Free Market Health Care Reform: A Real Alternative to ObamaCare

Most of us today realize the undoubted necessity of major health care reform. For those of us who do not wish to maintain the status quo, there are two sides to the argument. The Obama administration and the Democratic majority in Congress propose more government. Even Republicans are proposing their own slightly lighter version of ObamaCare. However, the only real solution to our health care problems is not more government, but less. It is the very regulations, subsidies, taxes, and inflationary policies proposed today that have led to our health care problems in the first place.

People are being taxed more than they have ever been before. Forty to seventy percent of each income earned by the middle class and the wealthy is now deemed government property, and taxed accordingly. Property taxes, payroll taxes, and corporate taxes are at an all-time high. All of this combines to kill jobs, drive up costs, and make our nation poorer by taking money from citizens to pay for unaffordable government programs, so-called "investments" in money-losing projects, useless bailouts, excessive government salaries, and, worst of all, imperialistic wars that only weaken our national security. With these expenses, it is no wonder that the cost of premiums, treatments, and medical care is at an all-time high. These costs are becoming unaffordable for thousands of American families.

Businesses continue to suffer from heavy price controls, wage laws, union-appeasing legislation, and pointless regulations. This kills profits by raising expenses, which in effect leads to reduced wages, higher prices on consumer goods and services, and a lower motivation to work, compete, and innovate. Advancements in medicine and opportunities to lower costs in order to compete are stifled by these expenses. When prices are fixed by government bureaucrats instead of the free market, the incentive to make improvements and provide better services is damaged. When doctors and patients have to sign more paperwork in order to meet the demands of time-wasting loopholes and expensive government regulations, the efficiencies produced by doctor-patient negotiations are no longer existent. Businesses can no longer afford to provide adequate wages or employer-provided health insurance for their workers.

Subsidies reward failure at the expense of the taxpayer. Big pharma, various insurance companies, and the medical-industrial complex rake in handouts with no idea of what will truly benefit or satisfy consumers. The transmission of information produced by the price system is distorted by false stimulus dollars that provide no calculation of profit and loss. Knowing what consumers want - and how much consumers are willing to pay - becomes much harder when funds are acquired by force rather than by the voluntary actions of consumers themselves.

Last, but not least, if we are to bring about real changes to our health care system, a problem we must be willing to face is the problem of monetary inflation produced by escalating wartime budgets, corporate welfare, cheap handouts, and the very central banking system we adopted under the Federal Reserve Act of 1913. Credit expansion leads to distorted interest rates and high levels of monetary inflation, causing endless boom-bust cycles and dollar degradation. Inflation is the biggest and sneakiest tax of all. It robs people of the value of their hard-earned money, which, in turn, brings down their actual wages and raises the prices of consumer goods and services. Hiring workers becomes more expensive, and businesses suffer as a result. Doctors, patients, hospitals, and companies are hurt in the process. Medical care only becomes more unaffordable.

From these facts, we can deduce that ObamaCare is simply more of the same. The overall economic costs of this expensive overhaul will only make things worse for consumers, workers, and employers alike. High taxes, excessive regulations, costly subsidies, and rising inflation is going to make everything we buy more expensive and everything we sell more worthless. Doctor-patient relationships, medical innovations, incentives to drive down costs, and quality of care will continue to suffer as a result. This is no way to reform health care. In order to truly reform health care, we must be willing to:

• Provide more tax credits and tax cuts
• Rollback price controls and medical regulations
• Stop favoring unions and the medical-industrial complex over consumers
• Eliminate subsides for insurance companies, big pharma, and corporations
  
• Slash our budgets to fight inflation
• Reduce the discretionary powers of the Federal Reserve, and...
• Take health care out of bureaucratic hands and return it to the powers of the free market

Real health care reform starts not by asking government to solve our problems, but by getting it out of the way. Only then will the individual achievement unleashed by the powerful forces of the free market guide us to improve services, lower costs, and provide high-quality health care for a greater number of people. Freedom does wonders for our personal, economic, and social well-being.

Paul: Bernanke World's Greatest Counterfeiter

President Obama: Mr. Warmongering Scumbag

How does a leader who promises peace around the world, yet expands the war in Afghanistan, authorizes the bombings of innocent civilians, continues to send tens of thousands of troops to fight overseas for an unjustified cause, is in bed with multinational corporations that manipulate the law to suit their needs, further deprives us of our liberties by extending the Patriot Act, uses taxpayer money to give aid to powerful dictatorships, puts us further at the mercy of China through excessive borrowing, builds up the debt through escalating budgets and regulations, authorizes more power for the Federal Reserve, signs away our national sovereignty with unprecedented ease, supports policies that cause more people to starve and die in third-world countries, and acts as if he could care less that the dollar is on the road to destruction - win and accept the Nobel Peace Prize?

Keep making your excuses, liberals.

Green Fascism: The Truth Behind Climategate and the Summit at Copenhagen

The climate change summit in Copenhagen is not something that many people want to pay attention to. Perhaps a gathering of environmentalists and world leaders to discuss "climate change" doesn't seem like such a big deal. The agreements made at this summit will affect each and everyone of us, yet we brush it off as just another pointless environmental propaganda fest that will have nothing to do with our personal or economic well-being. Do the words "one-world government" worry anyone? If so, then this event is something that needs to be paid attention to. The globalists would prefer global warming skeptics to stay out of this debate, but we must not give into their desires. I can assure you that our freedom and prosperity will be further damaged once President Obama gets involved in this meeting of totalitarian dictators bent on forcing their ideology upon the masses.

What exactly are these people planning? They seem to be setting up some type of treaty or agreement setting up worldwide laws that, if broken, will result in catastrophic punishments to millions of innocent people. The agreements themselves are punishment alone - punishment for driving certain cars, eating certain foods, working certain jobs, and living certain lifestyles. If any nation dare refuse to abide by these worldwide rules on how many carbon emissions can be produced, all Hell will break loose, and the U.N. will see that the disobedient will pay for their refusal to submit to the power-hungry global overlords that seek to grab control of everything in sight.

Third-world countries are being hurt the most. Food prices are already skyrocketing. Millions will be forced to starve and die because these new worldwide regulations and global taxes are far too burdensome on agriculture, energy companies, the auto industry, and citizens themselves. The very air we breathe is now considered a pollutant by the EPA. No one is safe from the wrath of the totalitarian dictators that seek to control every aspect of our lives. They will be telling us what kind of cars we can drive, what kind of foods we can eat, what kind of jobs we can work, and how we are supposed to live our lives. Liberty is being traded for "global security," and, in doing so, we are giving up the very heart and soul of our existence to those who seek to deprive of us of everything we have so that they can be known to the citizens of the world as the "saviors of mankind."

In the climate change agreements that will be confirmed at Copenhagen, we see some pretty scary things. Lord Christopher Monckton, one of the very few prominent figures speaking out against the New World Order, has somehow obtained secretive papers from Copenhagen coordinators outlining the plans for devastating global regulations. Believe it or not, there is actually going to be a massive global tax imposed on the citizens of the world, the revenue going to the World Bank to pay for whatever programs the globalists wish to force upon the masses. Global regulations regarding the emission of carbon into the atmosphere will also be set in the form of - courtesy of Smiley-Faced Fascism Incorporated - "environmental agreements." I can assure you that prices will rise, wages will go down in many industries, and the unemployment rate will continue to skyrocket within the coming months. Leading us into a global depression is exactly what the globalists intend to do, even if some naïve members of Congress insist otherwise. Our dollar is on the path to full-blown destruction.

Fortunately, a recent scandal has awakened many people to the scientific hoax that we call "global warming." Hackers gained access to the databases of many university computers, discovering shocking emails that revealed scientists discussing distortion, exaggeration, and elimination of their own scientific data to make global warming look like a valid and catastrophic epidemic. In their own words, they were trying to "hide the decline." Have you noticed how cold it's been lately? Here in Wisconsin, our summer was chilly, our fall was cold, and our winter is freezing. You literally feel like an iceberg as soon as you step out of the door. Temperatures have been declining, and we are supposed to believe that "global warming" is still a valid theory. Despite what the Al Gore propagandists want you to believe, we have been experiencing environmental extremes since life on earth took its first breath. Sun cycles account for the majority of what we call climate change, and there isn't much we can do to change sun cycles.

In the fifties, Progressives were screaming about how polar bears would drown and cities would sink beneath the seas if we didn't do "something." By the seventies, the tune of the Progressives was changed to "global cooling," and we were going to see another Ice Age if we didn't change our lifestyles - and quick. By the turn of the millenium, "global warming" came back to haunt us, and prominent figures, including Al Gore himself, profited off of environmental alarmism. Due to recent declining temperatures, the phrase is now "climate change," and we are supposed to believe that the evils of humanity have caused every single environmental problem that we face today. Even if you have spent but a year on this earth, politicians and scientists point their fingers at you to say, "It's all your fault." They don't want to accept that perhaps the majority of the temperature changes we see today are caused naturally rather than by the so-called "evils" of humanity.

