aped the media in wrongfully citing Rush’s statement, and then claimed; “If the President fails, then America fails.”  Then asked, “Is that what you want for this country?”

President Obama has complained, on numerous occasions, about “inheriting” a financial meltdown.  However, not once has President Obama admitted that, as a member of the Senate, he helped create the very meltdown he fully credits to the former President.  According to the rants of President Obama, and members of his administration, President Bush was an absolute failure.

Watch it!  Mr. President, you are on the verge of contradicting your wife.  Mrs. Obama informed us that, beyond a doubt, if the President fails, so too, does the country.  Should America assume that you, Mr. President, or your wife, believes that our proud nation is a failure?

Oh, that’s right.  President Obama already explained that we were in a tailspin, spiraling out of control, when he took the helm.  But for his brave and determined actions, America was destined for absolute ruin.

So, what bold, great actions can we attribute to President Obama that has turned our nation from the path of destruction to a soaring success?  Let’s examine what the President has accomplished in his first year in the Oval Office.

We have watched the President travel all over the world, and listened to him badmouth America at almost every stop.

We have listened to President Obama’s adolescent like claims, that former President G.W. Bush is single-handedly to blame for all of the problems our nation faces today.

We have watched him gratefully accept gifts that denounce America, while he tries to earn ‘Brownie Points’ from our communist foes.

We have experienced national embarrassment when he bowed to foreign leaders, not once, but on at least two separate occasions.

Although partially successful, by inflicting damage and creating an atmosphere of control in some financial institutions, President Obama failed in his attempt at a hostile Government takeover of Wall Street.  After the Presidents support of the “Financial Bailout”, with a ‘sky is falling’ mentality, the President, who claimed he did not want to run the banks, turned around, and in his next breath appointed new bank executives, began dictating salaries, and refused banks that offered to pay back the money, borrowed by the Government to initially “lend” to the banks.  Even now, many banks are trying desperately to rid themselves of government intervention.

The President has succeeded however, in partnering with the Labor Unions, most significantly in the act of taking control of a large portion of the American auto industry, namely General Motors and Chrysler.  His latest commitment to this partnership is in naming Union Boss, Andrew Stern to his newly formed Debt Commission.

Then there is the failed ‘Stimulus Bill’.  The President was sure that the stimulus bill had to be passed immediately.  Without a stimulus, America was going to fail.  Unemployment was going to rise to over ten percent, we needed to supply more money into the public because the financial institutions were on the verge of ‘post-bailout bankruptcy’, threatening devastation to the taxpayers.  Businesses were shutting down, bailed out banks were not lending money, the housing industry was sinking like a lead balloon, people were losing their homes, livelihoods, and the promise of a future.

President Obama and the Congressional Democrats forced their will on America, and passed their $1 trillion ‘Stimulus Bill’.  After unaccountably spending some 20% of the money, nothing has changed except the size of our nation’s unsecured debt.

Reported unemployment still jumped to over ten percent, financial institutions continue to fail, people continue to lose their homes and livelihoods as companies close their doors at a rapid pace, and our financial future looks very bleak.  As to overwhelming expenses to the taxpayers, we do not even know how much it will cost for what the Government has spent until now, let alone where they have spent it.  So much for the promise of transparency and accountability.

Ironically, when it comes to spending America’s money on socialistic government programs, such as bailouts, stimulus, and efforts to socialize healthcare, President Obama is fearlessly bold and willingly decisive.  He rushes headlong into promoting the most socialistic of programs with an urgency only matched by con artists, or Circus Callers yelling, “Hurry!  Hurry!”

However, in matters affecting our national security, and supporting the troops, deployed at his command, the President’s resolve wavers.  Instead of remaining brave and determined, as is his Constitutional responsibility, he demonstrates a lack of intestinal fortitude, taking months to make a decision such as that regarding the deployment of reinforcements in Afghanistan.

The President consistently proves to be unwilling to commit to actions against our nations invaders and enemies, yet has boldly circumvented the Constitution.  Instead of nominating people to necessary offices, and allowing the Senate to fulfill their Constitutional duty of providing “Advice and Consent” through the confirmation process, the President, in performing his few successes, unflinchingly named Czars.

So, the President has, in his first year in the Oval Office, taken control of a large portion of one of the last remnants of American industrialization in the auto industry, and partnered heavily with the unions.  He has attempted to takeover the financial industry, committed to unprecedented spending, committing our future generations to an unsustainable burden of debt, and continues his attempts to take control of our healthcare industry, or financially speaking, up to 15% of our nation’s economy. No communist mentality here.  But, I digress.

