Sunday, July 26, 2009

Health Care Reform is the House Built on the Sand

By Theosebes

“My view is that health care reform should be guided by a simple principle: fix what's broken and build on what works.”
Really? Then why did the American people have to sit through an hour long gilded sales pitch for the 1,018 page health care reform package? There was nothing simple stated during the Presidential Press Conference regarding health care reform. Nothing to help the American people lean back and say, “This is simple and it makes dollars and sense.”

The average American, when faced with a problem that seems insurmountable, tackles each issue one step at a time. If the house is falling apart, the owner with common sense looks at what absolutely needs fixing so that he may continue to live in his house as he works to correct that particular problem. If the plumbing fails, one calls the plumber, not the bank to do a complete home makeover.

Our servants in Washington, the Congress and the President, should learn from those they serve and make one fix at a time. According to an analysis by Republican staff of the House Ways and Means panel, the deficit from the health care reform bill would be $760 billion by 2024, the end of the first 10 years of full benefits coverage. It would be $1.6 trillion by the end of the 2020s.

This is not how a well run American household handles expenses. They look at the absolute need before them, and spend the appropriate money to fix the immediate problem before tackling the lesser of the needs. Health care needs a fix, but not reform.

Obama’s very language, “Health Care Reform” demonstrates that he is waiting with the wrecking ball, to demo the already standing structure that has many durable and worthwhile features in order to redecorate according to his ideological tastes and beliefs. There is no thoughtful blueprint laid out to see what is worth saving, what needs a little new paint, and what represents the leaking faucet that must be replaced. There is no prioritizing as to what is absolute necessary, but only, “When it comes to the cost of our health care, then, the status quo is unsustainable. Reform is not a luxury, but a necessity. I know there has been much discussion about what reform would cost, and rightly so.”

Obama’s dream home is not a home in which America can afford to live. But like many who were caught up in the Real Estate boom, pulling equity from their over inflated homes, pouring it into a dream home reform project that they couldn’t afford and then losing it in foreclosure, so also is this Administration and Congress doing to our Country. They have no vested interest in the people, but are like the lenders in years past who at all costs, disregarded ethics and morals, sold mortgages to individuals they knew on paper couldn’t afford the ink they were signing with, all for the sake of power and prestige.

The irony is that the President, responding to a question from the Press Corp said, “I have the best health care in the world, I want to see that every American has good health care.” We the people may sit on his porch and have what he terms as “good” while those living in the White House and the Congressional Houses in Washington D.C., get the “best” insurance. If We the People are their employers, if they work for us, then how is it, that we get stuck with the crumbs off the king’s table? How is it that we, the rightful owners of the White House and the Houses of Congress are not even invited to the meal to participate in the discussion?

The Biblical parable about the wise and foolish man can speak to this very issue. In Matthew 7, Jesus talks about building a house, and though He was speaking about spiritual issues, it applies to the kind of decisions that men make and the effects those decisions have on the lives that they influence. The President, by virtue of his position affects Americans through his decisions. Judge for yourself, are the leaders of this country building a house on a rock or the sand? Do their decisions represent wisdom or is there great foolishness in their positions that will cause America to crumble in years to come?

Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock:
25And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock. 26And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand: 27And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it. 28And it came to pass, when Jesus had ended these sayings, the people were astonished at his doctrine: 29For he taught them as one having authority, and not as the scribes.

Health Care Reform is just one of the houses being built on the sand. It will cause a huge collapse and the fall will be great.

Wise up America!

Saturday, July 25, 2009

A King for a Country of No Substance!

By Lenny Moynihan

It is easy to blame Obama for the situation we are in. After all, we Americans love to play the blame game. Of course, the trillions of dollars we will owe in debt is Obama's fault but we have to admit George W's second term lacked fiscal responsibility. Having said that, this spiral did not happen over night. We could not be at this place in time had the system and it's people not been broken a long time ago.

We have become a country of little substance and Obama is happy to be our town crier. He has crammed thoughtless and unread bills through the House and has high hopes of doing the same through the Senate. How did we get to this juncture in the first place? I believe one of the biggest movements to get us in this quandary is the New Age movement. I have studied Spiritual Metaphysics for over 10 years. The true understanding of the Metaphysical world and how it applies to matter is a life time education and requires diligence to practice. People have simplified the concepts of New Age and used them to create a world view. This world view is invested in a collective consciousness. The biggest problem with this world view is that it must be forced. True Nirvana could never be forced; thus, a perfect world on earth is unattainable.

Furthermore, true Metaphysical, New Age understanding does not require forced or demanded false morality. It is an evolution by the individual. For example, we have vegetarians putting more stock in the life of an animal than they do people. Most of these fanatics are pro-choice and see no issue with killing millions of babies. They do take issue with killing a cow though. This is an upside down thought system. In my opinion, this was the beginning of this upside down world we are living in now. We are the head of the food chain and a human life is more precious than that of an animal. Of course, I support organic farming. I have for years. I believe the food is better for you and the animals are treated with respect. This is a personal choice not a moral high ground. Many vegetarians demand that we all adopt their agenda for food choices but have no intention of changing their minds on abortion. They are much like religious fanatics that only allow one type of thought. Now Obama is using the New Age paradigm for health care and Cap and Trade. It is his idea of Nirvana and somehow these bills have more meaning than just a politician selling his wares. They are not a uniting factor if they are forced on the American people. The true premise of New Age is all actions create an action and that the Universe has a principled order to it. When you are bullying and hog-tying your people into life styles or lack of choice, you have misunderstood the idea of being united.

Our generation hooked on to the New Age agenda with authors like Mary Anne Williamson and Deepak Chopra. They both have had some good things to say; however, the problem lies within the interpretation that we must all come to the same resolve. According to Obama and his sycophants, that resolve is an Obama world. Dr. Deepak Chopra made huge sums of money in this great country of ours through book deals and TV appearances. He had no problem accepting the wealth a capitalist society offers. Yet the other day he wrote an article titled "Can we stop being a super power please?" This makes no sense since this country and it's freedoms and wealth buttered his bread. I guess it is OK for him to reap the riches of our country and enjoy its freedoms but now he has decided we must become more like a 3rd world nation.