Don't get me wrong. There are many legitimate environmental issues that we face today - the biggest being pollution. However, excessive taxes and regulations aren't going to make our environmental problems any better, and, even if they did, we'd do so at the expense of our freedoms. Instead, we must find ways of solving our problems without resorting to deprivation of Constitutional liberties. For one thing, we need to respect property rights more than we do now. We need to eliminate the loopholes that allow various corporations and individuals the right to pollute on property that isn't theirs. We also need to attack massive budgets and burdensome regulations that lead to credit expansion and high inflation rates. If we don't attack the problem of monetary inflation, the motivation and innovation needed to discover new and cleaner technological advancements will only be stifled by costly expenses. Believe it or not, I am a great admirer of nature, and I personally believe that everything on this earth has a life, a spirit, and a name. The environment is definitely an important issue for me, but the whole environmental movement has been infiltrated by big government Progressives, activists expressing anti-business sentiment, pinko commies, and self-loathing econazis. I, for one, have a hard time associating with those people.

Unfortunately, those who speak out against the New World Order have politicians, scientists, professors, television personalities, prominent celebrities, and brainwashed simpletons to deal with. When Lord Christopher Monckton tried to speak to anti-globalists at the climate change summit in Copenhagen, many brownshirted activists stormed in to seize property, act in a violent manner, and trash the place entirely. Police have also been taking into custody those who would even dare speak out against global leaders attending the summit. Free speech is dying a horrible death, and we need to do everything we can to utilize what is left of it.

I urge each and everyone of you to protect the environment, but do so without demanding personal or economic liberties to be taken away from us. Speak out against those who would like to see our rights deprived of us for their own personal gain. Expose the globalist agenda for what it truly is, even if it means losing a few friends and colleagues in the process. If we lose our freedoms, we will have ourselves to blame. Don't let it slip away. I know that I have used this quote many times before, but, in the words of Patrick Henry:

"Give me liberty or give me death!"

Fight the establishment with all you've got. Follow your heart, and march to the drums of liberty and freedom. God bless you, my friends, and have a wonderful day.

We're All Abortionists Now

As if passing a law legalizing the murder of millions of unborn infants wasn't enough for the babykillers, we are now being asked to do our patriotic duty to pay for other peoples' abortions against our will.

I haven't the faintest idea why they call abortionists pro-choicers! Does the baby get a choice? Does anyone related to the baby - besides the carrier - get a choice? If that wasn't enough, not even taxpayers are given the choice on whether their money is going to pay for murder or not. We pay for Iraq, we pay for Afghanistan, and now we're going to pay for the murders of millions of innocent children who are stripped of their right to live in the name of "choice."

For those of you who haven't heard, the Senate defeated the amendment in the health care bill that would have prevented taxpayer funds from going to abortions. Now, we have no choice. I urge each and everyone of you to pray for our country. If this bill doesn't die a horrible, horrible death, then let's hope that another pro-life amendment is passed.

You know, there are so many things confusing me at the moment. Democrats kept saying, "How could you accuse us of wanting to cover abortion in the health care bill? That's sick!" Now their tune has changed.

"A woman has a right to choose, and she shouldn't be stripped of that right just because she can't afford it."

Unfortunately, health care reform supporters are also making excuses for this horrible part of the legislation. As if it wasn't enough that they support a bill that will raise taxes on everyone rich and poor, put hundreds of people out of business, nearly eliminate any kind of competition in the medical market, slow the development of groundbreaking new innovations in medicine, destroy doctor-patient relationships, drive up premiums, increase the rate of inflation, use more money from China to fund it, create frightening death panels, send our deficits skyrocketing through the roof, and contribute to the rapid destruction of the dollar - now we're going to be forced to do the work of Satan himself. Murder, no matter what the fascists in Washington want to call it, is never justified for reasons other than self-defense. We cannot let this stand.

We cannot defend liberty without defending life. There is no reason for us to declare that some lives are more valuable than others in the name of "choice." Liberty begins at life. The seed of disrespect for life at any stage in development is one that grows rapidly once it is planted. Congressman Ron Paul said it best:

Today, we are seeing a piecemeal destruction of individual freedom. And in abortion, the statists have found a most effective method of obliterating freedom: obliterating the individual. Abortion on demand is the ultimate State tyranny; the State simply declares that certain classes of human beings are not persons, and therefore not entitled to the protection of the law. The State protects the "right" of some people to kill others, just as the courts protected the "property rights" of slave masters in their slaves. Moreover, by this method the State achieves a goal common to all totalitarian regimes: it sets us against each other, so that our energies are spent in the struggle between State-created classes, rather than in freeing all individuals from the State. Unlike Nazi Germany, which forcibly sent millions to the gas chambers (as well as forcing abortion and sterilization upon many more), the new regime has enlisted the assistance of millions of people to act as its agents in carrying out a program of mass murder.

It is our God-given duty to protect the lives of everyone rich and poor, black and white, male and female, elderly and youthful. The unborn are no exception.

Life is the greatest liberty of all.

The Leading Cause of Poverty Today? The Abandonment of Freedom!

We continuously hear over and over again that the leading cause of poverty in America today is a lack of regulations, inadequate taxation, underfunded budgets, "privatized" health care, and the free market system itself. Capitalism is blamed for the over-concentration of power and wealth into hands that belong to the richest of the rich. All of our troubles are claimed to have been caused by the system that brought us more freedom and prosperity than any other nation on earth. My friends, the leading cause of poverty in America today is not capitalism - it is our departure from that system and our inability to preserve the principles upon which our nation was founded.

At the root of the problem is the central banking system that we adopted in 1913 under President Theodore Roosevelt and then advanced further under President Woodrow Wilson. Both of these men were power-hungry globalists whose policies triggered a "need" for an elastic currency. When government bureaucrats propose budgets that are too expensive, taxes that are too high, or regulations that are too burdensome, the Federal Reserve is given the encouragement to expand credit and print money endlessly without a care in the world that the creation of the money itself is entirely artificial. It is created out of thin air.

Before the Federal Reserve, the government had to spend within its means. However, if we continue with a centralized monetary policy, the government will continue to spend and expand without limit. Poverty becomes a very difficult issue to deal with. Politicians, in turn, propose massive taxpayer-funded welfare programs that only drive up inflation, which is not only an increase in the money supply, but also a way of taxing the poor more than any legislative tax could do. When an inflationary policy is endlessly continued in infinite cycles, prices rise, wages go down, and it becomes more expensive for employers to hire people. The dollar is depreciated, and we get less bang for our buck. Poverty programs only make poverty worse.

Never has America been more riddled with useless wars and foreign entanglements than in the past several decades. If it wasn't for the Federal Reserve, the government would not be able to declare wars on other nations without a care in the world what it would do to our national debt and the economic well-being of our citizens. Recently, President Obama confirmed a troop surge of 30,000 men and women into Afghanistan. It's as if he is taking a page right out of the Bush playbook. This was the man who was supposed to be anti-war, the man who everyone thought believed in peace and nonaggression. His supporters continue to make excuses for him, but there is no excuse for sending tens of thousands of troops into a country that should have been left by Americans a long time ago. If you are anti-war, there is no excuse for the actions that were taken by President Obama, so stop making excuses for him. Does anyone else regret that we did not elect Congressman Ron Paul for president?

These wars pose a threat to our security, our economic well-being, and our civil liberties. It gives the totalitarian dictators in Washington the ability to take away our right to privacy and free speech in the name of what they determine is our "national security." When you give up liberty for security, you lose both. The real threat to our security today is the imperialistic power structure that consists of the U.S. government, the corporations preferred by bureaucrats, and the dictatorial Federal Reserve that controls almost every aspect of our economy. We are sinking deeper and deeper into the realms of fascism, and that is not something our Founding Fathers would have been proud of. We must do everything we can to fight for our lives and for our freedoms. We need to return to limited government, low budgets, low taxes, a noninterventionist foreign policy, and sound money.

The cause of all of our troubles, including poverty as we've never seen it before, is the inability to preserve the foundation upon which our great and prosperous nation was founded.

The Philosophy of Liberty

What Really Caused the Great Depression?

The Government Can

Audit the Fed!

As you may have heard, a House panel has voted to audit the fed. The move, led by Congressman Ron Paul, would give Congress more authority and oversight over actions taken by the Federal Reserve. I'm no economic expert, but H.R. 1207 is one of the most important pieces of legislation ever proposed in Congress.

The Federal Reserve, as everyone should know, is a central banking system that controls our monetary policy. It used to be called a "private" entity, but evidence shows us otherwise. The Fed is a public-private partnership having total control over a monetary policy that the Founders would be ashamed of. We no longer base our currency off of a sound, valid commodity. Our current fiat standard bases our monetary policy on almost nothing. It's a complete illusion.