All of this said, President Obama’s biggest failure is that he has no comprehension of what America is, or what makes the People of our nation great. 

President Obama fails miserably in understanding that America is envied and loved, the world over, for her iconic representation of Liberty, individual Freedom, and the promotion of Independence. 

The President fails to understand that our common conviction to these core values is what makes America great; that individuals believe so strongly, they are willing to pay the ultimate sacrifice to protect these values, not just for our own Freedom, but for that of our families, friends, and neighbors; and yes, for our country.

The President fails to understand that Freedom allows for different political ideologies, but that these core components of our belief may not be jeopardized, for they are the foundation of our country, and every American.

Amazingly, the President’s biggest success is derived from his biggest failure.  President Obama, with a little assistance from his leftist base, has roused the “Sleeping Dragon”, galvanizing America into action.  The President, along with the Congressional Democrats, have given voice to the “Silent Majority”, causing conservatives to rally around our liberty and freedom; and we are fighting mad.

American’s are standing up, united in telling the Government,

Stop!  We are fed up with politics as usual!  American Government is out of control and we are not taking it anymore!  We will not stand by and idly watch incompetent politicians destroy our nation, or our children’s future.

Government has overstepped it’s permissions and authority and we the People are demanding it’s members to cease and desist all such activities.  If Government refuses to listen, we the People will exercise our Constitutional Authority and take back control of our nation!


Health Care Reform Act of 2010; Dead On Arrival

January 21, 2010

David A. Black, Sr.

Leading the way to truly reforming Congress, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts elected Republican Senatorial Candidate, Scott Brown to fill a Senate Seat held by a member of the Kennedy Family for 50 plus years.  I guess Massachusetts agreed with Mr. Browns assessment that he was not running for “Kennedy’s Seat”, but rather the “People’s Seat”.

As a matter of fact, Senator Brown beat the ‘media, odds-on favorite’, Democratic Candidate, Martha Coakley by a decisive 5% margin, giving a climactic ending to a race featuring an incalculable long-shot.  This, even after President Obama came to town, stumping for Coakley and ‘dissing’ Brown because he drives an old pick-up truck.  Sure makes you wonder who is out of touch with the People.

The election of a Conservative Republican, in a State largely held by Democrats, has significant meaning.  For instance, we can draw from the election result is that Massachusetts gave the nation Hope for real Change in American Politics.

It is really too bad that Representative Barney Frank, of Massachusetts, does not understand the message the voters of his State sent to Congress.  Rep. Frank thinks the necessary Change is to require 67 votes to block a filibuster, instead of 60.  He did not have a problem with the standard 60 votes while he and his fellow Democratic Congressmen were forcing their Government take-over of the American Health Care System down our collective throats.  I wonder if he has been reading the writing on the wall?

No, the real message is that the People are fed up, and want an end to “politics as usual”.  Most of the Massachusetts voters backed Candidate Obama because he promised to do just that.  Instead, the nation has watched President Obama, and his Democratic Majority, use strong-arm tactics in politically hijacking America.

Now the People are doing what comes natural to American Patriots, they are retaliating.  Like Flight 93, like Richard Reeds’ attempt at a ‘shoe bomb’, or the recent attempt to bomb the flight into Detroit from Amsterdam on Christmas, hijack a plane, win or lose, Americans will fight back; hijack our government, the reaction of the American People is the same.  It really does not matter what State we live in, Americans are not good at being willing victims.

Another distinct reality of Sen. Brown being elected is that the Health Care Reform Act, as envisioned by President Obama and constructed by his Democrat henchmen, is ‘Dead On Arrival’.  The loudest, most significant campaign promise made by Candidate Brown was that as Senator, he would be the forty-first vote to stop Health Care Reform and the Cap and Trade bill.

Prominent Democrats are already trying to establish new positions on these two bills.  After a year of the Democrats claiming they have a mandate from the People and constantly reminding us who won the election, now they are attempting a last stitch effort to save their latest socialistic take-over bid of the American economy.  That is, the Health Care System was soon to be added into the pot where the financial, auto, and housing industries are stewing.

If Mr. Brown holds true to his word, the fact that he has become the most recent addition to the United States Senate is good for America.  I only wish we could apply such impact to the man elected into the Oval Office.  Instead, the contrary is true, President Obama has proven to be only a detriment.