Bono, another celebrity, is known for his activism for Africa. Although a noble cause, he did not do it alone. President Bush worked with him on his Aids project and helped quite a bit. Yet, I read in an article the other day how he dodged a hug with President Bush. He seemed to be bragging about this act of shunning. So, the moral high road is to help Africa but shun the President of the United States who helped you claim that goal.

Both Bono and Chopra tout themselves as above the fray. They see themselves as men of substance yet they are jokers just feeding their own personal agendas. (This is hard for me to say because I am a huge U2 fan!) They cow-tow to their audience and there is nothing original about them. The substance is only for what they see as important not for the good of the whole. Obama works in this same vein. He has a personal agenda and it is not for the betterment of our country. It is for his glory and aspirations of what he thinks our country should be. He lacks substance and has no understanding of a constitution that represents its people. He is a spoiled affront to our forefathers. If you read the biography of John Adams, you will see what a true hero looks like. He understood that in shaping America and serving her best, man had to remove his ego from the process. The above men mentioned are not fit to eat at our founders' table.

Our substance is only in the words not in deeds or actions. We like the idea of creating our experiences but when you study the nuts and bolts of Metaphysics it becomes a very different animal. Freedom is what creates a better man and more evolved spirit. Dictatorship breaks man and devastates spirit. We let ourselves go a long time ago and now we are reaping what we have sown. Yes, Obama is responsible for the chaos and careless acts he is making but we are responsible for giving away our freedoms so easily. Although we all did not vote for Obama, a lot of us did. This is because we seek outside ourselves for provision. Hopefully this awakened call is all we need to get back to self. If not, we surely will perish.

Saturday, July 18, 2009

Birth Certificate Needed for all Other Americans Who Travel Outside the US

By Theosebes

Last week, my niece, at the last minute had to fly to California from Ohio to get her legal, certified birth certificate to go on a Bahamian cruise. Within twenty-four hours, she had the document and was flying home for her planned vacation. Out of desperation and necessity, the family spent the extra money to obtain the needed birth certificate; how much more should our Commander In Chief take the necessary steps to obtain his own.

Obama on the other hand has not taken the time out of his busy schedule, even months prior to campaigning to get his certified copy of birth in order to fulfill the Constitutional mandate for the President of United States. If Americans must comply with the birth certificate laws in place to travel abroad, it stands to reason, that an American President also should have to comply as he gallivants across the globe promoting world peace.

Dr.Orly Taitz, the attorney for Maj. Stefan Frederick Cook was interviewed by conservative talk show host Rick Roberts. She posted on her blog the legal injunction on behalf of Major Cook who states, "[Then] any order coming out of the presidency or his chain of command is illegal. Should I deploy, I would essentially be following an illegal [order]. If I happened to be captured by the enemy in a foreign land, I would not be privy to the Geneva Convention protections," he said, as reported in WorldNetDailyExclusive.

Rick Roberts allowed Dr. Taitz to explain the circumstances in regard to the case and the legal precedent that has been dangerously set by the Army for revoking the deployment orders. Now, any military personnel who takes issue with serving under Barack Obama as Commander in Chief may cite this precedent and potentially be excused from deployment.

It seems that the President should just show his certified, hospital generated birth certificate and clear things up easily, without causing more speculation that perhaps he is not Constitutionally able to serve as Commander in Chief.

Meanwhile, MSNBC anchor Keith Olbermann tonight called Cook a "jackass" and Taitz a "conwoman," as he labeled both of them the "worst persons in the world." He flayed the soldier as "an embarrassment to all those who have served without cowardice."

He called Dr. Taitz delusional and Major Cook a non-patriotic, pathetic “draft dodger”.

A man of Barack Obama’s obvious power should be able to produce the desired document and ease the minds of the men and women that he is sworn to serve as Leader. It seems that if all Americans are required to obtain and use their birth certificate at some point in their lives, the President of the United States should also abide by the same standard.

If Disneyland requires a certified birth certificate to get in for free on one’s birthday, doesn’t it seem logical that the sitting President should also share his document willingly with those he serves in order to free the minds of the American people who are concerned with this matter? Perhaps Disneyland should invite Barack Obama to come for free on his birthday, but remind him to bring his birth certificate.

Thursday, July 16, 2009

Free Healthcare?

By Jenny Erikson

There are two types of “free.” Free as in freedom, and free as in beer.

Some things are essentially free. Rainbows, wildflowers, hugs and kisses from loved ones, and sometimes, a beer from a friend who says, “Don’t worry about it, I’ve got this one.”

As Americans, we are free citizens. It’s right there in the Declaration of Independence, a document that laid out the reasons why it was important for the colonies to break away from Britain’s “unwarrantable jurisdiction.” The Constitution lays out our freedoms; we are free to chose our own religion, to speak our minds, to assemble and petition, to own firearms, to raise our children as we see fit, to vote for a representative government, and we are even free to drink that free beer.

There has been a lot of discussion recently about socialized or “free” healthcare being introduced to the United States. Free healthcare? Where in the world are we going to find enough doctors (who, by the way, are trying to pay off an average of $140,000 in medical school debt each) willing to work for free in order to make sure that every American (or illegal immigrant pretending to be an American) has healthcare?

As a stay-at-home-mom, I work my tail bone off everyday. I’m the maid, the nanny, the chef, the chauffeur, the counselor, the life coach, the activities director, the secretary, the referee, and sometimes if my husband is lucky, I’m other things as well. I do it all for free, without being paid, because of my unbreakable and unending love for my family. But as much as I love my family, it is hard to do it all for free. Really hard. So I have to ask myself, “If it’s hard for me to work for free for my family, whom I love and cherish more than anything on the planet, how hard is it going to be for doctors to work for free for people they don’t even know?”

Free healthcare is an impossibility. There is no such thing as free beer. Your friend paid for it. Maybe he did it because it was his turn to buy, or maybe out of generosity or appreciation for your friendship. But he didn’t do it because the bartender said, “Sir, you make twice as much money as this man, so it is only ‘fair’ that you buy his beer for him.”