We are supposed to believe that printing money based on the opinions of a few elitist aristocrats is superior to basing our money supply over something that actually exists. We've never had a full-blown gold standard, but we did have something that was more toward such. Gold, as many people know, generally increases in value over time. The value and supply of gold used to be the basis for how much money we could print. Before the Federal Reserve, there was a natural cap on spending formed by the forces of the free market. The government had to spend within its means. With the Federal Reserve however, the government can spend and expand without limit because the Federal Reserve controls monetary policy by whim. Instead of monetary policy being controlled by sound commodity and the natural forces of the free market, monetary policy is changed based on the decisions of a bureaucratic panel of wealthy bankers. Somehow, this is supposed to be superior to the gold standard.

The endless printing of money causes much damage to our national and global economy. The value of the dollar, unfortunately, is becoming worthless because the Federal Reserve prints money endlessly to fund the government's massive budgets, spending programs, and debts both foreign and domestic. If our monetary policy doesn't change, we will see hyperinflation post-recession, the inevitable destruction of the dollar, and mass poverty worldwide. There will, in effect, be a financial meltdown. We won't ever be able to pay off our debts if we keep spending money that isn't there. Things won't get better if we continue to pump illusionary wealth into the system.

I highly recommend Ron Paul's End the Fed, a book that explains our situation in detail. Since I am very tired, I will leave it here today and perhaps express my emotions on a deeper level in a few days. For now, God bless you, God bless America, and have a fabulous day.

The Necessity of the Men's Movement: Defeating Modern Feminism One Step at a Time

There was a time when feminism actually stood for something. Women fought for their right to vote, fought for their right to work as a man could, and fought for their right to have their voices heard. They were sick and tired of having all of their concerns ignored as if they were just expendable objects to use for the advancement of the male power structure. Women just couldn't take it anymore. They were going to show the world that they were equals who had just as much potential and deserved just as much freedom as any man did. It didn't matter if society said they were supposed to cook, clean, and simply take care of the children. They knew in their hearts that they had the potential to lead the lives they wanted to lead.

With the help of a select few male voices that supported them, the feminist movement grew into something that benefited women of all ages, colors, and backgrounds. Women gained the right to vote, they gained the right to work as a man could, and they gained the right to have their voices heard. The pioneers of classic feminism paved the way for gender egalitarianism for generations to come. But as time passed, things started to go wrong.

The feminist movement was twisted into something that went against everything that the classic feminists stood for: instead of gender equality, these modern feminists began to fight for gender superiority. Instead of targeting sexism, modern feminists started targeting men themselves. Men were twisted into something evil and wicked. Men who emphasize strict gender codes and stereotypes have also perpetuated the problem. We have grown into a society that thinks women deserve our protection the most, but men and children deserve the same kind of treatment.

I see the effects of this new mentality as I hear stories that break my heart. I've read a few stories of men getting raped or beaten. and I have to tell you that they are some of the most horrible stories that I have ever heard. After calling the police, they were often laughed at or disregarded. There are sometimes comments to these stories. Yes, you do get your sympathetic and compassionate reactions, but there are a lot of people saying, "Men can't be raped," "Men aren't victims," "He deserved it," "A real man wouldn't get raped," "A real man wouldn't get beaten," "He was lying." Often, the only support these men could get were from a counselor or a few male or female friends that cared for them when nobody else would.

After all of these years of women fighting for their rights, something unexpected has happened: Men have now been pinned as aggressors and women as victims. Modern feminists aren't the only ones to blame. Men who emphasize strict gender codes and stereotypes have also perpetuated the problem. When did we get to the point where we started to believe that women deserve our protection more than men and children? As a protector and a nurturer, I feel as if it is my duty to protect all of God's children regardless of their differences. I will defend and protect women, men, children, and the unborn to the death. We all deal with things differently, but we're all human beings with feelings.

Now, where do these modern feminist influences come from? You absolutely need to take a look some quotes for yourself. Click on the link, and you'll be amazed.

I mean, come on. Men are supposed to respect women, but women don't need to respect men? Men aren't allowed to earn a higher salary, but it's okay for courts to have a bias towards women in custodial cases? Forced sex upon a woman is rape, but forced sex upon a man isn't to be taken seriously? A man who abuses a woman is evil, but a woman who abuses a man is nothing to worry about? Most feminists would say, "Of course not," to all of these questions, but their ideology has greatly contributed to these subconscious mentalities. No wonder we need a men's movement.

God bless you, and have a fabulous day.

The Problem With the Welfare State

Pardon me, but I need to vent my anger about the current culture of entitlements that has been arising in our youth and our adults. It seems that, nowadays, people are asking for more government programs and benefits than ever before. These welfare queens seem to think that, since they are citizens, they should be entitled to free health care, free education, free housing, free energy, free transportation, free TV, free internet, and even free cash. Why have we allowed ourselves to create an atmosphere in which everything we have been taught to work for in the past is now being considered a "basic public necessity?" We need to set our priorities straight or we'll grow into a nation of government-run people.

The government can give you what you think you deserve, but not without stealing from somebody else. Maybe you think it's okay that they take from the "rich" guy to take care of you, but the government is stealing from your pockets as well. It's called redistribution of wealth, and it's a socialist principle that does not work in our society. If anything, it increases the size and role of government at rates unforeseeable by our Founding Fathers. It makes people into slaves and servants rather than individuals and masters of their own lives. When the people become dependent on the government, the government can convince people into believing that it is trustworthy enough to expand in size and power.

You may think that the expansion of government is not such a bad thing. In fact, you may like it because you get more "free" stuff, and you feel more secure with a bureaucratic elite than with the forces of the free market. However, what you get is something worse than you could ever imagine: the government starts telling you what you can and can't do with your own life. Maybe it tells you that you're not allowed to drive a certain car or own a certain gun or marry a certain person. Maybe it tells you that you're not allowed to eat a certain food or set up your own business or sign up with a certain insurance company. Maybe it will even start dictating how much you can earn, how much medical care you can get, and what kind of lifestyle that you're allowed to pursue. It already happens in Canada and Britain.

When you ask the government for more and more "free" services, you're asking for it to grow in size, power, and tyranny.  At the rate we're going, we'll no longer be individual citizens with the right to live life the way we see fit. We'll be a truly powerless people, owned and managed by the dictatorial U.S.S.A. Have we learned nothing from the nursery rhymes that we all knew and loved as kids?

Rock-a-bye baby in the tree top

When the wind blows, the cradle will rock

When the branch breaks, the cradle will fall

And down will come baby, cradle and all 

You see, my friends, we're the babies being cradled by that branch, which is - you guessed it - the U.S. government. We are becoming increasingly dependent on that branch to live our lives. That branch will grow stronger and stronger, but the wind will grow stronger and stronger as well. No matter how strong that branch gets, the winds of deficit, taxation, warfare, inflation, dollar depreciation, burden, wickedness, totalitarianism, and evil will grow stronger right along with it. Eventually, the wind will grow so strong, that the branch will break, and the system will collapse upon itself. The government will fail its people, and the people won't know what to do because they haven't learned how to take care of themselves. The branch will break, and the people will fall.

It's never too late for preservation or restoration or a Second American Revolution. Thomas Jefferson once said that the blood of patriots and tyrants must once again be shed one day in order to restore the tree of liberty that has been planted in our great and prosperous nation. We need to stop letting ourselves become servants of an all-powerful master that promises to take care of us until death do us part. Instead, we must release our individual strength and tell the government that we serve ourselves and whoever we want to serve. We are the masters of our lives and of the government. They don't own us. They can't tell us what to do. They can't push us around anymore!

We are a strong and courageous people. We will rise again to relinquish the demonic forces that have infiltrated this all-mighty power structure that we call "leadership." We must not let them grow so large that they will bury us all. Protect your right to keep and bear arms. Protect your right to make your own choices regarding your life, liberty, and property. Protect your right to pursue happiness as you see fit. It's your life, and the government can't tell you what to do.

We're not going to take it anymore. Not in America. After all, we know better than to give up our freedoms in the name of some Progressive utopia where an elite group of aristocrats makes the decisions for us. Don't let them ever take away your liberty. It is more precious than any one of us take for granted.

Freedom is a treasure that must always be preserved.

The Health Care Bill: Passed in the House of Representatives

We all knew this was coming. Even as we frantically tried to call Congress to put a stop to this horrific piece of legislation, we knew in our hearts that it would amount to nothing. Our leaders don't listen, and we've known that for a very long time. One of the worst bills in history is about to become reality. Kiss your freedoms goodbye, America.

Progressives thought about what "free" or subsidized health care would do for millions of those who cannot afford health care. Without considering the economic consequences of such a disastrous idea, the social benefits of such a proposal seemed to outweigh any negatives whatsoever.

No one really took enough time to factor in the Federal Reserve: This team of global elites has been printing money like madmen since the very beginning, resulting in recession after recession. The value of our dollar has been plummeting, and yet, we want to continue with failed Keynesian policies that create nothing but illusionary wealth. Our politicians keep begging for inflation and dollar depreciation in order to fund their massive budgets. Without the Federal Reserve, our politicians would be forced to live within their means instead of spending and expanding without limit. Unfortunately, people now think that big government is the answer to all of our problems, and therefore want to sustain the Federal Reserve so that the government can keep gaining more control.