In fact, President Obama still doesn’t get it!  In his response to Sen. Brown’s election, he wore a look of disgusted concern indicating that Democrats must be more focused on the voter concerns.  Of course, I guess the idea of Obama attempting to distance himself from the debacle at center stage and throw his fellow Democrats under the bus, comes as no big surprise.

America, as in the Revolution, with the Tea Party, Massachusetts has taken the lead in returning our nations sovereignty.

DO NOT STOP NOW!

Unlike President Obama, who dragged his feet in reinforcing our military in Afghanistan, we can all stand firm in November and reinforce the message delivered by our brethren in Massachusetts.  Together, we can fight back and stop the current hijacking of America.

Just to clarify, I am not backing Republicans entirely.  Rather, I am supportive of the referendum set forth by the voters in Massachusetts by endorsing Conservatism.

In closing, I will borrow a famous quote from Neil Armstrong; the traditionally Democratic State of Massachusetts, electing Republican Scott Brown to the United States Senate, is one small step for Republicans, one giant leap for Conservatism.


Health Care Reform – A Means to Something More Sinister

October 16, 2009

Part 3 of 3

By David A. Black, Sr.

Part of the problem with the Proposed Health Care Reform Act is that we cannot expect to hear the truth of the issues in “honest debate”.  For instance, the “Death Panel” was adamantly denied, until it was removed from the proposal.

The proposal will allegedly cover the health care of illegal immigrants.  Supporters repudiate this, claiming the language forbids coverage of illegal immigrants.

However, there is nothing in the proposal to allow verification of any recipient’s legal status.  When Conservatives offer legislation to amend the discrepancy, Liberals reject the amendments.

Liberals forget there are laws prohibiting illegal immigration; yet they are here.  Because illegal immigrants ignore our federal immigration laws, it is logical to assume they will ignore any legislated restrictions to “nationalized” health care.

In his speech to the Joint Houses of Congress, President Obama claimed to promote “choice and competition” by officially announcing a “Public Option”.

The president declared, “I have no interest in putting insurance companies out of business. They provide a legitimate service, and employ a lot of our friends and neighbors.  I just want to hold them accountable.”

Ironically, that is similar to President Obama’s comments about not wanting control of General Motors, Chrysler, and companies affected by the “Financial Bail-Out”.  In the aftermath, we find that the opposite is true.  The president, and his administration, have asserted unprecedented control of “Private Industry”.  Why should we expect Health Care to be treated any differently?

The president went on to say, “… it would only be an option for those who don’t have insurance…  In fact, based on Congressional Budget Office estimates, we believe that less than 5% of Americans would sign up.”

Remember, I wrote to begin with, “we cannot expect to hear the truth”; you decide.

The president first cites to the falsely inflated number of 15% of Americans being uninsured at some point, and then exaggerates the number by doubling the time period, erringly assuming that doing so automatically doubles the number of people affected.

How so?  He claimed that one in three Americans goes without coverage at some point; that is more than 30%.   Then something closer to the truth slips out when he cited the CBO saying, “…only 5% will sign up”.

Mr. President, is it 15%, 30%, or 5%?  You referred to, or quoted all three percentages in the same speech.  With all due respect Sir, annoying little facts, known as the truth, will come back to bite you when they are misrepresented.

President Obama promised the following points in his “sales pitch” for the “Public Option;

1.  No tax subsidies for the “Public Option”.

2.  No additional deficit spending.

3.  Not a dollar of the Medicare trust fund will be used to pay for the “Public Option”.

4.  Greater security for the middle-class, not higher taxes.

Ignoring the fact that President Obama contradicted every point in his speech, and assuming the president intends to abide by these four points.  Logically, to accommodate the “Public Option”, the president is proposing another Government Subsidized Entity, similar to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. (Who, along with GM and Chrysler, the newest GSE’s, are going bankrupt)

Think about it!  Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, GM, Chrysler, and the financial industry staggering under the weight of the government…These are prime examples of what to expect for our health care system under a “Public Option”.

The only way for a “Public Option” to abide by the four points in his “sales pitch”, and maintain “choice and competition”, is to mandate that the ‘Public Provider” abide by the same laws enforced on “Private Providers”.  This means, among other things, the “Public Provider” would be required to establish “security holdings”, (typically 70 – 80% of their policy values) to ensure the financial ability to cover claims.

In order to stay in existence, insurers must guarantee the principles, which are the premiums paid by the people.  To do this, insurance companies invest the premiums they collect to cover claims that may exist on their policies and for their own business returns as well, including operating costs.