That’s what our government is trying to do regarding healthcare. It isn’t going to be free, because someone is going to have to pay for it (estimated cost is 1-1.5 trillion dollars over the next 10 years.) Doctors and nurses need to be paid, along with the scientists that develop new drugs, the engineers that build medical equipment, the architects that design hospitals, and even the janitors that keep the toilets clean. Taxes are going to skyrocket. Everything will be taxed, from the CO2 we breath out (double tax if that breath included nicotine), to sodas, and of course, to incomes.

It isn’t going to be free either, with “legislation that would require all Americans to have health insurance, prohibit insurers from refusing to cover pre-existing conditions and place other restrictions on the industry.”

I’m a grown up. I like my freedom. I like choosing my doctor, and I like that doctors can refuse patients. I like being free to choose my car, my vocation, my religion, my food, and my home. I like that all Americans have those freedoms, even if they choose differently than me. It’s precisely that freedom that makes our nation great. An entrepreneur is free to make or improve something, investors are free to fund it, and consumers are free to purchase it.

Our government is sliding down the slippery slope of oppressive power. Obama wants to tell us what to eat, what to drive, how to run our companies, and what medical treatments we may receive. Oh sure, we’ll still have a “choice,” but the taxes will be so crippling that it will “necessarily bankrupt” us. As history has shown us over and over, everybody’s a loser in a tyrannical state. The Cubans aren’t driving 50 year old cars and dying of malnutrition because they like it that way.

Jennie is a conservative Republican chick with a strong opinion and a smart mouth who loves her husband and kids with the ferocity of twenty tigers fighting over a meatball.

Wednesday, July 15, 2009

Sotomayor Bores on Purpose: She’s Looking to Get Hired

By Anthony Bialy

A reality show about, sigh, soon-to-be-confirmed Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s confirmation hearings would be too dull for even Al Gore’s television station, if that’s possible. While her anti-nunchuk rant may have infuriated each and every ninja in the Senate, most of her statements have been Wonder Bread-bland. She’s ironically depicting herself as being more inoffensive than an Osmond.

Of course, this stands as remarkably sudden turnaround for the nominee: she’s instantly become unerringly sympathetic to those who support gun rights, has remained partly coy on the decidedly straightforward subject of abortion, and abruptly claims that her complexion doesn’t make her wiser.

But she’s flipped into tedious mode for a reason: the candidate is applying for a sweet gig. Sotomayor is undergoing a job interview, and she’s naturally going to be either positive or vague about her qualifications in the hope that the hiring managers won’t notice her rising red flags. She’s attempting nothing more than to gloss over her résumé’s rough patches. The native of the, let me double-check, Bronx is doing everything she can to downplay her infamous alleged richness of experience.

After all, Supreme Court Justice is a recession-proof job no matter what else President Obama unleashes on the poor economy. It comes with other benefits, too: the occupation currently pays $208,100 per year, offers a long summer recess, and requires no travel or heavy lifting. And, it’s of course a career for life once you land it.

Justice Samuel Chase was impeached but not removed in 1805; he was the first and last person to face an attempted banishment. At this point, a judge would have to get caught selling meth to war orphans on the court’s steps to put his or her employment status in danger.

It’s steady work during a time when the phrase “government job” may soon become redundant. Even better for Sotomayor, none of her bizarre decisions can be overturned by the Supreme Court if she’s herself on it; at worst, she’ll only find herself voting in the minority. This post would remove her chance of ever again being embarrassed by reversals.

Despite the procedure’s importance, many interviewers have been too busy inking their “HIRED” stamps to ascertain whether the aspirant deserves the post. Most glaringly, Vermont Senator Patrick Leahy cut off his New York counterpart Kirsten Gillibrand for sucking up to Sotomayor for too long. The Senate has reached a new low even by its own modest standards when someone like Leahy thinks a colleague is being too fawning toward a perfectly liberal future Court seat-filler.

It’s all dreadful to endure. The most exciting moments of the hearings will continue to be when rudely protesting dunces in the crowd interrupt with shrieks regarding their hostility to her nomination. And even those incidents will only be interesting because of the possibility that the loudmouths might deservedly get pepper-sprayed or tasered.

The only chance for a truly compelling event would be if Republican senators displayed any willingness to stand up for conservative ideals. Namely, they could call out Sotomayor for her obviously ingrained hostility to judicial restraint. That’s especially true in light of her novel claims that she’s now keen about adhering to the Constitution.

Opposition party members could focus on how her recent statements obviously conflict with her record. All they would have to do is highlight Sotomayor’s curious willingness as a member of the judiciary to pass and approve laws; making up policies herself is a type of governmental efficiency we don’t need. Jeff Sessions, Lindsey Graham, and maybe Jon Kyl are at least trying to show that she doesn’t deserve the position despite her salesmanship. But they’re going to end up being a minority of the minority.

Instead, most Republican lawmakers on the whole will lamentably acquiesce during the time between now and the vote. They’ve decided that, since they comprise only one-third of the Senate, the best strategy is to concede and be thankful the applicant isn’t even worse; oddly, they’re acting as if yielding will slingshot them back into power.

Their turnstile mentality means that Sotomayor will succeed in getting promoted from the Court of Appeals despite her evasiveness during the hiring process. The reluctance on the questioners’ part to provoke controversy makes for immensely uninteresting television. Oh, and it also leads to another activist landing on the Supreme Court.

Anthony Bialy is a freelance writer and "Red Eye" Conservative in Western New York

Americans Are the Real Naysayers on Healthcare

By Nichole Hungerford

“For those naysayers and cynics who think that this is not going to happen, don’t bet against us...We are going to make this thing happen because the American people desperately need it.” Emphasis not added!

This threatening statement made by President Obama comes amidst a Rasmussen poll demonstrating that as of today, 49% of Americans now at least somewhat oppose the Democratic healthcare reform proposal while 46% are at least somewhat in favor of it. This is a fairly dramatic change from a poll taken just two weeks ago where 50% were for, and 45% were against the proposal.