When this bill is passed in the Senate and signed by our president, many things will happen. Small businesses will inevitably see tax hikes. Prices will go up, wages will be cut, and quality of service will plummet. We'll have to beg China for money again, increasing our debt dramatically. Competition will suffer, and with it, innovation will also suffer. With all of the new regulations on the insurance industry, and the lax oversight of the government option, the government will inevitably have the upper hand. They'll be able to seize their funds by force, whether people like it or not. Since everyone will be required by law to have insurance, those who do not have it will be forced into the government option, sending premiums even further through the roof. There will no longer be an incentive to provide better care. Government-run health care will take control.

Worst of all, money will print at rapid speed, increasing inflation and making our dollar worthless. Everyone invested in our dollar will suffer, leading to mass poverty worldwide. At the mercy of tyrannical governments and wealthy bankers, we will beg to be saved. We will no longer own ourselves.

Enjoy your freedom while it lasts, for it could be worse. At least we're not living in Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union - yet.

The Idiots at FreePress.Net: Part II

In case you haven't read Part I, please click here to do so. Today, I'm going to continue my analysis of this ridiculous and idiotic organization that thinks it can save the media by destroying the economy in the process.

While media technology has advanced in the 42 years since public broadcasting was created, the need has only grown for noncommercial, not-for-profit media, available free to the public with a mission to inform, educate, inspire and engage.

I want my readers to take a very close look at the language this organization is using. As you can see, it has radically Progressive undertones. It is now evil to make a profit in order to sustain business. When did we get to the point where we started to hold disdain for the very mention of profit? Profits buy the things businesses need to thrive. Without them, you inevitably fail in the marketplace - unless the government steps in to turn your bankruptcy into bureaucracy. These people at FreePress.Net have no clue what kind of impact their actions will have on the economy if they get their way. On top of that, their plan for government-controlled media has a specific agenda; a Progressive agenda, might I say. The information, education, inspiration, and engagement received is far from unbiased: its purpose is to indoctrinate the masses with socialist propaganda in order to manipulate society into succumbing to Progressive ideals. After all, these taxpayer-funded outlets have a "mission," do they not?

Despite their value, public media are under constant threat. They are chronically underfunded and under assault by lawmakers who would silence critical voices and cripple alternatives to the commercial media.

The words in bold are clearly methods of making people believe that massive spending bills, high taxation, and big government is the answer to our problems. If you expand the government's role in the media, won't you just silence critical voices and cripple alternatives even more? After all, that's what the government does and will continue to do. Why give them more power to do so?

The headlines are bleak. Tens of thousands of journalists have lost their jobs in just the past few years. Major dailies throughout the country have been shuttered or gone bankrupt, and it seems only a matter of time before a major American city wakes up without a newspaper on anyone’s doorstep.

Maybe these outlets would be able to thrive if they were allowed to make a profit? Just a thought. I know, sounds ridiculous, doesn't it?

The erosion of American journalism hinders the public’s right to know: Without quality journalism that holds our government and corporate leaders accountable, our democracy suffers. But the state of journalism isn’t natural, inevitable or acceptable.

More Progressive nonsense! First of all, it isn't groups of people who have rights; it is individuals who have rights. To say that the public has a right is like saying that everyone is one in the same, something our Founders regarded as a complete fallacy when they wrote our Constitution. It is the individual who has the right to pursue knowledge by any means possible, but that doesn't mean he or she entitled to free TV, free radio, and free internet. Although that would be nice, the economic consequences are disastrous. We can't afford all of these entitlements anymore, even if taxation was at a one-hundred percent level across the board. Giving people things for free isn't really "free" if you're stealing from someone else. As for the talk of accountability, what these people are saying is that government should interrogate and silence people who do not meet the government's idea of what is acceptable and what is not. All these people want is more bureaucracy. Someone has to tell these people that we are a Constitutional republic, not a democracy.

Our media system was shaped by political and public policy decisions made by Congress and the Federal Communications Commission in Washington. Lawmakers and regulators at these agencies rubber-stamped the bad deals that led to the unchecked consolidation and crushing debt that now threaten the health of our press.

For once, I actually agree with these idiots, but I don't have the same solution in mind. More government is not the answer to our problems if big government was the problem in the first place. That's just common sense.

The search for solutions to the crisis in journalism calls for a national journalism strategy premised on the idea that newsgathering is a public service – not just another commodity.

Do you like socialized journalism the likes of the Soviet Union and China? If so, then you're in for a wonderful surprise. If not, enjoy the ride while it lasts. Thank you, and have a fabulous day! Leave your comments below.

Urgent: Major Advancement in New World Order Agenda

No comment.

The Idiots at FreePress.Net: Part I

I never thought I'd actually be calling people idiots for their political beliefs, but the folks at FreePress.Net are absolutely out of their minds. What I read literally made me want to throw up. I don't understand these people in the least. What they're calling for almost seems like a government takeover of the media for the sake of getting it out of the hands of the "greedy" corporations. I want to briefly present some of the idiotic remarks I found on the site - and trust me, they are idiotic - and then explain why their idea of a solution only perpetuates the problem they claim they want to prevent.

Media owners influence how women and people of color are portrayed in the media.

I know this may seem like a small statement the organization is making - and it is true - but it already shows you the scope these people are looking through. Notice that they choose to victimize two groups that are continuously victimized by the government: women and minorities. I am appalled at how women are exposed as objects on television, but this statement leaves out another problem in our media: the portrayal of men and white people. I'm sure there are many sincere, wonderful males out there who compare themselves to the males on television and don't see themselves as "manly" enough for the rest of society, even though it doesn't really matter how masculine or feminine you are. The organization is clearly trying to use "diversity" to push its agenda so that it can use women and minorities as pawns for their own gain.

But these massive conglomerates – like General Electric, Time Warner and News Corp. – only care about the bottom line, not serving the public interest. And allowing these few firms too much control over the flow of news and information is dangerous for our democracy.

Again, notice the language. The agenda seems reasonable on the surface, but if you look at the language closer, you will definitely notice some collectivist and Progressive rhetoric that has been used for years by politicians who are shredding our Constitution without an ounce of shame. The phrase "public interest" is often used to justify collectivist ideas, principles, and policies that define the interests of every individual despite the fact that individuals have a relative viewpoint on what is truly in their best interest.

High-speed Internet access is fast becoming a basic public necessity, just like water or electricity.

This was the idiotic rhetoric I was speaking of. Can anyone explain to me how high-speed internet is just as important as water? I guess if we don't drink enough internet, we'll suffer from dehydration. Uh-oh! Although I am using a high-speed internet connection at this moment, I can honestly tell you that I survived without high-speed internet for years, and I didn't even come close to dying. Really? Yeah, really! I'm serious. Nothing happened to me. In fact, I've even lived without the electricity that these collectivists claim is a "basic public necessity" for long periods of time through some of the most horrible blizzards we've experienced in years (so much for global warming). To claim the internet as a necessity is one thing, but to call it a basic public necessity is even worse. Anyone with half a brain knows that no one "needs" the internet.

We need to keep the Internet free, open and neutral. Network Neutrality is vital to ensuring that everyone can connect and share content freely, that we can access the information, visit the Web sites and say what we want online, free from discrimination or interference.

And that is why, supposedly, putting it in the hands of the government is an even better solution. In fact, the government already partially controls the internet through special interests, the Patriot Act, and the FCC for crying out loud! This solution would just give them more control.  If you honestly think that the government is going to be more fair and balanced, you have no idea who controls our government: bureaucrats, special interests, global corporations, and the Federal Reserve. The solution advocated by FreePress.Net would give the government the ability to silence and interrogate opposition, peek in on personal conversations and networking sites, and give the president the executive power to shut down the internet at will. We already have this so-called "network neutrality," but the solutions advocated by this organization, and by members of the Obama administration, would go far beyond that. In fact, Obama's FCC "Diversity" Czar has said that the widely unpopular Fairness Doctrine doesn't go far enough. Although repealed a few years back, elements of the Fairness Doctrine still exist today, and if we let the government have more control over the media, who knows what will happen? Oh, maybe I'm worrying too much. The government already has massive influence over the media. A complete takeover would just be a few steps away.

The way to stop the slide and improve broadband access, service and choice is to pass a comprehensive national broadband plan that is focused on putting our digital future back on track. A national broadband plan would protect Internet freedom and foster competition by bringing new providers into the marketplace, driving economic growth and innovation, and bringing universal, affordable broadband access to all Americans.

In a nutshell, that pretty much means socialized internet. Supposedly, the internet should be "free" for everyone by making all citizens pay into the system, regardless of how often they use the internet or whether or not they use it all. What these idiots don't realize is that setting up a "comprehensive national broadband plan" would require trillions of dollars funded by taxpayers, borrowing, and increased printing of money, leading to hyperinflation, bigger debts, and the very destruction of the U.S. dollar. That's not exactly "free," now is it?

Well that's all I really have time for today. This is just scratching the surface. I know you're in shock, but please leave your comments below. Thank you, God bless you, and have a fabulous day!

