About Me

Name: Jax Hawk
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

THREE REASONS AND MORE FOR THE USA ECONOMIC COLLAPSE

Posted by Jax Hawk on Thursday, October 29, 2009 10:12:29 AM

Thursday, October 29, 2009

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

First and foremost, the US state debt has skyrocketed from $2 trillion to $11 trillion within a decade. The USA will never be able to pay off the debt.
Secondly, the political structure of the nation is vulnerable. There is neither universal legislation in the country, nor common traffic rules. The US Army does not execute its major function – defense – anymore since many foreign nationals prefer to serve in the army to obtain the US citizenship.
Third, the split of elites, which was especially visible under the conditions of the crisis.
The problems, which Panarin named, are absolutely real. However, there is only one thing that is real: America will not be able to cope with these problems. The USA is sick, but the illness began a long time ago and had a number of exacerbation. However, none of those illnesses has ever resulted in the collapse of the nation.

The USA survived several immigration and economic crises. There was the split of elites before – it once resulted in the civil war between the North and the South. Winston Churchill once said that Americans will find a way out of a difficult situation only after they try all other ways. It goes without saying that the map of the United States will remain unchanged in 2010.
Professor Igor Panarin made his mapof the divided USA in 1998, although it did not produce any attention on either the Russians or the Americans.

For those who have not seen the map It divides the USA into sections that will be taken over by foreign countries, such as Alaska by the Russians, the South West and the West Coast by the mexicans and so on! Any American knows that the USA economy is based on a large market. The larger the market is, the faster the nation can overcome economic difficulties.

America has never suffered from any crisislike like we are facing todayEven.after WWII, that is why the  current crisis so painfully. However, the interest, which so many Americans have shown to the research of the Russian professor, proves they treat the imminent threat seriously. The government and the majority of the USA will not take a risk of triggering a global war.
If we do, our nation will suffer from much greater damage than it did during WWII, when we lost thousands of military personel but no damge to our infra-structure. There were no intercontinental ballistic missiles 70 years ago. However, Our  nation's presnt leadership can provoke smaller, local wars, for example a conflict between China and India. If it happens, the USA will not try to have Russia involved in any regional conflict because Russia, for the time being, is the only state that is technically capable of destroying America,

Within six months (April through September) the dollar lost over 10 percent at the world foreign exchange trading, which marked the sharpest decline since 1991. Some experts believe that the American currency is close to collapse, which may lead to a new financial crisis.
Our present GDP to the amount of money in circulation, due to the government printing money as fast as they can spend it, is 120 times the GDP. The slide of the US dollar devaluation has been observed for a few years, but the current rate of decline is unprecedented.
Some jokester even rushed to re-read the letters of Karl Marx to Friedrich Engels written during the US financial panic of 1857 discussing the collapse of America. It would have been funny if it wasn’t so serious.

The chief economist of HSBC Bank Stephen King believes that if the US officials fail to stop the fall of American currency, it may provoke another financial crisis. “A dollar collapse would be a disaster all round! It would leave the international monetary system short of stability and long on fear. It would unleash economic upheavals on a similar scale to those seen in the 1970,” King wrote for The Independent.

American government officials, including the Treasury and the Congress,  don’t seem to be overly concerned since nothing is being done about it.And the spending marches on at a rapid pace despite the Tea Parties and protests by concerned citizens.
The US hasn’t done anything to support the currency since 1955. But is a collapse inevitable? From the viewpoint of macroeconomic indicators, the US state of affairs is, indeed, scary: A record budget deficit of $1.4 trillion, record state debt that now exceeds $11.9 trillion, high unemployment and weak currency. Huge inflows of capital into the economy that Obama is proud of haven’t yet shown results!