This means, the government, through the “Public Provider” would necessarily purchase stocks, bonds, real estate, and commodities to amass profits. (Not a far stretch after the Auto and Financial Bail-Outs)

Politicians engaged in such activities create obvious potential dangers.  In short, your tax dollars would be risked, or “invested”, in the stock market to cover the costs of the “Public Option”.

Keep in mind, during his speech, President Obama informed us that nationalizing health care through a “Public Option” is only a part of his plan; he reminded his “Progressive Friends” that, “The ‘Public Option’ is only a means to that end – and we should remain open to other ideas that accomplish our ultimate goals.”

What are the “ultimate goals” of the presidents “Progressive Friends”?

Government “investing” tax dollars in “Private Industry” is a one-way ticket to corruption.  It will not be long before politicians assume massive control of the market through legislation, to “protect” the investments of the “tax payers”.

Considering the government prints money at will, this creates an environment in which private insurance companies cannot compete.  In relatively short time, financial pressures will force “Private Providers” to file for bankruptcy.

There is no better “investment” than to acquire failing competitors.  Therefore, through “free market capitalist investing, “private assets” would end up in the government’s possession.

DANGER! The president is proposing a “hostile takeover” of our nation.  He is simply using Health Care Reform as a vehicle to reach a more sinister destination.  The “Public Option” creates a potential “enemy from within”, using Capitalism, to accomplish Socialism.

Nationalized Health Care is, by its nature, another form of Socialism being introduced to a “free” society; another attempt to gain control of all major methods of production in an effort to confiscate wealth and dictate the lives of individuals through mandates and distribution of means.

Redistribution, or the practice of taking from one societal group to provide for another group, is Socialism.

The government dictating compliance by mandating involvement of private individuals in government run programs is Communism.

America was created, by design, as a Capitalist Society; a social system based on individual rights through the separation of the economy and the Government; with a limited government, relegated to the duties of protecting the rights of the People.  America is founded on the rights, of individuals, to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of happiness.  Americans enjoy the right to possess private property, and maintain the right to individually contract to, and profit from our own labor.

The right to Life and Liberty guarantees us to freedom from oppression, freedom from burdensome government, and the right to freedom of actions in our individual Pursuit of Happiness, so long as no person or group infringes or violates the rights of another.

Previously, in “The Health Care Reform Act of 2009 – Crisis or Coercion”, I disputed the “facts” the president termed “undisputable”.

In “National Health Care and the Constitution”, I called the president out, defying him to present an argument, giving him or Congress the Constitutional Power or Authority to legislate “National Health Care Reform”.

Now, I am declaring the potential dangers of a sinister agenda.

I reject giving the President, or Congress, the Power to implement legislation that could, so easily, be used as a means to anything as sinister as what I have described.

The Founders intended to create a nation of “free men”, fundamentally rooted in societal and economic capitalism, to preserve the natural rights of each individual.  Any attempt to vilify capitalism, or provide support of socialism is, in a word, un-American.

I maintain, that if America allows the nationalization of our health care system, we are only a step away from saying goodbye to our Representative Republic, and hello to a Socialist State; in essence, saying goodbye to Liberty, and welcoming Tyranny.

So long as a single Patriot fights for Liberty, Freedom lives.  Never stop fighting.

Part 1 of 3:  The Health Care Reform Act of 2009 – Crisis or Coercion

Part 2 of 3:  National Health Care and the Constitution


Obama and Democrats Desire to Silence Opposition

August 18, 2009

Obama apparently wants his opposition to shut up and get out of his way.  At a Democratic rally for Virginia gubernatorial candidate Creigh Deeds on Thursday, August 06, 2009, President Obama let his true feelings, regarding his opposition, out of the bag.

President Obama told the approximate 1800 people in attendance, “I expect to be held responsible for… these issues… because, I’m the President.  But… But… But, I don’t want the folks who created the mess… I don’t want the folks who created the mess doing a lot of talkin’.  I want them to just get out of the way so we can clean up the mess.  I don’t mind cleanin’ up after ‘em but don’t do a lot of talkin’” [transcribed verbatim]

The President reiterated that he inherited a $1.3 trillion deficit, claiming that without his policies, going forward, we would have had an even higher deficit.  Of course, he made an exception for his stimulus bill, proclaiming that we had to have the stimulus to jumpstart the economy.

Obama went on to analogize that, you cannot charge up the credit card, going on shopping sprees that did not grow the economy, then hand over the bill and say, why haven’t you paid it off yet.

“I got that bill from you!”  Obama exclaimed.

