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!

Advertisements

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


Cash for Clunkers – The New Government Motors Corp.

June 11, 2009

Have you heard? Congress is now considering giving out cash for clunkers.  That is, they are considering the idea, of giving buyers up to $4500.00 for their old, gas guzzling clunkers, toward the purchase of a new, fuel-efficient vehicle.

Now things are beginning to make sense.  As you know by now, the Government is the proud new owner of approximately 60% of General Motors (GM). The United Auto Workers Union (UAW) has partnered with the Government, and purchased approximately 15% of GM. This is ironic when you think of how much of the Auto Bailout money was ultimately received by the UAW, as “legitimate expenses” paid by GM and Chrysler, before the takeover.

But first, let’s look at the business aspects of what is going on here. No matter your social viewpoint, the whole idea for a company to be in existence in a capitalist, free market system is to make profits. The auto industry is no exception to this ideology; they must continuously develop their products, to appeal to the buyers, and thus maintain marketability. Like it or not, without profits, they cannot pay the overhead, or maintain the research and development necessary to sustaining the business. The only way this joint venture can be profitable is to lure people to buy their newly acquired product.

Up until now, auto manufacturers used factory rebates as a sales tool. Now that the Government is in the auto industry, they are legislating the use tax rebates. If you think about this for a moment, the entire auto bailout fiasco could have been avoided, if the Government had used tax incentives toward new car purchases, of American made cars, as proposed by Andrew Wilkow. Mr. Wilkow argued that the money was going to originate with the people regardless, and that using a tax incentive would entice people into purchasing new, American made vehicles, thwarting the need of a Government bailout, and at least allowing the people to have something to show for the money they spent. Now they have legislated the use of tax incentives, but as an unfair advantage to compete for market share.

Has anyone thought to ask where the money is coming from to pay for the incentives being offered?  You can bet its coming from the same place as all the funding for all the other Government programs, your pocket.

This takeover is looking more, and more, like an attempt to monopolize the auto industry, with the exception of Ford Motor Company, who has refused to give in to government ownership. Do you think the Government would adopt new ecological or economical standards for the auto industry, and then give their “Government Entity”, GM, exclusion? Of course, the exclusion would extend to foreign auto manufacturers. That would teach Ford; they would soon wish they had accepted money from the bailout.

As a side note, most of the testing for automotive research and development takes place on the racetrack. I can just imagine, Team POTUS. Look out NASCAR; you could be the next step.

No way! The Government in auto racing? Why not? Besides money, NASCAR already has something that the Government envies, fan loyalty. The Government sees NASCAR Fans the same way they view any other demographic group, a voting block; typical, conservative, “good ole boy” types, loyal to a common interest. You think?

The GM takeover takes place on the heels of the Government supporting a deal for a foreign auto company to purchase Chrysler, who went bankrupt after the bailout. The support is in the form of the Supreme Court allowing the “merger” of Chrysler and FIAT, and at the same time, the forced closure of auto dealerships, thereby allowing the new owners to escape the dealer’s contracts with Chrysler. So much for the promise of saving American jobs. Did I mention the UAW received money from Chrysler as a “legitimate expense” as well?

I wonder if the money received by the UAW, from the manufacturers, as a result of the bailout, was ultimately used as purchasing capitol in this latest scheme. If so, I wonder if the Taxpayers now technically own part of the UAW, as the bailout was paid from tax dollars.

To compound the issue, it seems the UAW will still have labor agreements with FIAT, who bought out Chrysler. FIAT is tied to the Italian Government, in as much as, to offset American taxes paid for the sales of their automobiles here in the U.S., FIAT is subsidized, thus completing the loop.

The U.S. Government, the UAW, and the Italian Government, all members of one big, happy, global, auto industry family, and you and I, the Taxpayers, are on the hook to pay for the wedding. Gee, we didn’t even get a piece of cake. I almost forgot, the Chinese are going to be our new “Dutch Uncle”, because they bought the Hummer line from GM. That should work to throw a monkey wrench in the SUV Market.

As to financing, the Government is already controlling several financial institutions. It is only a matter of timing until the announcement of a special, low interest auto-financing program. I bet it will have full Government backing, just like Fannie Mea and Freddie Mac. Wow, how about that?

No matter how you serve it up, President Obama is leading our nation down a road to failed ideologies and policies. Keep watching, if you dare, for where I think it could lead us.

(Check out my follow-up to this article in Globalization of Our Nation)


“Yes, We Can!” Is this truly the “Hope and Change” you bargained for?

June 7, 2009

I must ask all those who supported Barack Obama during his candidacy for President, and went on to vote for him, electing him into the highest position in the entire free world.  Is this really what you bought into?