AND WHILE OBAMA CUTS ONLY THE "UNNECESSARY" DEFENSE SPENDING, THE RUSSIANS HAVE DEVELOPED A NUCLEAR CARRYING ROCKET THAT THEY SECRETLY FIRED AT THE POLAR REGION.
On 11 October 2008 Russia’s northern fleet held military exercises in the Murmansk region. Russia’s President Dimitry Medvedev praised the maneuvers paying special attention to the launch of the intercontinental missile ‘Sineva’, which he watched from Russia’s only aircraft carrier. The ministry of defence says the rocket, which was fired from the fleet’s nuclear submarine ‘Tula’, reached its longest distance yet – 11,547 kilometers. An aide to the Russian navy commander said it was the first time a submarine had launched the Sineva ballistic missile to its maximum range. “For the first time in Navy history, the launch was not to the Kura test range in Kamchatka [Russian Far East], but to the area of an equatorial part of the Pacific,” Captain 1st rank Igor Dygalo said, adding that the launch was made to check the preparedness of naval strategic nuclear forces. The Sineva launch was made as part of the Dvina tactical exercises of the Russian Northern Fleet, which are also part of larger-scale Stability-2008 exercises conducted with Belarus that started in September and ran until October 21..
 These RSM-54 missiles will be able to stand on alert status until 2030. The K-84 Ekaterinburg strategic submarine of the Project 667BDRM/Dela IV class of the Northern Fleet conducted a successful launch of a R-29RM Sineva/SS-N-23 missile at 15:20 MSK (11:20 UTC) on September 9, 2006. The missile was launched from a surfaced submarine from an ice-covered polar region toward the Chizha test site at the Kanin Peninsula. The three warheads that the missile was reported to carry successfully reached their targets.
 Unlike its predecessor, the Skif, the Sineva carries 10 independently targetable re-entry vehicles instead of four. The new missile has a longer range and a modern control system developed for Makeyev’s Bark SLBM (SS-NX-28). It can carry four or 10 nuclear warheads, depending on the modification. The RSM-54 carries four, and the Sineva (with a service life of several decades) 10 individually targetable reentry vehicles, with a yield of 100Kt each. source: Russian Strategic Nuclear Forces.com

So now after Obama and his followers in the Congress manage to spend US into insolvency, that will make paying the present military force impossible. All the Russians and Chinese have to do to take over the USA is threatened to annihilate us with their nukes, and Kruschefs prediction that we will not have to beat you on the battle field will become a truism!
Kruschev remarked to Agriculture Secretary, Ezra T. Benson,  that communism would eventually consume democracy. Benson replied that Americans would never accept such a drastic change in their form of government as communism. Kruschev then told Benson that it was already beginning to happen.


He said that Americans were being fed one small bite of communism at a time, and that over the course of several years, Americans will have accepted so many communistic ideals, including a massive and uncontrollable federal government, that one day we would wake up to discover that we are a democracy only in name - that our policies and methods of government will be communist in nature. Kruschev concluded that it will be the slow injection of socialist/communist principles into America - not nuclear missiles - that would destroy our nation.Source: Wikapedia

 





Posted in THREATS TO US

« THE RUSSIAN ARE ENJOYING THE DESTRUCTION OF OUR ECONOMY
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

THE RUSSIAN ARE ENJOYING THE DESTRUCTION OF OUR ECONOMY

Posted by Jax Hawk on Wednesday, October 28, 2009 10:17:21 AM

Wednesday, October 28, 2009

 


Many historians attribute the arms race between president Reagan and the Soviet Union and the destruction of the OSSR economy as the reason for the demise of the Communist state.


Now it would appear to this blogger that the U.S. Congress and Obama are committing economic suicide with the mad dash toward government control of our lives. And the Russians are enjoying the sight!

This quote from a well-known(in Russia) columnist about the Immolation of the U.S. economy illustrates how much they are enjoying the debacle that is occurring in Washington.

“ It can be safely said, that the last time a great nation destroyed itself through its own hubris and economic folly was the early Soviet Union (though in the end the late Soviet Union still died by the economic hand). Now we get the opportunity to watch the Americans do the exact same thing to themselves. The most amazing thing of course, is that they are just repeating the failed mistakes of the past. One would expect their fellow travelers in suicide, the British, to have spoken up by now, but unfortunately for the British, their education system is now even more of a joke than that of the Americans.