So, are conservatives winning the argument on this crucial issue? Are people beginning to see through the Obama deception? It is no surprise that in his most recent statements, Obama again exploits the crisis lie, characterizing the state of healthcare as a “desperate need.” In fact, Americans enjoy unparalleled healthcare, the vast majority of Americans are happy with their coverage, and all this with the added benefit of not having to suffer the appalling atrocities of socialized medicine. Of course, none of Obama’s radical agenda would ever stand a chance of being enacted without the guise of a “crisis” obscuring it, which is why he inevitably sounds the alarm on every issue that will expand the power of the federal government and the presidency. At this point, however, it sounds as if Obama is going to have to force this project on an unwilling populace who, let’s be honest Mr. President, are the real "naysayers" on this issue.

Tuesday, July 14, 2009

Sotomayor Extravaganza!

By Nichole Hungerford

Yesterday began the hearings of judicial nominee, Sonia Sotomayor, and not a moment too soon for the liberal hate-writers who now have something to spew their baseless vitriol about besides Sarah Palin. In fact, I can give you the format of each pitifully predictable op-ed piece in advance: They will proceed with a brief introduction of sanctimonious, verbal love-making to Sotomayor, and devote the remainder of the article to irrelevant grandstanding against Justice Roberts. Sad, but formulaically true. The hearing will also be the first official capacity in which we will see comedian Al Franken (a.k.a., Stuart Smalley the fictional self-help guru) as he ascends his newly purchased Senate seat.

At this point, there is simply too much uncertainty about how Sotomayor would conduct herself on the court. She may not even be as liberal as her predecessor, David Souter. At the very least, we can reasonably be assured she won’t be any worse. She enjoys unrestrained affection from most Senate Democrats and considerable skepticism, although not heavy opposition, from Republicans. Republicans are especially interested in how she will explain several controversial, off-bench statements which will be addressed in the coming hearings.

Yes, I rant!

By Lenny Moynihan

It seems the problem we have in America is this desperate need for an idol. Although both black and white communities have picked Obama as a top contender, this last week it seemed to be Michael Jackson. I am sorry that I need to point out color but it seems we are still doing that. Of course, we heard that Michael was more black than white and he really represented the black community. I think this was a similar argument with Obama. I recognize there will always be idiots in America and the world at large that are racist; thus, the fallen world we live in. Many of us have encountered some kind of prejudice some worse than others. I can say it was drilled into me by this society that I am not to see color. Was I the only one paying attention? I know I am not the only person that has lived my life this way so why can't the rest of you? To the black community and others that love to use the race card I say it is time to let the color go. We are an inflexible society that grabs onto issues and don't want to let them go.

I found out in my 20's that I am the steward of my destiny. This is not a left or right tenet, this is a life Truth. If I had personal problems and excess baggage, I would need to find the answers. If I wanted riches, I would need to work for them. If I wanted to be married with longevity, I would have to work at it. The common thread here is me working at it. I have spent a life time addressing my personal issues so I could be all that I could be. I am convicted in my beliefs and I have no need for a flesh and blood idol. I have filled my own voids because no one else can! It seemed Michael was a broken person although incredibly talented. Obama, to me, is an egomaniac. How can either of these men be an idol to fill my needs? More importantly, why are Americans so desperate for someone else to fix it for them?

I say we have lost our sense of self. The black community refuses to set aside color so every single issue must include that conflict. Obama refuses to let go of his agenda so we must watch our country's demise. The left refuses to let go of its hatred and vitriol speech so we must continue to look bad to other countries. The fundamental right clings to it's judgement; even though, Christ made it clear thou shall not judge. The white community is so busy being politically correct they have forgotten their own thoughts and feelings. In the end, none of this is working except for the government at large, or should I say as it gets larger!

We have become an insane nation and if you don't believe me turn on the news. Our government is not representing it's people. The glamour life style of pop stars and Hollywood don't represent us either. They are all thriving because of our needs for idols and the distraction of white noise. As a nation, we really need to get it together. We are 233 years old and we have become more immature not mature. The fundamental premise is the pursuit of the individual not BIG OVER GRASPING AND OVER REACHING GOVERNMENT. Instead we look to Presidents and pop stars to create our governance. This pattern is deadly. America take a good look at yourself. I ask you, do you like what you see?

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Saturday, July 11, 2009

We Behave Even When We (Tea) Party

Maybe I should forward my pictures from Buffalo’s Independence Day Tea Party to the Department of Homeland Security. It wouldn’t be to help them save time when compiling Janet Napolitano’s Personal Enemies List: it’s more of a preemptive move against those who brand us as radicals for thinking the government shouldn’t be buying lots of stuff. If they’re still fretting about the seething rage among righties, we may as well make the case that attendees are as typical as zealots get.

We held a standard Tea Party. Specifically, a few hundred of us spent an hour or two listening to enthusiastic limited-government speakers while assembled in front of our majestic Art Deco City Hall. It was basically similar to other events across the nation: we were mostly like everyone else everywhere else.

That said, we face particularly onerous burdens based on where we are. Notably, we are subject to income tax for the privilege of living in the Empire State, a risible 8.75 percent sales tax in Erie County, and astoundingly high property tax rates that cost some homeowners more than their mortgages. We have to chant to ourselves, religious mantra-style, the ample benefits of living here just to keep from calling U-Haul.

We’re mostly upset because it’s unnecessary to take all that’s taken from us. There are innumerable examples of obviously genuine waste. But even worthwhile organizations should be funded by private citizens choosing to spend their money on them. Philharmonics, art galleries, and pro sports teams are all significant and wonderful assets, which means that people should be willing to spend their own money in support. If we benefit from them, we don’t need a government mandate to fund them.

Our party also featured the same extremists who criticize the educational system for its astounding expenditure per mediocre student. On a national level, count us among the disaffected reactionaries who think banks and car companies that run themselves into the ground can either dig themselves out or stay there. Barack Obama’s take on the free market is strangely expensive.

Tea fanatics also maintain that the government isn’t obligated to care for our fitness. Lost in the analysis of health care costs is the broader truth that it’s an individual’s duty to maintain his or her self. Simultaneously, we realize that doctors, hospitals, and the rest of us will always step up to help those in need; the true cynics are those who hold that charity only works when forced.

We’re also the same lunatics who oppose cap and trade simply because it will destroy the economy and attempt to force us to use limp power sources for the sake of not having any effect on the environment at all. Of course, the bill will only affect people and industries that use energy, so it’s not as if its consequences will be far-reaching.