Someone really should point out to the President, that he did not actually inherit the deficit, he actually assisted in creating it.  He was a U.S. Senator, and as such, he did vote for the Bush stimulus bill, the banking bailout, and the wasteful auto bailout.  You cannot inherit a “mess” if you are, at least in part, responsible for creating it.  So, where did that bill come from?

Although the President was speaking primarily about the economy at the time, considering his actions and attitude over the last seven months, since he took office, it is easy to see that he finally voiced the overriding opinion of most of the Democratic Party leadership, in regards to any who oppose them.

We are realizing the truth of that as the members of Congress have returned home to their constituencies and are being met with staunch resistance to the idea of nationalizing Health Care.  The Democrats must have thought they had everyone fooled by the constant use of the word ‘reform’.

We are witnessing staunch rejection of the Nationalized Health Care proposal, citizens are coming out of the woodworks to oppose it.  The President and his supporting staff of congressional thieves are reacting by trying to discredit any who stand in opposition, even attempting scare tactics to quiet us.

When Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi witnessed raucous protests against President Bush, some of which referred to the President as another Adolf Hitler, and other such intelligent remarks, Speaker Pelosi was eager to proclaim that she was ”a fan of disruptors.  Although she has made a conscious effort to back away from her comments, Speaker Pelosi went so far as to claim that protesters of the proposed Nationalized Health Care are Un-American, intimating they are swastika-wearing Nazis.  Several Democrats have echoed the disparagement espoused by Homeland Security Secretary Napolitano when she termed the opposition as right-wing terrorists.

However, I noticed, while watching the coverage of the current public dissent, the protesting conservatives seemed relatively civil, nothing like the rowdy affairs in which I have watched Liberal Democrats involved.  I witnessed no pushing, no shoving.  In fact, I do not believe I even seen anyone rushing a stage of platform.

Not until, of course, the Liberal left counter-protesters began showing up after Senator Majority Leader Harry Reid called the protests “phony”, and told supporters to “punch back twice as hard”.  Senator Reid might as well have handed the left wing extremists a license to attack.

How ironic, when Liberal Democrats participate in public protests, burning flags, blocking streets, disrupting businesses, and creating havoc, they are asserting their first amendment rights.  When Conservative Republicans dissent against, what we believe to be irresponsible legislation, in a reportedly loud, but peaceful demonstrations, they are attacked by the same people that protect the Liberals.  As much as the Democrats deny it, there is a double standard applied here.

When the Republicans held the majority, Democrats kicked and screamed for compromise.  Where is the compromise now that Democrats hold the majority?  The word has seemingly dropped from their vocabulary.

Take notice America, the Liberal Democratic mind-set is on full display.  When not the majority, Democrats claimed without merit, they were being steam-rolled, ignored, relegated to the sidelines, and repetitiously demanded compromise.  Now that they have the power of the majority, Democrats are doing exactly what they falsely claimed their opposition did.

The proof is in the actions of Speaker of the House Pelosi, who in a move to stifle the Republicans, in January imposed new house rules that require any legislation to cut taxes, must include offsetting  measures to maintain tax revenues, dollar for dollar.

The Democrats have accused Republicans of obstructionism.  Obstructionism?  OK!  Fine!  You’re right!  We are obstructionists!  We are patriotically, intentionally obstructing the liberal left from blatant attempts to negate more of our personal liberty and freedom by excessive empowerment of the Federal Government.  We are expressing whole-hearted dissent against being led further down the path to Socialism.

However, might I remind you, the Republicans are the minority, Democrats can pass any legislation they want, yet still the battle cry goes out that we need to compromise.  The Democrats really do not want compromise, they want Republicans to roll over and accept the legislation with open arms, and vote like Democrats.

What Democrats really want is a scapegoat to take the heat for President Obama’s extremist agenda.  They want someone at whom they can point their fingers.  They need someone to blame for their failed ideology and policies.  Yes, they understand, full and well, the consequences and repercussions of passing Obama’s agenda.

Under President Obama, the Federal Government has imposed it’s power on the financial/banking industry, they continue to manipulate the housing market, and they have forced a partnership with the auto industry.  Now they are attempting a full court press by trying to force us into nationalized health care, and pushing to regulate the operations of private corporations’, and the ability of corporations to set executive salary structures.

Why should we give them the final say in repairing the “messes” that they created to begin with? I allude to the skyrocketing deficit, the inability to balance the budget, out of control spending, the impending failures of Social Security, Medicaid, and Medicare, and a consistent desire to grab more, and more power for the Government at the cost of individual liberty and freedom.