While taking a small breather from mouthing the never-ending propaganda of recovery, never mind that every real indicator is pointing to death and destruction, the American Marxists have noticed that the French and Germans are out of recession and that Russia and Italy are heading out at a good clip themselves. Of course these facts have been wrapped up into their mind-boggling non stop chant of “recovery” and hope-change-zombification. What is ignored, of course, is that we and the other three great nations all cut our taxes, cut our spending, made life easy for small business…in other words: the exact opposite of the Anglo-Sphere.

That brings us to Cap and Trade. Never in the history of humanity has a more idiotic plan been put forward and sold with bigger lies. Energy is the key stone to any and every economy, be it man power, animal power, wood or coal or nuclear. How else does one power industry that makes human life better (unless of course its making the bombs that end that human life, but that’s a different topic). Never in history, with the exception of the Japanese self-imposed isolation in the 1600s, did a government actively force its people away from economic activity and industry.

Even the Soviets never created such idiocy. The great famine of the late 1920s was caused by quite the opposite, as the Soviets collectivized farms to force peasants off of their land and into the big new factories. Of course this had disastrous results. So one must ask, are the powers that be in Washington and London degenerates or satanically evil? Where is the opposition? Where are the Republicans in America and Tories in England?

This is a story you will not read in our newspapers or see on the major television networks, but I hope will be picked up by other bloggers and circulated on the net.

Hans Hoppe’s first book in English – and the one that put him on the map as a social thinker and economist to watch. In it he argued that there are only two possible archetypes in economic affairs: socialism and capitalism. All systems are combinations of those two types. The capitalist model he defines as pure protection of private property, free association, and exchange – no exceptions. All deviations from that ideal are species of socialism, with public ownership and interference with trade.

Within the structure of socialism, he distinguishes the left and right version. “Conservative” socialism favors high regulation, behavioral controls, protectionism, and nationalism. The “liberal” version tends more toward outright public ownership and redistribution. I believe Obama is a liberal socialist and his goal is to transform(aka. change) the USA from a free enterprise system to one that is controled by the government from cradle to grave!
The consequences of socialism vary based on their degree and kind, but they have similarities: high costs, resource waste, low growth.

While Obama destroys our economy that currently borrows $ two(2) billion a day to keep are economy going, and Obama makes nice with China and Russia They are busy making deals with each other to become the power that once was the USA!
This excerpt from an article written in the English version of Pravda, illustrates the problem we are to face if Americans don’ t stop the “train reck” that is going on behind closed doors by the DEAMONCRATS and Obama consigliere.
“Russia’s Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, together with a Russian business delegation, has sealed over five billion dollars in deals with China on energy, infrastructure and space exploration. The lucrative agreements are the outcome of talks with China’s leaders in Beijing Russia Today reports.

In terms of security cooperation, the two countries agreed to notify one another on any launches of ballistic missiles. Both Russia and China are permanent members of the UN Security Council and are big players when it comes to negotiations with Iran and North Korea, so talks on those issues took place on the sidelines of the major deals.
The foundation has been set for a future pipeline which, when built, will bring up to 70 billion cubic meters of gas a year from Russia to China, according to Aleksey Miller, Russia’s gas giant Gazprom CEO. Preliminary agreements have been already signed.
“We have agreed on the initial framework for supplying China with natural gas,” Miller said.
According to the agreements, the price of the gas will be determined by a special formula included into the future contract. It will be based on existing international practice.”
Prime Minister Putin expressed confidence that the talks on gas deliveries will end fruitfully.

Another thing is important – there are requirements, and there are opportunities to work with each other. In this sense, the Russian and Chinese economies supplement each other. This work is planned for many decades.”Meanwhile in Washington DC, our odious president and his willing Democrat congress is preparing to destroy our economy by passing CAP AND TAX!

Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)

IS THE RUSSIAN GAS PIPELINE FUNCTIONING AS THE NEW BERLIN WALL?

THE ARCTIC AND RUSSIA WHILE CONGRESS ARGUES OVER SPENDING BILL!

WHAT WILL USA DO WHEN THE SECOND SHOE DROPS???

 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

AND I THOUGHT THE PURPOSE OF THE WAR WAS TO DEFEAT THE ENEMY!!

Posted by Jax Hawk on Tuesday, October 27, 2009 11:07:14 AM

Tuesday, October 27, 2009

If the United States waited until Germany and Italy had stable governments before we invaded Europe in 1944. The British and most of Europe would be speaking German, possibly Russian by now.

We went to war to defeat the Nazis and the Japanese who attacked Pearl Harbor.Not to establish a stable government!
MacArthur set up the government in Japan and Eisenhower set up the government in Germany AFTER we defeated the enemy!

Today we dither around at the peril of the brave men and women who are trying to defeat al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan, despite the fact that the General sent by Obama has asked for 40,000 more troops to complete the job that Obama sent him to Afghanistan to do.

The absurdity of the dialogue about sending more troops is centered around the establishment of a stable government. We do not even have a stable government in the USA in my opinion. How can you equate what Obama and the Democrats are trying to do with health care and cap-and-trade with the Constitution and Bill of Rights! You cannot!!

But todays news highlites the statement by the spokes person in NATO that they would not consider sending troops to fight in Afghanistan until a stable government has been established.
“Bratislava, Slovakia (AP) – Two NATO members said Friday they will not send more troops to Afghanistan unless its Nov. 7 presidential runoff creates a legitimate government and until President Barack Obama decides on a new strategy there.
Dutch Defense Minister Eimert Van Middelkoop said his country, with 2,160 troops in Afghanistan, is awaiting the final election results “because the legitimacy of the Afghan government is key,” as well as a decision by the Obama administration.

“I think most countries are waiting for the American decisions,” van Middelkoop said at a meeting in Bratislava of the defense ministers of the 28 NATO countries.
I believe they will have to wait until Obama gets his Health Care Bill and the CAP and Trade(aka Tax) are passed, and then he will say that the economy will not support the sending of 40,000 troops as an excuse to do what he intended to do two months ago. Deny McChrystal’s request for 40,000 troops!

The top U.S. military commander in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, was briefing NATO ministers — including U.S. Defense Minister Robert Gates — on his view of the war in Afghanistan at the meeting.
Danish Defense Minister Soeren Gade said allies won’t increase troop levels until they’re assured the new government in Kabul is committed to the NATO goals.
“I think whoever is going to send more troops to Afghanistan will put up some conditions,” said Gade, whose country has 690 soldiers in Afghanistan. (who cares what a country steeped in socialism that only has 690 troops committed cares?)

“They need to see the new Afghan president and say: ‘If we send more troops to your country, you have to deal with this, this and this.’ We have to make sure the new government in Afghanistan are committed to their job before we send any more troops to Afghanistan.”
Defense Minister Franz Josef Jung of Germany said he also doesn’t expect his country to increase its troop numbers in Afghanistan when the soldiers’ mandate from the German parliament comes up for renewal in December. The existing mandate allows the deployment of a maximum 4,500 soldiers, and Germany currently has just over 4,200 troops in Afghanistan.

The” Hill” is reporting today that: In a speech to nearly 3,000 servicemen at the Naval Air Station in Jacksonville, Fla., Obama said those who died gave “the last full measure of devotion.”9But will he send the troops to watch their backs as McChrystal has requested?)
In the same speech, he pushed back against critics who say he hasn’t acted swiftly enough.( he has not!!)
“While I will never hesitate to use force to protect the American people or our vital interests, I also promise you this — and this is very important as we consider our next steps in Afghanistan — I will never rush the solemn decision of sending you into harm’s way,” Obama said. “I won’t risk your lives unless it is absolutely necessary. And if it is necessary, we will back you up to the hilt.”( I guess he forgot his votes against anything that Congress was doing to support the troops in the Iraq war!)
Monday’s loss of U.S. troops in Afghanistan followed Sunday’s car bombs in Iraq that killed more than 150 people, many of them children.