In that regard, our foes don’t know history, or at least not our history. They don’t simply oppose distinctively American concepts like personal reliability and being left the hell alone; they don’t even realize that they’re valid options. They’re unable to get around the answer to the question that, if the government won’t attend to the details, who will?

On the other hand, the Tea Party gave us a chance to flaunt our historical knowledge, and not just because we used our First Amendment rights to stand up for our Tenth Amendment ones. For one, judging by the quantity of rattlesnake-clad flags being waved, we clearly know who Revolutionary bad-ass Christopher Gadsden was.

Plus, someone in the crowd at Buffalo’s Niagara Square was proudly flying a Green Mountain Boys flag. The green standard with 13 stars in a blue corner field would probably be misconstrued to be Mother Earth’s ensign by our commie hippie friends. It’s a mistake that would be made by the same types who only know of Ethan Allen as a fancy furniture builder.

By the same measure, John Hancock and Sam Adams would have been branded militant nuts today, but only by those who recognize the names. They would be hassled by dinosaurs like The New York Times and evening network newscasts along with newer reptilian incarnations on the web. The only thing worse would be that others would sadly find themselves unfamiliar with the heroes. For one, JoJo Biden would be confused as to why a financial guy and brewer, respectively, were being treated as menaces.

With that in mind, I’ll hold back and instead make those at DHS keep looking for the pictures of my individualistic comrades and me. They can stumble to if they’re really interested in seeing how we amassed and occasionally cheered as we behaved. Alternately, the feds can search for photos posted by one of the numerous other normal diehards based in a plethora of other cities.

It’ll be good for those keeping an eye on us: they can learn what we already know, namely that we just want to keep more of what we make. If we’re the biggest threat to security, consider this nation blessed. That was just another reason to have spent the rest of the Fourth celebrating.

Anthony Bialy is a freelance writer and "Red Eye" Conservative in Western New York.


Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Friday, July 10, 2009

“Capitalism and Freedom” – Senator Jim DeMint

This week GM won permission for a government-backed company to purchase GM brands including Buick, Cadillac and Chevrolet, in order to pay off millions of dollars of debt—elevating the phrase “big government” to a new level. As consumers are confronted by an ailing economy and a brittle banking system, how much longer will it be before the capitalist system becomes just a faded memory?

The following is an excerpt from Senator Jim DeMint’s new release Saving Freedom: We Can Stop America’s Slide into Socialism:

“America’s golden goose is our capitalist economic system. It has made us wealthy beyond anything the world has ever known. Yet our excesses and debt are leading us to demand more and more golden eggs. Our taxes, regulations, and legal liabilities on businesses are now the most onerous in the world. We haven’t yet killed the goose, but we have plucked her clean, and the socialist axe is at her neck…

We have seen the federal government’s ‘communal sector’ replace local decision-making in public schools, hamstring private sector health-care services, federalize local banking, socialize farming, nationalize road construction. We now have federal intrusion into almost every business sector. Government must provide a consistent and predictable framework of laws and regulations, but arbitrary intrusion and subjective interpretations of regulations destroys the operation of the free market. Capitalism and socialism will not work together.

America cannot have it both ways. We must decide if we want a free market economy or socialism. Mixing the central planning principles of socialism with the decentralized free-market principles of capitalism has not worked, and it is destroying American’s competitive advantage in the world. Using business to collect taxes, provide health care, maintain pension programs, promote affirmative action, support the unemployed, absorb the cost of emissions by cars and utilities, and pay for frivolous lawsuits is killing the goose that lays the golden eggs.

All of these functions are important and sometimes necessary, but Americans must understand that putting these costs on the backs of businesses does not save money; it obscures costs and creates inefficiencies that reduce competitiveness. Businesses don’t pay for anything; they pass along the cost of taxes, health care, pensions, and all other costs of doing business to their employees and customers. These expenses increase the cost of American workers but reduce their take-home pay. They also increase the cost of products, reduce competitiveness, and hurt profitability.”

In 314 pages, Senator DeMint argues against big government and calls for Americans to take back the power rightfully bestowed upon them by our founding fathers. He also calls for Americans to defend their personal freedom and provides action steps citizens can take to stop this slide into socialism.


Connect with Senator Jim DeMint online:

Twitter: @JimDeMint
Personal Site:
Senate Site:

Thursday, July 9, 2009

Dependence Day

Upon celebrating the 4th of July, the birth of our nation under the Declaration of Independence in 1776, I couldn't help but wonder what direction our nation is free-falling to. Our Founding Fathers risked everything to fight for a country that they believed in. A free country. A country where "all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." When America finally won her Independence from Britain, the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights were written with the purpose of limiting government. We fought for Independence and they knew that we needed to preserve it. We needed to create a country where the strong arm of the government could not interfere with our right to live free. Are we still that country? The country that stands for freedom and an individual's right to earn a good life? I am not so sure anymore. There are more and more people out there that think they deserve a good life and that the government should provide it. The current Democratic controlled Congress and President Barack Obama are only too happy to comply with this.

Since his inauguration on January 20th, President Obama and Congress have been spending tax payer money uncontrollably, have taken over a portion of the auto industry, are setting the stage to control and regulate more of the banking industry and Wall Street, and now they want to take over the health care system and pass a Cap and Trade bill that will raise prices for all Americans on everything from heating your home to things you purchase at the store. If the Cap and Trade bill passes in it's current form, a government agency will be created that will inspect your house before you can sell it and tell you what improvements need to be made to meet government "green" regulations. Just as medical decisions should be made by a doctor and the patient, shouldn't improvements on a home be made between the buyer and the seller based upon an independent home inspection? Not according to the current administration and those running Congress. They know what is best for every American.

Our President couldn't even get off the fence to come out with a strong stand on Iran, the election and the protests for freedom. First he said,"We're still waiting to see how it plays itself out...." and that "The difference between Ahmadinejad and Mousavi in terms of their actual policies may not be as great as has been advertised. Either way we are going to be dealing with an Iranian regime that has historically been hostile to the United States." I am sure to the people protesting, there was a difference. To many who were protesting, it was not so much that Mousavi himself didn't win, it was the idea that Ahmadinejad could take an election illegally. Obama claims he didn't want to "meddle" in Iran's problems, but by making these comments and belittling what the people there were protesting, he did. If there was no difference between Ahmadinejad and Mousavi and both regimes would be hostile to the U.S. anyway, then why be so timid and not condemn the actions of the government?