Obama's Enemy List

I read this excellent article by blogger Eddie Howell, the author of Something You Might Like, and I thought I'd share it with everyone:

Obama's Enemy List
by Eddie Howell

President Barack Obama, in a very un-presidential manner, is going about promoting his political agenda in large measure by criticizing, trying to marginalize, and ultimately bring down those whom he perceives to be his political enemies (rather than “opponents”). Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN) has cautioned the President that his actions are beginning to look like those of Richard Nixon, who, seemingly in a paranoia mode, made a list of “enemies” he wanted his administration to go after, and some of whom he did actually attack, using the resources of government. This pursuit of “enemies” led to the eventual downfall of his presidency.

“‘An “enemies list” only denigrates the Presidency and the Republic itself,’ Alexander said on the Senate floor. ‘These are unusually difficult times, with plenty of forces encouraging us to disagree. Let’s not start calling people out and compiling an enemies list. Let’s push the street-brawling out of the White House and work together on the truly presidential issues: creating jobs, reducing health care costs, reducing the debt, creating clean energy.’” [1]

Sorry, Senator. You are correct, but you may be too late. The enemies-list operation is in full swing already. Any people or groups of people who have criticized (to any significant effect) some part of the Obama agenda may very well find themselves to be his target, if they aren’t already.

A partial listing of Obama’s “enemies”:

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce – This is yet another example of Obama trying to marginalize and take down a traditionally very influential group. Obama is against any effective lobbying group that tries to benefit the private sector or the American economy. A prosperous people don’t look to government for everything. An impoverished people may.

Fox News – Anita Dunn, David Axelrod and others have been sent out to try to discredit Fox News and even get “mainstream” news outlets to deny that Fox is a legitimate news organization. This will have some effect, perhaps, but Fox News’ ratings are up substantially since this “war on Fox News” broke out.

Rush Limbaugh and conservative talk radio – The administration will probably try some back-door version of the Fairness Doctrine to silence conservative talk radio (and Fox New as well). Mark Lloyd, the “diversity czar” of the FCC has no respect for freedom of speech or freedom of the press. Rush’s ratings are up.

Health insurance companies – Democrats in Congress are currently working to deny health insurers the exemption from anti-trust laws that they currently enjoy. The objective is to strip the states of their power to regulate insurance and at the same time put the insurance companies either out of business or directly under the thumb of the federal government, and further obfuscate the costs of their health care plan.

Big oil – All energy-related industries, as well as consumers, are likely to suffer as a result of cap and trade, if it is enacted. This will punish our entire country by bringing on another depression. States that are already suffering the most will likely be hardest hit, but all will be hurt. Are you ready?

Auto manufacturers – Current CAFE standards and the GM and Chrysler takeovers should be punishment enough, if any were needed (which it isn’t), but Obama is going to tighten CAFE standards further and dictate what kind of cars can be made. Many vehicles currently available will be gone.

Fast food – Federal and some local laws will more strenuously regulate fast food providers as to location, nutritional information disclosure, and allowable menus. This is an area where endless harassment of citizens can and will take place.

Conservatives on the internet – Obama is already pushing for authority to take over private networks on the pretext of “cyber-security” concerns. Proposed “net neutrality” rules will further restrict internet freedom. People have remarked on how the internet has not brought about “Big Brother” controls as some have feared, but we haven’t seen the outcome yet. The technology is there for massive abuse and government control. The FCC “diversity czar” is going after internet conservatives also.

According to Investors’ Business Daily, even though “net neutrality” is advertised as creating more opportunities for internet access, “[t]he issue is not access, but control. In February 2008, FCC diversity czar Mark Lloyd, an admirer of what Hugo Chavez did to silence Venezuela's media, wrote about net neutrality in an article titled ‘Net Neutrality Is A Civil Rights Issue’ and published by CommonDreams.org.

“‘Unfortunately, the powerful cable and telecom industry doesn't value the Internet for its public interest benefits,’ Lloyd wrote. ‘Instead, these companies too often believe that to safeguard their profits, they must control what content you see and how you get it.’ Lloyd feels government should be the voice controlling what you see and hear.” [2]

The Republican Party – The Obama White House is trying to marginalize the Republican Party as a non-factor. The main obstacle to this is the fact that the American people, by a majority, support none of Obama’s main initiatives. Republicans could capitalize on this a lot more than they have been doing. But if they’re afraid of appearing too combative, they will instead appear to have rolled over and capitulated. New candidates will be needed if the GOP is to be revived in 2010, even though most voters want that to happen.

Etc., Etc. – Look for more enemies-list activity in upcoming days. They’re just getting started, and they’ve got to move fast.

Then there are those the Administration and Congress are going after a little less directly, without trying to publicly discredit them specifically. They’re not enemies so much as targets to be dealt with in clearing the way for and financing the Obama program:

Doctors who oppose Obamacare – Doctors are going to find their government reimbursements decreased (to lower “costs”), which will lead to more doctors dropping out of government-reimbursed programs, or out of medical practice entirely. But that’s OK with Obama if he gets his government-dominated program going. However, the attempt to cut reimbursements may well prove politically impossible.

The private sector in general – How many more businesses and industries must be taken over by the government? Apparently many more, will be, not necessarily by ownership, but by numerous new taxes and regulations and zealous enforcement from the growing government sector. Corporate profits are the liberals’ piggy bank, they think. They’ll worry about the economy and jobs (along with Afghanistan) later, time permitting.

The “rich” who aren’t part of his support team – Hollywood liberal elites, professional athletes, union leaders, rich trial lawyers and other liberal donors can hope to fare well in Obama’s fascist crackdowns. Some large companies are said to be cutting deals to try to gain a favorable position. But the rich taxpayers in general are considered ripe for the picking. Obama does not care about unemployment or the bad economy. It’s all about getting his great fascist program in place before the bottom falls out of his popularity.

American Taxpayers in general (investors, professionals and other workers) – These will do well to be able to keep their jobs or the better part of their investments in the Obama-depressed economy that we’ll see if Obama’s big agenda items are enacted. Forget about green jobs. A few thousand of those will do little to help the 15-million-plus who are unemployed, not counting those who have given up looking for work, or have taken part-time jobs.

The Obama Administration is probably the most activist freedom-destroying and takeover-minded (i.e., “progressive”) administration in our history. Woodrow Wilson and FDR might come close, but at least they could point to World War I and the Great Depression and World War II as excuses for their activism. Obama still tries to blame George W. Bush long after it’s too late to do so. This is not the change most people thought we were going to get. Soon only the most hardcore leftists and Obama fans (and some others bought off or severely arm-twisted) will be able to willingly support the Obama program.

Isn't that incredible, people? Eddie is such a good writer. Please visit his blog, and be sure to comment! God bless you, and have a fabulous day!

A Constitutional Lawyer's Analysis of H.R. 3200

I was looking through some blogs today, and I came across something very interesting. The author of Just Another Conservative Girl posted a critique of H.R. 3200, the health care bill, by Michael Connelly of Carlton, Texas, a retired Constitutional lawyer. I decided to post it on my blog, and I encourage others to do so as well.

The Truth About the Health Care Bills

Well, I have done it! I have read the entire text of proposed House Bill 3200: The Affordable Health Care Choices Act of 2009. I studied it with particular emphasis from my area of expertise, constitutional law. I was frankly concerned that parts of the proposed law that were being discussed might be unconstitutional. What I found was far worse than what I had heard or expected.

To begin with, much of what has been said about the law and its implications is in fact true, despite what the Democrats and the media are saying. The law does provide for rationing of health care, particularly where senior citizens and other classes of citizens are involved, free health care for illegal immigrants, free abortion services, and probably forced participation in abortions by members of the medical profession.

The Bill will also eventually force private insurance companies out of business and put everyone into a government run system. All decisions about personal health care will ultimately be made by federal bureaucrats and most of them will not be health care professionals. Hospital admissions, payments to physicians, and allocations of necessary medical devices will be strictly controlled.

However, as scary as all of that it, it just scratches the surface. In fact, I have concluded that this legislation really has no intention of providing affordable health care choices. Instead it is a convenient cover for the most massive transfer of power to the Executive Branch of government that has ever occurred, or even been contemplated. If this law or a similar one is adopted, major portions of the Constitution of the United States will effectively have been destroyed.

The first thing to go will be the masterfully crafted balance of power between the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of the U.S. Government. The Congress will be transferring to the Obama Administration authority in a number of different areas over the lives of the American people and the businesses they own. The irony is that the Congress doesn’t have any authority to legislate in most of those areas to begin with. I defy anyone to read the text of the U.S. Constitution and find any authority granted to the members of Congress to regulate health care.

This legislation also provides for access by the appointees of the Obama administration of all of your personal healthcare information, your personal financial information, and the information of your employer, physician, and hospital. All of this is a direct violation of the specific provisions of the [Fourth] Amendment to the Constitution protecting against unreasonable searches and seizures. You can also forget about the right to privacy. That will have been legislated into oblivion regardless of what the [Third] and [Fourth] Amendments may provide.