Too many of the same people that drove us to where we are, with blind personal ambition, are now attempting to position themselves as our saviors. They are setting themselves up to continue the usurpation of our rights. Seems kind of like Lucifer giving us directions at a fork in the road to the after-life.

Democrats are holding true to form in asserting that only Republicans are to be held accountable for their actions.  Democrats want to be judged by their intentions, even if their actions are that of a socialistic nature.  Where is it again, that good intentions pave a path to?

Meanwhile, Scary Barry, his Congressional Cronies, and the Miscreant Media sycophants continue to defy reality and try to convince us that the public dissention and protests are being drummed up by special interests.  Obama is even trying to redirect the public outpouring of dissent toward the big, bad, evil insurance companies.

Go figure.  I imagine telling the opposition to shut up falls under the category of, “Hope and Change”.


Cash for Clunkers – Deal? Or, No Deal?

August 9, 2009

So, here we are.  It only took the Government approximately two weeks to spend $1 billion (that is with a ‘B’, as in “Bucks”) on the “Cash for Clunkers” program.  Congress would have been happy to spend more of your hard-earned money up front, but $1 billion is all that was allocated in the bill.

Now we are looking at round two, and this time Congress is doubling the effort.  Because it worked so gol-darn well, the Government is going to authorize another $2 billion for the “Cash for Clunkers” program.  So ante up folks, Washington is feeling generous, as the 2010 campaigns will be getting under way.  They need a way to redistribute your wealth to make them look good and buy some more votes.

Let me state, for the record, I understand there are a lot of people that, due to the program, have new cars parked in their driveways that would not otherwise be there.  Also, there are that many older cars that no longer plague our roadways.  However, I must ask the question.  Have any of these people thanked you for your contribution to the betterment of their condition?

Yes, America.  You are now owed a great debt of gratitude for assisting in the purchases of all those new cars.  How many?  At $4500 each, $1 billion buys a total, of a little over 222,000 down payments on new cars.  At an average purchase price of approximately $25,000 per new car, the program should account for gross sales of just over $5.5 billion for the auto industry.

Bear in mind, the “Cash for Clunker” program allowed foreign manufacturers in on the deal as well, so Detroit and Government Motors will not glean all the profits; as a matter of fact, they held “true to form” and maintain their dismal market share.

For the moment however, let us assume all the cars purchased, with the assistance of the program, were purchased from Government Motors and Chrysler.  When you consider that most well run corporations operate at a profit of less than 10% of gross sales, and for purposes of recognizing that GM is now leaner and more efficient operating under President Obama, we will allow the full 10%; the program produces a profit of approximately $550 million.

If GM and Chrysler would have been the sole beneficiaries of the program, and all the profit went to repaying the massive bailout of the auto industry, they still owe the Taxpayers approximately 14.5 billion to the tax payers.

However, those $4500.00 payouts merely provide down payments; maybe we have missed the boat on this one.  Maybe the real payback is going to come from the interest earned by the finance companies, which the Government has their meaty little hooks in as well.  After all, according to the numbers used above, the finance companies would have financed some $4.75 billion, which would produce approximately $4.5 – 5 billion of gross revenues, to the finance companies, over the next five to six years.  At 10% profit, 100% of which being paid back to the Taxpayers, that should put another $500 million back in our pockets by the end of 2015, or a little under $100 million per year.  What a deal!

All right, it is time for a reality check.  The fact is, the money supplied to fund the “Cash for Clunkers” program, was first borrowed by the Government, some of which at rates reportedly as high as 30%.  In the end, you and I get to pay the tab for all those new cars, and we never even get to see them, let alone drive them.  Then of course, there is the pesky little fact that we get to pay for them at the government deficit rate, which means each car will cost up to $100,000.00 instead of the $25000.00 purchase price.  Oh, happy day!

Think about it; the Government borrows $1 billion to loan out in $4500 increments, to people who could not otherwise afford it, to purchase approximately 222,000 automobiles, at an average cost of $25,000, and we get to pay back an amount, of up to ten times the original amount borrowed by the government, to satisfy the debt.

I thought President Obama was being hailed, by some on the left, as the smartest President we have ever had.  I might be missing something here, but I do not understand the math on this one.  Maybe the tried and true formulas of mathematics have changed since I went to school; or maybe this is what they were referring to by “New Math”.

The simple truth is, America cannot afford this, or any other give-away programs intended for the sole purpose of buying votes.  “Cash for Clunkers” is not improving the economy or consumer confidence with any sustainable influence, nor will it.  Moreover, as I pointed out, the Taxpayers are going to be saddled with the debt.