It was only after coverage of the protests increased and the tragic shooting of a 26 year old woman by the Iranian Basij Militia while exiting a car, that President Obama decided to speak with stronger criticism on the actions of the Iranian government, "When a young woman gets shot on the street when she gets out of her car that's a problem." Mr. President, it is more than a problem, it is murder.

Now to the complete other end of the spectrum, when the Congress and Supreme Court of Honduras had their military remove the leftist leaning President Zelaya, Obama came out quick. He claimed immediately that it was "not legal" and that Zelaya should be reinstated as President. In fact Zelaya was corrupt, had mismanaged finances of the government and was trying to circumvent the Constitution of Honduras by extending his term of office. The Congress agreed with the Honduran Supreme Court's ruling that Zelaya was in violation of the their Constitution and the military complied by removing Zelaya. As Hans Bader stated in his article, Will Obama blackmail Honduras into installing a bullying would-be dictator?, "The Honduran military's role in enforcing the court order does not make it a "coup" any more than federal troops' role in enforcing the court-ordered integration of the Little Rock public schools in 1957 constituted a military occupation or takeover."

What is scary is that Obama stated that the "U.S. will stand on the side of democracy" so to him, Zelaya represented democracy! In taking this stance, President Obama has now found himself agreeing with Hugo Chavez, Fidel Castro and every other leftist dictator and leader in Latin America. I applaud Republican Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen for taking issue with the Obama administration on it's reaction to Honduras.

In a letter to Obama, Ros-Lehtinen stated "the U.S. stance from the onset appears to have been focused on supporting one individual, President Jose Manuel Zelaya Rosales, irrespective of the Honduran constitution, rule of law, and democratic institutions. ... [T]here has been no apparent attempt by the U.S to discern the truth about the status of democratic and constitutional order in this Central American country, before making summary conclusions and issuing condemnations based on incomplete information." She ended the letter by saying she hoped the Obama administration "will not have the U.S. response hinge on unconfirmed reports and accusations by sources with a vested interest in ensuring a particular outcome that may, or may not be in the interest of the United States."

The Senate will soon start confirmation hearings for Judge Sonia Sotomayor, who President Obama has nominated for the Supreme Court of the United States. She has stated, "I would hope that a wise Latina woman, with the richness of her experiences, would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life." I argue that she does not see all people equally. She first sees ethnicity, then gender, and then the law, which she wants to create. In 2001, she said this, "Personal experiences affect the facts that judges choose to see. My hope is that I will take the good from my experiences and extrapolate them further into areas with which I am unfamiliar. I simply do not know exactly what that difference will be in my judging. But I accept there will be some based on my gender and my Latina heritage." Anyone who is a judge and makes it clear that they will be bringing their bias to the bench based on their heritage, gender and experiences, should not be anywhere near the Supreme Court.

Our country is changing. It is changing because we are being led by a man who lacks the knowledge of what freedom and democracy is, to be President of the United States of America. If the United States doesn't stand up to the government of Iran and doesn't give the people of Iran the message that we stand solidly with them in their struggle for freedom; if our leader doesn't see that in Honduras, the wheels of democracy were actually working in the ousting of Zelaya; if our President and Congress force government controlled health care and continue to take over industry after industry; if our government sees fit to impose taxes and create another federal bureaucracy to make the country "green", and if a judge gets confirmed to the Supreme Court who clearly doesn't see all people equally and sees her role as one to create law and not interpret it justly, where is our freedom headed?

The American people need to understand that if actions are not taken to stop the current trend of government interference in our lives and it's inability to stand up for the struggles of freedom in the world, we may be longing for the days of celebrating our hard fought-for Independence because we will be mourning our complacent birth of Dependence. Dependence on a government that thrives on power. The power to tell you what is right for you. In the words of Thomas Jefferson, " That government is best which governs the least, because its people discipline themselves."

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Wednesday, July 8, 2009

No Job Lined Up = Palin Quitting?!

By Theosebes

The Great American Panel was heated tonight on Hannity’s America as Bob Beckel opened his mouth and dripped sarcastic anger all over Sarah Palin’s decision to step down. His logic was because Sarah Palin didn’t have a job lined up, she quit on the people of Alaska. Beckel’s response angered me as I sat thinking to myself, “What if Sarah Palin decided to dedicate the next few years to her husband and family? What if she gave it all up because she knew her family needed her to be a full time mom? Is that not a job?” My ire was up when the illusion of joblessness was equated with quitting, the job of motherhood was relegated to non-work.

“How sad that Washington and the media will never understand -- it's about country," she (Palin) said. “Though it's honorable for countless others to leave their positions for a higher calling and without finishing a term, of course we know by now, for some reason a different standard applies for the decisions I make. But every American understands what it takes to make a decision because it's right for all -- including your family."

The Washington Post reported, “Palin offered few clues about her ambitions but said she arrived at her decision in part to protect her family, which has faced withering criticism and occasional mockery, and to escape ethics probes that have drained her family's finances and hampered her ability to govern. She said leaving office is in the best interest of the state and will allow her to more effectively advocate for issues of importance to her, including energy independence and national security.”

In a speech given by President Roosevelt in Washington on March 13, 1905, before the National Congress of Mothers, he shared, “No ordinary work done by a man is either as hard or as responsible as the work of a woman who is bringing up a family of small children; for upon her time and strength demands are made not only every hour of the day but often every hour of the night. She may have to get up night after night to take care of a sick child, and yet must by day continue to do all her household duties as well; and if the family means are scant she must usually enjoy even her rare holidays taking her whole brood of children with her. The birth pangs make all men the debtors of all women. Above all our sympathy and regard are due to the struggling wives among those whom Abraham Lincoln called the plain people, and whom he so loved and trusted; for the lives of these women are often led on the lonely heights of quiet, self-sacrificing heroism.”