The president met with some of his national security advisers Monday in the White House Situation Room, the sixth meeting of its kind, to discuss the situation in Afghanistan. But fewer advisers were included, and Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the top U.S. and NATO commander in the region who reportedly has asked for nearly 40,000 additional troops, did not participate! (It sounds like the failure of McNamara and president Lyndon Johnson to listen to the generals in Viet Nam while they were listening to the anti-war chants in the streets and reading the negative articles in the Washington Post and New York Times)

Will Americans allow this smooth talking president to be Commander in Chief over the modern day Viet Nam! And do not believe the Left when they say we are invoved in a civil war that has been going on for 35 years. What we are fighting for is to destroy alQaeda before they attack us again. We would rather defeat them in their hideouts than in the streets of the USA!






Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

HOW OBAMA GETS CROWDS AT HIS SPEECHES

Posted by Jax Hawk on Monday, October 26, 2009 12:28:09 PM

For the first time in six years the president of the USA, and Commander in Chief, is visiting the Naval Air base in Jacksonville, Florida. The Captain in command of the Naval base said publicly that at least3000 people will attend Obama;s speech,but the dirty little secret is the following post from a person who is stationed on the base, To protect her I will not reveal her name, But for what it is worth here is here response to the Commanders statement about the attendance.
"President's Visit
Captain Scorby, you didn't tell the whole story! After sign-ups to attend the speech turned up empty, you MANDATED that the troops show up for the speech! So, yeah, that's why you are expecting 3000 people! There's always more to every story
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

CAMPAIGNER-IN CHIEF NOT COMMANDER -IN-CHIEF

Posted by Jax Hawk on Monday, October 26, 2009 10:24:23 AM

Monday, October 26, 2009



Governing  involves tough, unpopular choices and cutting deals with opponents. It requires doing things rather than talking about them!.

Obama is showing little appetite for this. Instead of being the commander-in-chief, he is the campaigner-in-chief.
After a disastrous summer that saw his approval rating drop more than any other president at the same stage since Harry Truman in 1953, Mr Obama has temporarily abandoned the campaign-style events promoting his stalled health-care reform initiative.

Now, he is stumping for Democratic candidates in states he won last year but which are now in danger. Last Wednesday in Hackensack, Mr Obama took to the stage to proclaim: "Your voice can change the world. Your voice can elect Jon Corzine, governor once again of New Jersey." Change the world? Mr Corzine is a former Goldman Sachs executive whose political career was launched when he spent $57 million of his own money on a Senate seat in 2000.

And as he always does, Mr Obama blamed every economic woe on the Bush years, conveniently forgetting that Republicans are no longer in office and it's been his mess for nine months now.

Campaigning and raising cash is what Mr Obama does best. Next week's fundraising events in Florida and Virginia will bring to 24 the number of such functions he had headlined since entering office in January. During his first year in office, Mr Bush attended just six fundraisers.

Late-night comics, although unabashedly liberal and at a loss last year as to how to poke fun at the rather humourless Mr Obama, are having a field day portraying him as a do-nothing prevaricator obsessed with his own image.

"Obama agreed to commit an additional 40,000 troops to help fight Fox News," quipped NBC's Jay Leno. "Senior White House adviser David Axelrod told reporters that Fox News is just pushing a point of view. Well, yes, but at least they've got a point of view." Mr Obama was elected on a promise of being post-partisan to Washington and transforming the country. Thus far, he has won the support of only a single Republican for his health-care plan and has shown himself to be as aggressive a Democratic partisan in office as anyone in the fabled Clinton war room.