In fact, we have yet to experience the unintentional consequences of the “Cash for Clunkers” program.  The program will provide a shortage of used cars and parts, thus driving up the cost of these vehicles.  You know, used cars, the very cars bought and driven by those who cannot afford new cars, but earn too much income to qualify for government assistance, the true middle class, and the actual people who will have to pay the bill in the end.

How many jobs will be lost due to the rising cost of used cars and the lack of parts?  Used car dealers will not be able to sell as many cars, thus they will maintain fewer salespeople.  Parts will be harder to come by, and consequently more expensive, thus causing closures and layoffs at small repair shops who thrive on keeping these cars running at the lowest possible cost.  In addition, how many of the people, assisted by the program, in purchasing new cars, will default on the loans, causing yet another hit on the still shaky financial industry?

No, folks.  It seems to me that Scary Barry and his Congressional Cronies have not thought this one through.  It seems there are too many negatives for the Taxpayers in this “Cash for Clunkers” deal.

Hey!  I got an idea!  How about, we tell Barack Obama Hood and his merry men in Congress to stop looking for ways give away and spend money that we do not have, in an effort to buy our votes?  Maybe instead, they can start looking for ways to begin paying down the national debt.

Mr. President, if you really want to give us something, give us a plan to restore our national financial security.  Give us a plan to secure our borders against invasions of all types, a plan to restore our nation and our military to the “superpower” status we have rightfully earned.  Give us a plan to reduce the size of the Federal Government, a plan to restore the value of our currency returning to a free market and capitalism.


Globalization of our Nation

June 17, 2009

As I proclaimed previously in “Cash for Clunkers”, the creation of Government Motors has firmly placed the Government in bed with the United Auto Workers (UAW).

The UAW still has a labor contract with Chrysler, who was bought out by FIAT. The Italian Government subsidizes FIAT, to offset the taxes paid from the sales of FIAT’s products in the U.S.

Just one big, happy, global, auto industry family, and you and I, the Taxpayers, are on the hook to pay for the wedding. Gee, not only did we not get a piece of cake, we were never invited to the wedding. No, we were never even consulted about the new arrangements of intimacy.

Then too, we cannot forget to add our new “Dutch Uncle”, the Chinese, to the equation. The Chinese will not be reduced to eating leftovers after becoming the single largest holder of American debt. Now that the Chinese have bought the Hummer line from GM, you can bet they will play heavily in the final formula.

I believe you are beginning to get the picture. President Obama is taking drastic steps to globalize our market. The creation of a partnership between the Labor Union and the Government is a major step toward Socialism. The UAW is acting as the modern day proletariat, as described by Karl Marx in his Communist Manifesto.

The UAW, as the modern day proletariat, will now have direct access to influencing policy and increasing their funding, by tapping into tax money. On the other hand, the Government will have a way to launder money through the auto industry, and the UAW, into political war chests, to finance the campaigns of their favorite liberal stool pigeons.

Upon further review, there is the little matter of “conflict of interest” on the part of the UAW. The UAW is still contracted to provide labor to Chrysler, now owned by a foreign carmaker, while at the same time being part owner of a domestic carmaker. I cannot help but wonder how much influence the Italian Government will have in our Government through a proxy relationship, using FIAT and the UAW as a conduit.

Now doesn’t that make for a nice, cozy little package? But, hey! If we play our cards right, this comfy little arrangement could put us in line for a membership in the European Union.

As for our new “Dutch Uncle” from China, of course, because they own so much of our debt, we will be told that we must enter into a free trade agreement with them. Then they will have a market for those fuel efficient Hummer’s. You know, the SUV’s the Government keeps claiming nobody wants to purchase.

This is starting to look a lot like a solidification of “Global Citizenry”, or more commonly known as “One World Government”. Do you think that is a stretch? Then argue the points I have made.

While you are at it, try to explain what constitutional role we play in a “Global Justice” effort, using our military as an “International Police Agency” instead of the highly trained fighting force of our nation. Try to rationalize why we are sending FBI agents to Afghanistan to read Miranda Rights to captured “enemy combatants”, before CIA agents can question them, thus extending the Constitutional Rights of American citizens to the people of other nations.

Did I mention that these individuals are “enemy combatants”, caught on the battlefield? The policy, quietly adopted by President Obama, seeks to protect those who actively target U.S. military personnel, and citizens, in attempts to harm and kill us.