No other woman in America has endured such a firestorm of hatred aimed at her and her children as Sarah has and yet she has demonstrated an inner strength, integrity and fortitude that every woman in America should honor, on both sides of the aisle. Quitter is not an adjective with which I would label Sarah Palin. Starter, achiever and doer are more in line with her character and the track record of her life. They are qualities that have helped her raise her family, love and support her husband, care for her newest baby Trig, and walk her daughter through an unexpected pregnancy, all while effectively governing Alaska.

Shame on the media and the bloggers like Shannon Moore for the visceral hate reporting they repeatedly practice. According to, “Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin’s attorney, Thomas Van Flein, issued a four-page warning to mainstream news organizations over the weekend that he will sue on behalf of his client if 'defamatory material' relating to her or her family finds its way from Internet blogs to print.”

It is truly a shame when grown men and woman must have their tongues and typewriters muzzled by the threat of a defamation lawsuit in order to attain humane behavior.

The speculations won’t stop and the hate will not quit until Sarah Palin and all that she represents is silenced. The only reason for this kind of animosity is the fear of what a person or ideology represents to the one spewing the hate. Governor Palin may have stepped down from her job as Alaska’s executive, but she has never quit on that which is most important, and that is her family.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Saturday, July 4, 2009

I Pledge Alliegence to the United Nations Flag?

By Theosebes

This past Monday morning, Susan E. Rice, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations made a visit with Unicef to a classroom at the Harlem Children’s Zone. She spoke with an audience of eighth and ninth graders about volunteerism and shared that she hoped they would have similar opportunities to engage with the United Nations and with young people in the developing world as she had had. She said, “Your generation will have more to do than any other generation with people in other countries.” According to the New York Times article June 22, 2009, In Harlem, Ambassador to U.N. Urges Volunteerism, she shared about the civil war in Congo, and the supplies that Unicef, in honor of Harlam Children’s Zone, would be donating to this area. “Kids all over the U.S., and particularly here in New York, need to understand how their security, future and economic livelihood is linked to what happens in other parts of the world,” she said. “They’re not passive bystanders in this life, even as young people.”

Benign as this might seem, there is more to the story. Yesterday morning an email was sent out to members of Home School Legal Defense Association in regard to this visit. What the New York Times didn’t report was shared in the E-lert sent from HSLDA. According to the email, Susan Rice told this group of students that the administration officials are actively discussing “when and how it might be possible to join” (that is, ratify) the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC). As before, she also communicated what a disgrace it is that the U.S. would stand with only Somalia against such a widely accepted treaty.

Michael Farris, HSLDA Chairman asked the members to take action by calling the White House and their Congressional leaders, letting them know that they strongly oppose the “anti-family and anti-American treaty.” He also asked that calls be made to Ambassador Susan Rice’s office at the United Nations voicing these concerns.

A few hours after the initial E-lert from HSLDA, another email came through sharing this fantastic news: “The office of UN Ambassador Susan Rice has been inundated with calls! The first phone line we sent out has been completely shut down, and the voice mail system for all of their lines has been crashed.”

Home Schooling families stepped up to represent not only their rights, but the rights of all Americans. The grassroots movement that took place yesterday must continue on a larger scale by educating all Americans about the danger of this U.N. treaty and placing calls to their elected officials.

Once again, our liberal friends in Washington, who claim to love America, are covertly hoping to ratify CRC making it the law of the land here in the United States helping to strip away the rights of parents in America and allow the U.N. to dictate what proper parenting looks like at a global level.

Both Drudge and Free Republic reported on this development on June 24, 2009, but this has been on the back burner for Barbara Boxer as reported earlier this year by “Sen. Barbara Boxer is urging the U.S. to ratify a United Nations measure meant to expand the rights of children, a move critics are calling a gross assault on parental rights that could rob the U.S. of sovereignty.”

According to J. Michael Smith, HSLDA President, in Washington Times Op-ed—U.N. Treaty Might Weaken Families

“Article 43 of the CRC establishes an international committee on the rights of the child to examine compliance by member nations. This committee, which sits in Geneva, has final authority concerning interpretation of the language contained in the CRC.

Two central principles of the CRC clearly are contrary to current U.S. laws related to parent-child relationships. The CRC provides that in all matters relating to children, whether private or public, or in courts, the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration. Additionally, nations should ensure that children are capable of expressing their views freely in all matters affecting them, giving due weight to the age and maturity of the child.

This is contrary to traditional American law, which provides that absent proof of harm, courts and social workers simply do not have the authority to intervene in parent-child relationships and decision-making. The importance of this tradition and practice is that the government may not substitute its judgment for that of the parent until there is proof of harm to the child sufficient to justify governmental intervention. It is clear that in two very important areas of the parent-child relationship, religion and education, there will be potential for tremendous conflict.

The international committee in Geneva, in reviewing the laws of practice of countries that have ratified the CRC, has expressed its concern that parents could homeschool without the view of the child being considered; that parents could remove their children from sex-education classes without the view of the child being considered; that parents were legally permitted to use corporal punishment; and that children didn’t have access to reproductive health information without parental knowledge.

The bottom line is the CRC would drastically weaken the United States’ sovereignty over family life, which would have a substantial impact on every American family."

To find out more on the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child, visit

Our sovereignty as parents in America is threatened by the United Nations if our Administration and Congress ratify this treaty. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and teach my children to do the same. We must not lie down on this issue for the sake of our children and grandchildren. We must fight with everything we have to remain One Nation, Under God, not One Nation caving into the demands of the world.

Friday, July 3, 2009

The Tea Parties are Coming, the Tea Parties are Coming!

By Theosebes

The Tea Parties are coming, the Tea Parties are coming! For a second showing, the Tea Parties are coming to a neighborhood corner near you on the Fourth of July, 2009. If the first event was missed, then participation is highly suggested. So come one, come all and bring your red, white and blue tea cups to share with others, in the ever growing frustration that has taken most Americans by storm.