If you decide not to have [health care] insurance or if you have private insurance that is not deemed “acceptable” to the “Health Choices Administrator” appointed by Obama there will be a tax imposed on you. It is called a “tax” instead of a fine because of the intent to avoid application of the due process clause of the [Fifth] Amendment. However, that doesn’t work because since there is nothing in the law that allows you to contest or appeal the imposition of the tax, it is definitely depriving someone of property without the “due process of law.

So, there are three of those pesky amendments that the far left hate so much out the original ten in the Bill of Rights that are effectively nullified by this law. It doesn’t stop there though. The [Ninth] Amendment that provides: “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people;” The [Tenth] Amendment states: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are preserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Under the provisions of this piece of Congressional handiwork neither the people nor the states are going to have any rights or powers at all in many areas that once were theirs to control.

I could write many more pages about this legislation, but I think you get the idea. This is not about health care; it is about seizing power and limiting rights. Article [VI] of the Constitution requires the members of both houses of Congress to “be bound by oath or affirmation” to support the Constitution. If I was a member of Congress I would not be able to vote for this legislation or anything like it without feeling I was violating that sacred oath or affirmation. If I voted for it anyway I would hope the American people would hold me accountable.

For those who might doubt the nature of this threat I suggest they consult the source. Here is a link to the Constitution: http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html

And another to the Bill of Rights: http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html

There you can see exactly what we are about to have taken from us.

Michael Connelly
Retired [Attorney],
Constitutional Law Instructor
Carrollton, Texas
mrobertc@hotmail.com

Now wasn't that interesting, folks? I sure though it was. Leave your comments below. God bless you, and have a fabulous day.

"The Pay Dictator"

I was watching the news this morning, and the conversation I witnessed was very interesting. The reporter was interviewing Stephen Moore, one of the authors of a book called The End of Prosperity, which I haven't happened to read yet. They were discussing "Pay Czar" Kenneth Feinberg's decision to cut the salaries of executives at several bailed-out firms. Stephen Moore made sure to correct the reporter on calling Feinberg the pay czar.

"He's not the pay czar. He's the pay dictator."

I couldn't have put it better myself. Now don't get me wrong - I can assure you that these executives were paying themselves more than they deserved, all the while cheating out their employees and shareholders with jack for dough. The salaries the executives paid themselves were over-the-top and outright ridiculous. However, there is a deep message in all of this. Let's take a look at what happened.

These firms, which were on the edge of declaring bankruptcy, were bailed out with taxpayer money. Hooray for government intervention, right? What happens when executive salaries, wages, and the means of production are paid for by your tax dollars is that an alliance forms. Government gets to call more shots in the market, and the giant corporations get to call more shots in the laws. Since the corporations are now dependent upon public funds, the government, who controls those funds, also gets to control the aspects of production that are dependent on those funds. As far as I'm concerned, once an institution is bailed out, it provides an incentive for the government to gain an impressive amount of control over the market, especially since many of these bailed-out institutions are largely responsible for what happens in our economy.

What can the government now control in terms of that bailed-out institution? Almost anything - salaries, wages, prices, methods of production, distributive measures, shareholder payouts, what is produced, how it's produced, when it's produced, where it's produced - pretty much everything. Even if you don't agree with what the methods of production are, you're forced to pay for it anyway through the tax dollars that you rightfully earned. A large part of the market is now controlled not by the people, but by the ruling elite. When an institution is largely free of regulation, the institution has a responsibility to employees, shareholders, and consumers. If these people are not properly satisfied, it hurts business. The institution is then held accountable and must choose to make the proper decisions in order to satisfy the people they are responsible to. If they do not make the proper decisions, they can lose their employees, shareholders, and consumers through the system of natural selection that is the free market. Sales, profits, and overall stability decreases. Since institutions want to avoid this, they are motivated to make the right decisions. That is the magic of the free market.

Let's pretend you're a business owner.

Employees earn their pay by the wages you provide. The lower the profits, the lower the wages. You can't earn a decent profit if you pay yourself too much and don't leave enough for the means of production and the people who are expecting to be paid. If people find out that your wages aren't too great, less people will want to work there. You need workers to do the jobs that you don't have time to do because of your other responsibilities. I won't waste too much time explaining why workers are needed. It's obvious.

Shareholders are invested in your profits, since they themselves own a portion of your business. This means that they are dependent upon your profits. The lower the profits, the lower the payouts. If the payouts are too low, less people will invest in your business, and you might just dissatisfy your shareholders.

Consumers buy your product. They're the main source of your profit. If they buy your product, you bring in money. If they don't buy your product, you don't bring in anything. Thus, you must satisfy them. You also need enough profits to set good prices and make a high-quality product. If the price is bad, and the quality is bad, less people will buy your product, which will give your competitors an advantage.

See how much responsibility you have as a business owner? You dissatisfy people, and they just might take a hike. You get less profits. You don't want this to happen. You are motivated to avoid the worst in order to keep profits, stay ahead of the competition, and thrive. Simple as that.

When the government starts to stick it's nose in everything, however, force can be used to bring in revenue (which isn't profitable if you're spending more money than you take in). Money can be squeezed out of taxpayers whether they like it or not because paying taxes is the law. It's not voluntary. You can be jailed or even threatened for not paying your taxes. Therefore, most people will want to pay them. What you have is coercion. If you spend more money than you take in, which is usually the case with government due to reduced profit motive, then you add on debt. This means higher taxes, more inflation, currency degradation, and more. It's horrible for the economy. We're on the edge of destroying the dollar right now.

Excessive government intervention leads to waste and inefficiency. I mean, look what happened. The health industry was relatively unregulated - and then came the government with price controls, subsidies, regulations, tort reforms, and programs like Medicare. Is it any coincidence that our system got worse as intervention got heavier? Social Security's broke, Amtrak is broke, Medicare is broke, Medicaid is broke, every government program on the book is broke. If the government was a business, they would have failed decades ago!

The worst thing about this whole ordeal is that the pay dictator is letting executives of government-owned corporations keep their massive salaries - think GM and General Electric - in addition to thinking about regulating the salaries of private businesses that aren't even propped up by taxpayer dollars. This means that the big guys are going to literally squish the little ones into tiny little pieces. Oh, President Obama sure loves those small businesses, doesn't he? Unless they have money, that is. Then he stabs them in the back and accuses the millions of small businesses that belong to the Chamber of Commerce of having too much profit.

Since when can one man - the pay dictator - determine executive salaries? I mean, I could understand if Congress was involved. These are taxpayer funds, and Congress is supposed to have control over those funds. But since when can one man say, "Your salaries need to be cut," and be automatically fulfilled of his wish? This is dangerous, people! One man having so much control is not a good thing. Powerful corporations have been given even more ability to call the shots in the very laws we must abide. You'd better believe it.

On top of that, the Federal Reserve, a supposed "private" entity that is supposedly "separate" from the government has been given the power to monitor the activities and actions of other businesses. If you don't think these guys are power-hungry, string-pulling puppeteers whose ultimate goal is one-world government, you've got to be out of your mind. The proof is everywhere, people! This banking elite is the most powerful entity in the world. They must be destroyed.

God help us all.

Much Ado About Nothing

The opinions I express today are going to be extremely controversial. Neither liberals or conservatives are going to be very happy with me after I say what I'm going to say next. As my ideas are often shaped by my own experiences, I don't expect everybody - or even most people - to agree with me.

Keith Bardwell, a justice of the peace in Louisiana, denied a couple their marriage license based on the fact that it was an interracial relationship. I, for one, think there is too much brouhaha over this story. You're probably thinking, "But, Michelle, he's a racist!" It is my personal belief that Bardwell is not a hateful man, or even a complete and utter racist for that matter.

Bardwell says that he has not denied marriage to people based on their race alone. In fact, he has married numerous black couples. He is friends with people of multiple races, and he has discussed this issue with them. He is opposed to interracial marriage because, from his personal experience as well as the experiences of others, interracial marriages have not lasted long or have had a good impact on children.

Do I agree with him? No, I don't. In fact, I am the product of an interracial relationship, and I am in one myself. So is my sister. So is my brother. So is my aunt. Obviously, I am not opposed to interracial relationships or interracial marriage. However, I was raised and still live in a place where jokes about white girls and their black boyfriends run rampant, a place where jokes about blacks and Native Americans are very, very, very frequent, and a place where people often refer to President Obama's race in many of their jokes. I can honestly tell you that most of these people are not racist.

I mean, everyone's a little bit racist. I'll admit it myself. To a certain extent, I like black jokes. To an even greater extent, I like jokes about my own race. Native Americans have a great sense of humor about themselves. A major portion of their jokes are about Native American culture. Everyone makes judgments based on race. It's in our blood. Does that mean that statements, like, "Black people are the scum of the earth and should be murdered," are acceptable? Hell no! But that doesn't mean we should be policing political correctness and accusing everyone left and right of bigotry for a few racially-fueled jokes.