It has been six months since you elected, potentially, the most dangerous President of the United States in the last sixty plus years.  Yes, I said it; potentially the most dangerous.  We have experienced four and a half months of his regime… oops, scratch that… administration, and the question looms greater and darker every day.  Does this man truly represent the changes you believe this country needs?

Leading up to the election, six months ago, the slim majority of the voters were taken in by the mantra, “Hope and Change for America!  Yes, we can!”  This was the campaign slogan, then Senator Obama preached from his traveling pulpit.

Then came the first signs of the Audacity of Hope and Change when we, as a nation started receiving daily news briefings from the Office of the President Elect.  President-Elect Obama used this platform to criticize the outgoing administration.

Call me “old Fashioned”, but the last time I read the Constitution, it calls for a Congress, consisting of the House of Representatives and the Senate, and we have one executive elected to the office of President.  No matter how many times I look at it, the Constitution has not changed; there is no office of the President Elect.

Senator Obama became President, and one of the first things he did was to announce that he was determined in his intention of closing the prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, by early next year.

This was an early indicator of short sightedness.  By announcing his intention, he placated his liberal base only to find that there was no place to put the detainees.  No other nation wants them; in some cases, this includes their native lands.  Not wanting to go back on his campaign promise to close Gitmo, the Obama Regime, I mean Administration, announced the intention to bring detainees to the United States to stand trial in a court of law.

Oops, there is a glitch in that plan.

Opponents argue that bringing the detainees here gives them access to constitutional protections.  This is an unprecedented action for the government, as extending rights to enemy combatants increases their ability to civilian defense practices and tactics, almost ensuring their release.  In case you are not familiar with military operations, the military does not specialize in collecting evidence in the middle of a war zone.

Therefore, bringing the detainees here to try them in U.S. Courts subjects them to evidentiary rules and constitutional law that would give some seedy ACLU attorney ammunition to obtain the release of the detainees.

There is also the creation of unacceptable risk to our national security, as defense tactics would be to demand information from the battlefield that could jeopardize our troops, and their tactics.  What if the one jeopardized was your son or daughter?

There is also the little issue of the Real ID Act of 2008, a law supported by then Senator Obama that bars entry into the country of any individuals involved in terrorist activities.

After his inauguration, President Obama pushed for the passage of his Stimulus Bill. He claimed that passing the bill was the only hope for our economy.

Wow!  That was a shot.  In less than one hundred days in office, he spent more than all the preceding presidents combined.

He must think you’re stupid!

When it comes to stupidity, truth is, the stimulus bill passed the House and Senate, and was signed into law, without ever being read.  I wonder if the legislators, or the President for that matter, would sign a contract without reading it.  If so, I have a limited number of ocean front condos for sale in Kansas.

Anyway, he must think your stupid.  You are supposed to believe that more excessive, wasteful spending by Congress, on short-term projects, is going to help solve the fiscal crisis facing the nation, and solve our long-term economical woes.  Let’s face it, the majority of the Stimulus Bill is Presidential and Congressional payoffs for votes, and we the taxpayers are left holding the bag.

Now, thanks to the President, General Motors (GM) has changed their name to Government Motors.  This sounds very funny until you begin to understand that government involvement as partial owner of the auto company puts them in bed with the Labor Union.

Oh, what’s that?  You had not realized the UAW is also a proud, new, partial owner of the failing GM.  That is an issue that requires further explanation, which I will attempt later.

Did I mention that President Obama is now declaring that Iran has a right to nuclear power, “so long as they can prove it is intended for peaceful purposes.”  Please correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe a large contingency of the insurgents in Iraq, killing our troops, originate from Iran.

Somebody pinch me.  This has got to be a bad dream.  I cannot believe the Commander in Chief is making nice with the folks that are actively trying to kill America’s finest.

I am trying hard to recall anything good that he has accomplished, but his ability to read speeches from a teleprompter do not count.  Think about it, we still have not received any details of his tax plan that was going to help middle class Americans that earn less than $250,000.00 per year.

So, for those of you that voted for Barack Obama, is this what you bargained for?  Did you really buy into the rhetoric of an individual that intends to sell our country down the river into socialism and irrelevancy?  Can you honestly agree with his apologetic speeches to the rest of the world, denouncing America’s exceptionalism?

Do you believe, as President Obama does, that the Constitution is a pesky nuisance, a compilation of negative rights?  Do you believe the Founders failed in implementing the Constitution, by not outlining the things the government should do for the people?  Or, do you hold true to the ideology, as I do, that the Constitution intentionally applies limits to the power and authority of government?

Is this truly, what you bargained for?