Is the storm brewing as a result of our twenty first century Tea Tax or is there a greater angst, a deeper discontent than just the enormous deficit that will be handed down to our great, great-grandchildren? I suggest that as with the colonists of the 1760’s, the taxation without representation was only a part of a greater injustice that was imprisoning the patriots who gave so much for us, their great, great, great-grandchildren. Would men fight and die because the tax man, in this case Britain, was assessing “unfair taxes”? The taxation they faced was only twenty percent of those being taxed in England, so where did the cry for independence gain in fervor?

The issue that shook the world then and I believe is beginning to shake our world today is not just about the exorbitant taxes that Obama and Company are laying on the backs of millions, but the shackles brought on by an enormous government and the freedoms that are being stripped away, daily in the name of change, in the name of progress. The colonists didn’t shed their blood because they were angry that England was asking for more money, in fact after the War of Independence, colonists were taxed twenty fold more than they had been under the crown. The blood of these patriots ran on the soils of Lexington and Concord, Bunker Hill and Brandywine because their freedoms were being stripped away.

What freedoms have been confiscated from the hands of private citizens today and given to the oligarchy on the hill? To sum up: Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness have become endangered ideals under these ruling elite. Economic freedoms under government regulation, property rights, and the freedom to succeed and fail in business are just a few areas in which the government has overstepped the limits of its Constitutional powers as seen in the frantic vote of the Stimulus Bill. There is a strong arm push for mandatory government run health care. There is the deceit in the Obama plan for educational reform that strips parental rights to choose what is best for their children under the guise of the Convention on the Rights of Children, a treaty if ratified would supersede American law and sovereignty. The First Amendment is under attack through the Fairness Doctrine which was “rooted in the media world of 1949, when lawmakers became concerned that by virtue of their near-stranglehold on nationwide TV broadcasting, the three main television networks — NBC, ABC and CBS — could misuse their broadcast licenses to set a biased public agenda” this is being revisited by Pelosi and friends and yet we see Obama-mercials for his policies without the benefit of hearing from the other side of the discussion.

Fourth Amendment rights are under attack as Obama is using the oft-disproved contention that "90% of the guns recovered in Mexico come from the United States" as the stated basis of his support for the international treaty he is promoting. The treaty is formally known as the Inter-American Convention Against the Illicit Manufacturing of and Trafficking in Firearms, Ammunition, Explosives and Other Related Materials (CIFTA) treaty.

The list of liberties at risk is lengthy and could not fit into a mere blog. Perhaps our greatest liberty, the right to worship God, as guaranteed under the First Amendment, is our most tragic loss. Any honest reader of history will recognize that many of the first settlers in America came for religious freedom and the cost that so many paid for such freedom was the utmost price, their very lives or the lives of their loved ones. Individuals die for those things which have intrinsic value and the right to worship God, unimpeded by the government, is one of those invaluable rights. Today we see this First Amendment right under attack as evidenced by the H.R. 1592 that is pending committee in the U.S. House. This is a bill that would “criminalize thought or emotion or even speech," said Glen Lavy of the Alliance Defense Fund. But I suggest that this attack began decades ago when the Supreme Court ruled in 1947 that it was unconstitutional for the government "to support any religious activities or institutions, whatever they may be called, or whatever form they may adopt to teach or practice religion."2 in Everson v. Board of Education 330 US 31.

Tom West of the Claremont Institute wrote, “The victory of relativism has made the Founders' understanding of religious liberty alien to us. Liberty today is taken to mean "the right to choose," the right to do whatever one pleases.

Surprisingly, both liberals and conservatives agree on this definition. Their disagreement is over the extent to which government should impose limits on abuses of liberty. A sign of our shared view of liberty is that we often speak of balancing liberty with order, with responsibility, or with community. If we define liberty as the unlimited right of the irresponsible will, we do have to look to a source outside of liberty for some restraint on it. But if liberty is inherently responsible liberty, as the Founders thought, it does not need to be balanced by anything. It contains within itself its own balance.

For the Founders, the irresponsible, irrational will is not free. It is enslaved. James Madison said that "the tyranny of their own passions" led the Athenians to condemn Socrates to death. What Madison meant by this phrase was spelled out by the Reverend Samuel West of Massachusetts in a 1776 sermon: "The most perfect freedom consists in obeying the dictates of right reason, and submitting to natural law. When a man goes beyond or contrary to the law of nature and reason, he becomes the slave of base passions and vile lusts. . . . Hence we conclude that where licentiousness begins, liberty ends."4

The liberty and freedom that Americans once enjoyed, free from governmental legislation, came from the idea of personal, conscientious self rule that denied self in the best interest of society or in closer context the best interest of one’s neighbor. There was also the belief of God or a Deity that had defined standards of behavior that human kind should follow because it was best for the individual and society. Because many Americans have shunned the notion that there is absolute truth and therefore absolute law, and because the government operates on the same premise, they legislated on what is good for now, for the ruling class, to remain relevant to the voting population. But those who have remained steadfast in the knowledge that there is in fact absolute truth and who temper their lives through self control and self rule for the best of society, will not only make a distinct stand against the direction of this type of government, but will also perhaps lose their rights to speak out against this abuse of power by the very government they hope to rebuild.

Alexis de Tocqueville wrote in Democracy in America, “It must never be forgotten that religion gave birth to Anglo-American society. In the United States, religion is therefore mingled with all the habits of the nation and all the feeling of patriotism, whence it derives a peculiar force….Christianity has therefore retained a strong hold on the public mind in America…Christianity itself is an established and irresistible fact.”

For this reason men and women have paid the ultimate sacrifice, not because they were angry that taxes were too high, but because loss of liberty was too costly. Freedom and liberty come from God, and the Christian religion has been the tool that has shaped this country from the beginning. Calvin Coolidge stated, “If American democracy is to remain the greatest hope of humanity, it must continue abundantly in the faith of the Bible.”

So let the Tea Parties begin, but let them begin with the purpose of regaining the liberties that the Left has so easily taken from the American people. The fight is for the future, the fight must begin now, or the wars of the past, the signatures on the Declaration of Independence, the sacrifices of the Founders, the Colonists, the Military, the fathers and mothers, who for hundreds of years have given their utmost, will die in vain, as the America they founded dies on the threshold of the twenty-first century.

Smart Girl Politics ©Template Blogger Green by Dicas Blogger.