I realize that this is a different topic. However, I can also tell you that many of the people I am surrounded by are a little uncomfortable with interracial relationships. A black guy with a white girlfriend comes to mind. People often are weary when it comes to these types of things. Couples like that are often joked about or even criticized. To me, it's not right or fair, but those kinds of attitudes don't make a person a complete and utter racist.

I mean, look at the percentage of Americans who either are not sure they agree with interracial relationships or oppose them altogether: 32 percent. Does that mean that 32 percent of Americans are racist? Of course not! In fact, many black people actually share Bardwell's opinion. People need to open up their minds and realize that some people live in a completely different atmosphere with completely different values, especially the elderly who have grown up in a different time and place entirely.

In further defense of Bardwell, let's take a look at what this man has to say:

To me, this man seems nothing but well-intentioned and goodhearted. I am seeing constant hate for him. "What a bigoted racist. He should just die. I hope he burns in Hell." If you ask me, those with open minds should at least be more considerate. You don't have to agree with Bardwell. I sure as hell don't! The point I'm trying to make is that, in America, we can't force people to think like we do.

In the private industry, priests, rabbis, imams, and other issuers of marriage can deny pretty much anyone marriage. As a government worker, however, it is against the law for Bardwell to deny people marriage if they can pay up front. He misunderstood this, and it was a very honest misunderstanding. He thought that the law was that you could not prevent people from getting married. In fact, he offered them his advice and referred them to someone who would marry them. Does that really make him such an awful man? I think not!

Call me a racist, call me a bigot, call me whatever the hell you want, but I don't care. I stand by my statements. Leave your comments below. Thank you, God bless you, and have a fabulous day!

Attack of the Second Stimulus!

Everyone knows that the first stimulus was a complete and utter failure. Even President Obama himself admitted it. In fact, Vice President Joe Biden took it a step further and said that the administration and Congress underestimated the economic crisis. Although some politicians seem to be in denial, most of America knows that the first stimulus hasn't really done anything. It hasn't even been fully spent yet. Once put into full throttle, the Fed's gonna be printing money like there's no tomorrow. They already are. Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke has three main principles that he implies openly:

1. Inflation is good.
2. Urgency calls for more spending.
3. Don't worry about deficits.

Of course, he has ulterior motives, and anyone who knows the true agenda of the banking elites knows that economic recovery is not a top priority. Bernanke has extremely flawed principles. Keynesian economics - I'm sorry to say - just doesn't work. Bernanke is a smart guy. He knows the dollar is being obliterated. Unfortunately, that's the goal. It will open the gates for an open-borders North American Union with a continental currency. In fact, it will bring the world that much closer to a one-world government. With the dollar destroyed, mass poverty will ensue worldwide. Do you know how many people are invested in our debt? No one wants to buy our debt anymore because the American dollar is nearly worthless now. You could burn it, and no one would care. With massive budgets and exceedingly flawed monetary policy, this series of events will come quickly, so be prepared.

Some Democrats proposed a second stimulus bill. President Obama, however, says it isn't necessary - and he's right. I want the American citizens to know, though, that this is just a game. We now know why Obama doesn't want a second stimulus bill. It's because a second stimulus is already being spent away in the form of countless "recovery" programs. Republicans will point to Democrats, saying that this is all their fault, but the plans that Republicans have aren't any better, and they have shown that for the past eight years. They want to throw tax refunds at failing corporations! Yeah, it'll give the corporations an unfair advantage over the little guy, but Republicans don't care. It's all in the plan, folks. Washington is just one big party.

Not only is Washington spending away our futures, but they're spending away the futures of the next generation. We're going to see tax hikes, hyperinflation, massive job loss, poverty like we've never seen before, and the complete and utter destruction of the dollar. I know it may sound apocalyptic, but the New World Order is coming. My late grandfather knew about it, my mother knows about it, and I know about it. The truth is being passed down through each generation. Milton Friedman and all of the other great free market economists predicted every single thing that is happening now. If we don't put a stop to this insanity, their startling revelations will be fulfilled.

But there's hope.

There is a revolution brewing in our people. We are going to fight a long and glorious war - not a war of guns and bullets and bombs, but a war of words and ideas and principles. I feel the spirit of the American people, and it is a strong one. We have defeated socialism, communism, fascism, and every other totalitarian system in the book. We can and will defeat the New World Order.

Viva la revolution!

Have a fabulous day. God bless you, and God bless America.

The Matthew Shepard Act: A Paleoconservative Lesbian's Perspective

The Matthew Shepard Act, a bill recently passed by the Senate, is now awaiting the approval and signature of President Obama. The bill extends federal hate crimes laws to include crimes inflicted on victims due to his or her gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability. Its origins lie in a 1998 crime in which Matthew Shepard, a teenage boy, was supposedly tortured and murdered for being gay.

Many people would expect me to support this bill. After all, I am a lesbian. However, I don't support this bill at all. In fact, I vehemently oppose it. Now before you accuse me of suffering from Stockholm syndrome, as Janeane Garofalo would do, please hear me out. As much compassion as I have for Matthew Shepard and his family - as well as for other gays and transgender people killed because of the way they are - I have plenty of reasons for opposing this bill.

First of all, let me say this: I believe in equal protection of all individuals, regardless of immutable differences such as race, gender, nationality, background, disability, sexual orientation, or gender identity. What hate crimes legislation seeks to do is enact a form of collectivist thought process - that rights should be given to groups rather than individuals. While this type of legislation seeks to combat discrimination, it does the exact opposite. Giving special rights to one group over another is discrimination by the government. If someone murders another person because they are gay, shouldn't they receive the same sentence as a drug dealer who murders a customer for not getting their drug payments in on time?

Collectivism is the enemy of the individual. By thinking of everybody in terms of groups, you start to give preferences. While our U.S. Constitution gives the individual the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, our government officials want to go the collectivist route instead and victimize those who have been oppressed in the name of "social justice."

I have something to say to those who want to use minorities as pawns for their own political gain: As a Native American lesbian girl, I don't want your pity! While other gays will be tricked into thinking that this is something they should support, I, for one, will not buy into this little scheme. I am much stronger than that. If you don't think I have as much potential as a straight, white male, you're wrong. I am more than my skin color, I am more than my gender, and I am more than my sexual orientation. Those are things I was born with, and I shouldn't be receiving any pity treatment just because I'm a minority. It feels demeaning when I am judged for what is on the outside rather than the content of my character.

You can try to lure me in all you want by saying, "You poor thing. You need special protection under the law." Just know that it won't work! It never will. I am much more than some little chess piece for your stupid political gain. I am an individual, and there is no other person like me on the face of the earth. That goes for the rest of you, too. Don't think that all you are is the person you appear to be. You are much more than that. You may be of a certain race, but that doesn't compromise your entire character. You may be of a certain gender, but you're more than that boy or girl those magazines and television shows make you out to be. You may even suffer from a disorder, but you're more than that. You are an individual, and no one on earth is like you. You have your own separate talents and gifts to offer to the world. Your individual pursuit is the greatest pursuit of all. Don't ever forget that.

The politicians up on the hill are going to try to get people locked up for saying things like, "God hates fags." Honestly, though, I don't need to be babied by Big Mommy Government. Free speech, no matter how stupid or offensive, is a First Amendment right and a personal freedom. I'm sick and tired of hearing all these so-called "hate speech" accusations coming out of people who want to ban speech they simply don't like. If someone calls me a fag, I can just fire back and say, "And I'm not ashamed of it either! Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me."

Let people have a right to oppose homosexuality. Not everything people have to say is hateful, and even if it is, that's their right. We have the power as individuals to voice our opinions as well, and we can't let some oppressive power structure take that away from us. Free speech and the pursuit of the individual are the greatest threats to the government there is. We the people need to stand up and protect our rights, preserve our principles, and fight for liberty no matter what sacrifices we have to make. We are Americans, and it is time for us to say, "Give me liberty or give me death!"

Have a fabulous day. God bless you, and God bless America.

Long Time, No See, Folks!

You're probably wondering where I've been. Let's just say that I've been quite busy and stressed out lately. I'm having some issues with our police and government. It's pretty much why I've become so passionate about politics in the last few months. There has been a lot that has been happening in the world recently, and you're probably wondering what I have to say about it. President Obama has won the Nobel Peace Prize, a decision on Afghanistan is yet to be made, the Supreme Court has refused to take up a case on a student who was harassed for not reciting the Pledge of Allegiance, gay rights activists marched on the hill on Saturday to demand that Obama keep his pledges, the White House is waging a war of words against Fox News, the health care bill inches closer and closer to being passed, and Columbus Day is being phased out. So where do I stand on these important issues? You're about to find out!

President Obama Wins the Nobel Peace Prize

Congratulations, Mr. President! I have to say I'm quite shocked. You really haven't accomplished anything good so far, and I have no idea why they decided to give you such a prestigious award. Perhaps the award has become a sort of punch line, seeing as Jimmy Carter and Al Gore are other winners of this decade. The thing is, even they actually accomplished something. I will spare the hate, and realize that there is still a lot of time left. However, you have shown so far that you can't be trusted.