What is next? I wonder how long before we attempt to concede more sovereignty to the United Nations. That could begin to pave the way to extend voting privileges to Castro, Kim Jong-il, or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Or, maybe we can release the detainees at Guantanamo Bay and have them create a Jihadist Party and a Hamas Party to vie for political power against the Democrats, Republicans, and Independents.

As I claimed in “Just an Average American”, I will attempt to provoke thought. Think about my comments here. As troubling as it sounds, it makes sense.

Think about the actions and proclamations of President Obama in his short tenure in the Oval Office. He has travelled the globe, apologizing for America’s exceptionalism, admonishing our standards of living, and condemning our past foreign policies. According to that which Barack Obama preaches, America is a portrayed as a cancer to the rest of the world, and the President alone has the cure. His policies of reaching out to empower and appease our adversaries and the endless degradation of America are the answers he proposes.

Let me give you a news flash. France and Spain tried this method of achieving peace. They were bombed for their trouble, demonstrating that their practice of appeasement was an exercise of futility. Maybe, then State Senator Obama, was too busy studying and perfecting the implementation of Saul Alinsky’s radical teachings, to pay attention to the unfolding real life events.

Then again, Barack Obama is not the sharpest knife in the drawer when it comes to learning lessons from History. After all, the President espoused the belief that the Constitution of the United States is a list of “negative rights”. He went on to express, and I paraphrase, the Founders only mandated the restrictions of Government, they failed to express what Government is supposed to do for the people.

In my opinion, this is the most troubling public statement Barack Obama has ever made. As a graduate of Harvard, and a Constitutional Professor, he should understand, better than most, that the Founders intentionally set out to limit the authorities and power of the Government. They believed that authority and power should be reserved to the people and the States, respectively.

In his mind, instead of being elected into an office of servitude, Barack Obama has succeeded in his bid for power through the mantra of “Hope and Change”. Now he fully intends to push our nation in a direction it was never intended. He is adopting policies of socialism, at the cost of individual liberty and responsibility. He works tirelessly toward the induction of our exceptional nation into the mediocrity of globalization. In doing so, he attempts to reduce the greatness of liberty and freedom, to the oppression of a socialized, tyrannical dictatorship.

If you still think that is a stretch, think about the power President Obama has already seized for the Government. We now know that the banks were forced into the financial bailout, and that they were repudiated when they attempted to return the bailout money. We also know that a large amount of the bailout money for the financial industry went to foreign owned banks.

We have watched President Obama lead the way for a hostile Government takeover of the auto industry; farming pieces of it out to foreign ownership. He espouses support of failed energy policies, restricting domestic production of energy sources and forcing our dependence on foreign entities.

He marches lockstep in supporting the vilification of the corporate world, consistently attempting to persuade people to vacate “Corporate America”. He preaches that greedy CEO’s make too much money, and therefore require “Government imposed salary caps”. What’s next, more Government ownership?

Maybe the President does not understand that part of our country’s greatness depends on our industrialization, which by the way is profit driven. Conversely, could he be setting the stage to sell corporate ownership to foreign interests, as a means to promote further globalization?

In short, the examples are numerous and the evidence is clear; you only need to look past the sycophant media spin to see that all indicators point to our being led into a socialistic state.

I for one, appreciate my liberty and freedom, and my right of self-governance. I revel in the opportunity to make the best of myself, without limitations placed on me, through the process of rulership. I reject any individual that would pervert the standards and values of my nation, and any efforts to devalue that, for which so many have fought and died. I know what America is, and what it represents, and oppose any who attempt to redefine it.

There you have it. I leave no questions as to what I believe, or where I stand. What do you think? Are you American enough to stand with me, “just an average American”, in support of individual freedom and liberty, and oppose the socialization of our nation? Are you willing to stop the induction of our country into a doctrine of globalization, under which we would become just another member state of a “One World Government”?

Step back from your party affiliations and the rhetoric. Try to personalize the events of our nation, as if the events were limited to your life, your household, within your community, and the neighboring communities. Look at what is happening and what has already transpired. Understand the implications, and the consequences of current events.

Are we, as a nation, protecting individual liberty and freedom? Are we promoting self-governance, and personal responsibility? Are we preserving the vision of our Founders? Or, as a people, are we allowing the government to lead us into a state of dependency? Are those we elected, attempting a form of tyranny? Worse yet, are they conceding our sovereignty?

You decide. Do you want to be part of an independent nation based on liberty and freedom? Or, would you rather become a “citizen of the world” and therefore reduce our nation’s status to that of a simple, socialistic member state of the world?

Think about it.