You went back against everything that you promised in your campaign. We found out that you don't really hate the Patriot Act. You just want to use it to your advantage. You don't really want to cut spending. You want to raise it to fund your own plans for the nation. You don't really want to keep the middle class from getting a tax hike. You want to tax them to death so that you have revenue to fund your health care plan, and even that won't be enough to do so. You're going to have to get the Federal Reserve to print more money, risk hyperinflation post-recession, and destroy the dollar as we know it. You're not really anti-war. Apparently, Afghanistan is a "good war" that must be fought. You don't really hate the lobbyists. One of your number one priorities is appeasing SEIU. You're a shill for lobbyists. You weren't really going to avoid an individual mandate for health care coverage. You want to demand it. You're not really listening to the "other side" of the debate. You're closing the door on it. The list just never ends.

On MarioKartWii.com, I wrote the following:

President Obama will gain my trust if he at least does these things:

1. Attempts to repeal the Patriot Act
2. Ends the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan
3. Criticizes the Federal Reserve on tremendous levels, then at least attempts to influence Congress to audit or abolish it
4. Says that we should re-institute a gold standard
5. Frequently criticizes his own administration and his own party
6. Frequently criticizes himself for his past mistakes
7. Attempts to cut taxes for at least the middle class
8. Attempts to cut spending drastically
9. Denounces Chavez, Castro, and other dictators
10. Attempts to minimize, decrease expansion, or lower the expansion rate of the size and scope of government
11. Denounces every Marxist in his life
12. Denounces the last three administrations
13. Attempts to reduce lobbying
14. Embraces the Constitution as America's sacred document
15. Stops apologizing to the world and becomes a proud American who doesn't care what other people think of us

As I monitor the president carefully, and look at this list often, I also encourage my readers to do so. If President Obama fulfills any of these promises, please email me immediately. Near the end of his term, we'll see how he did.

The War in Afghanistan

President Obama can't seem to come to a decision, and I can honestly say this would be a very hard one to make. If I were in his position right now, I'd fear being persecuted for ending the war right on the spot. Just like Obama, I don't have much political experience. However, I can say this: ending the war and focusing on domestic defense is a good idea. I just don't see this happening, as Obama seems to think that Afghanistan is a "good war."

Those on the Left want Obama to keep things the way they are right now, and those on the Right side with military leaders by wanting to send more troops. I, however, disagree with both sides. We don't need any troops in Afghanistan. What we need is for our borders to be secured, increased domestic defense, militarization of space, and an effective missile defense system. Engaging in American imperialism is not something our Founders would be proud of. We're only weakening our national security by provoking violence and hostility abroad. For more on my opinion of this issue, read my blog entry - Afghanistan: The "Good" War? - from a few weeks ago. It explains my positioning and reasoning quite clearly.

Student Harassed for Not Reciting the Pledge of Allegiance

Up until a few weeks ago, I was not aware that some states mandated that students and schools recite the Pledge of Allegiance. Don't get me wrong: I think patriotism is one of the most admirable and necessary qualities that a person should have in this great nation. I love reciting the Pledge of Allegiance. I think it's great that students do. However, when you give the state power to force patriotism on people, you're doing the opposite of what you're intending to do. Patriotism enforced by the establishment is just going to make anti-patriots even angrier. Not only will it make anti-patriots angrier, but it will also make those who love this country angry as well. In what way does that encourage patriotism? It goes beyond that, unfortunately. Coercion by the state is only needed when someone violates another person's right to life, liberty, and property, and when you try to use it otherwise, you're committing an act of aggression. This creates hostility in the population, spreads violence throughout, and makes people much more fearful of the government.

That being said, I should move on to the actual story. Cameron Frazier, a high school student in Florida, was ridiculed, cursed at, and accused of being unpatriotic by his teacher when he refused to stand up for the Pledge of Allegiance. Some people think that's the appropriate thing to do, but I, for one, think otherwise. Frazier points out that it takes more than imitating the crowd and saluting a flag to be patriotic. According to him, patriotism also includes supporting our troops and victims of natural disasters. He thinks the flag is a powerful symbol of our nation's core principles, but the government's recent policies don't reflect those principles. I am in total agreement with him. Any proud American should be.

Honestly, his teacher is a bitch for doing what she did to him. If she did that to me, I'd totally wanna sue her. I mean, who wouldn't? I really can't blame the kid. I feel deep pride in my heart that this student stands up for he believes in, respects the core values of our nation, and stays strong and brave through all of it. This is the kind of role model that we need for America. Someone who speaks out against the establishment regardless of what anyone else thinks and respects old traditions and values that have made this country great.

This kid obviously took the self-initiative to develop himself beyond the confines of government education. My fellow conservatives should be voicing out on this issue. If they think our educational system is flawed, admire patriotism in our youth, and really stand for the core principles of our nation, why aren't they expressing their outrage? Seriously, it makes me angry that they would rather continue to ramble on about some birth certificate than help distinguish the difference between enforced patriotism and real patriotism. They should be expressing their pride in this kid!

Liberals, where are you? Say something!

Gay Rights Advocates Pressure Obama to Keep to His Promises

On Saturday, in case you haven't heard, some super-duper gay rights activists headed up to Washington on pink ponies and multi-colored rainbows to demand that President Obama keep the pledges he made to the gay community during his campaign. As many of you know, I'm a lesbian myself, and I do fully support the rights of the LGBT community. Although I'm not a bleeding-hard liberal who will expose every inch of her body at each opportunity she gets - or a promiscuous girl who thinks sleeping around is the perfect way to live - I would also like Obama to keep to his word on this. However, it's not on my top priorities list.

We have more urgent issues at hand, and we need to focus on those more than we need to focus on things like gay marriage. The solution I have in mind is making everything a civil union under law and leaving individual churches to decide on the issue of marriage. I believe that a church has a right to deny anyone marriage and speak out against homosexuality. When I marry my sweetheart, I'll just go to a church that is willing to hitch the two of us. This process of allowing any kind of marriage whatsoever - gay, straight, monogamous, or polygamous - is a long and tiring path. I realize that my views are a bit radical and not representative of the mainstream. As I don't see this solution being implemented anytime soon, gay marriage is not on my top priorities list.

However, Don't Ask, Don't Tell is a policy that needs to be dealt with as soon as possible. President Obama said he would address this, but he hasn't really said or done anything about it so far. Gays have every right to serve in the military. If someone wants to risk their life for the country that they love, who are we to tell them that they can't just because they're gay? I can see how homosexual activity can be disruptive in the military, but so can heterosexual activity. Who are we restrict rights to anyone on the basis of their sexual orientation? That's discrimination. DADT is a flawed policy that needs to be dealt with.

The White House vs. Fox News

I have a few things to say, and I will sum it up quickly.

1. FOX News is biased, but...
2. They will cover crucial stories that other networks won't.
3. With two wars going on in Iraq and Afghanistan, a news station is not the enemy.
4. The White House is openly watching Glenn Beck now. I hope he gets it through their heads.
5. Anti-FOX News stories are a great way for the MSM to bring in more viewers. Clever idea.

Health Care

With a vast majority of Democrats in Congress, something tells me that H.R. 3200 has the potential to be passed soon, and those of us who oppose the bill - not those who would rather see no reform whatsoever - should continue to fight against it. On MarioKartWii.com, I wrote the following:

Here is how we will pay for H.R. 3200:

1) Request that the Fed print more money
2) Raise taxes not only on the rich, but also the middle class
3) Increase inflation
4) Spend debt
5) Devalue and eventually destroy the dollar

If we continue to tax and spend like a bunch of crazy lunatics, inevitable consequences will ensue, and we'll all regret it. We can't trust the government with Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and many other programs that have sent this country into a downward spiral. How can we trust them with HR 3200? More people are denied under Medicare than private insurers! In this country, it has led to rationing. We may get short-term social benefits, but we will ultimately see a rise in poverty.

As you can see, the price of H.R. 3200 is not a price worth paying. Its economic effects will greatly outweigh the social benefits it seeks to provide. I've written about this subject several times before, and you can check under the archives for my entries.

Columbus Day

Although Christopher Columbus was a murderer who slaughtered several of my Native American ancestors, I respect that some people think that he should be revered through a national holiday. Evidently, a Native American group is protesting this holiday. I can't blame them, really, for feeling resentment towards this man for what he did. I know I do. However, when they start accusing people of being racist bigots and trying to ruin everything for them, that's where I draw the line. To some people, criticizing members of your own race represents self-hatred, but I don't hate myself. They're people just like everybody else. I don't know how important Columbus Day is to everyone, but calling it "Fall Day" or "Native American Day" is a bit over the top. Can't we just have another day reserved for Native Americans? How about a holiday reserved for white people? That would be nice.

Well, folks, it's time to wrap things up. I hope this much-needed update satisfied any curiosities you may have had about my opinions on current events. With that, I bid you farewell.

Have a fabulous day. God bless you, and God bless America!