All this says much about Mr Obama's priorities at a time when he is sitting on an urgent request for 40,000 more troops to Afghanistan, seemingly unsure about whether the counter-insurgency strategy he announced in March is the right one.
And while our version of Nero dithers, a total of 46 US troops have died in Afghanistan in October in what is already by far the bloodiest year in the country since the 2001 US-led invasion.
With enough effort, resources and time, the marines are confident the Afghan population can be won over. But, with the platoon’s influence limited to a small area around their base, many soldiers wonder if the Taliban and Al-Qaeda may simply outlast them, or if the US and Afghan governments have the resolve to send enough troops to win. Top Republican senators have escalated their call for Obama to grant McChrystal's request for more troops in Afghanistan, and one prominent Democrat warned that a failure to do so could jeopardize U.S. forces.Source:


Despite the urgency in Afghanistan and the decreasing morale problem, Obama procrastinates in his decision to grant or deny McChrystal's request for 40,000 more troops.
Obama has said he would make up his mind in the coming weeks, and no announcement is expected before November. A senior administration official said the president is still working through and considering various options as has not settled on one. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because the debate is ongoing.

Source: Telegraph.uk.com
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

ALL TALK AND NO RESULTS WITH IRAN!

Posted by Jax Hawk on Saturday, October 24, 2009 11:04:02 AM

Saturday, October 24, 2009

 
The Times of London is reporting that Obama’s offer of friendship to Iran is about to be rejected, as anyone could have predicted who is not a worshiper of the Democrat “messiah”.

From Times Online October 24, 2009
“Barack Obama’s policy on brink of collapse as Tehran does last-minute nuclear stall Obama’s policy of diplomatic engagement with Iran is close to collapse as Tehran backtracks on a crucial deal aimed at cutting its stockpiles of nuclear fuel.
Iran agreed a deal “in principle” at talks in Geneva to ship the majority of its low-enriched uranium overseas for reprocessing into nuclear fuel that could be used for a medical research reactor.

The framework deal, along with an offer to allow international inspectors into its newly revealed enrichment plant at Qom, was hailed as evidence that Iran was responding positively to the diplomatic track.
Today, however, with just hours until the deadline, Iran has turned the table on its foreign emissaries with a rival proposal, demanding that it be allowed to buy higher enriched uranium directly from abroad.

Tehran’s proposals fall far short of the deal drawn up in Vienna by the United Nations atomic watchdog and endorsed by the UN, the US, Russia and France. It would not only fail to reduce Iran’s stockpile of low enriched uranium — now large enough to fuel one nuclear warhead — but it would also require the waiver of pre-existing UN sanction”s.

Russia and China’s reluctance to consider new sanctions is forcing Washington to seek a coalition of willing allies to impose their own economic blockade on Iran if efforts to get UN sanctions fail. But without the co-operation of the Communists in China and the quasi-communists in Russia, unless a blockade of Iran is established. The Iranians will get anything they want from Russia and China, and the rest is just talk!

It has been six months since Obama made the commitment to talk to Iran with no pre-existing conditions, to convince them to stop their quest for nuclear weapons.
He made the commitment on March 20th 2009, and yesterday(10/23/09) Iran threw his proposal back in his face! It appears that Obama has yet to learn that power and force are the only thing tyrants respect.
Obama has the ability of using the full force and power of his office as president to intimidate and vilify his opponents of his health care and cap-and-trade proposals, but he speaks softly without the “big stick’ when he speaks to dictators and tyrants!


Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)
OBAMA SPEAKS SOFTLY WITHOUT THE “BIG STICK”!

OBAMA IS NO KENNEDY OR REAGAN

COMMERCE WITH THE AXIS OF EVIL?

Iran Nuke Talks? Well, Maybe Not


 

 :
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

YES MADAM SPEAKER WE ARE SERIOUS!!

Posted by Jax Hawk on Friday, October 23, 2009 10:36:04 AM

Friday, October 23, 2009

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

CNSNews posed a question to the power happy “capo” of Obama in the House of Representatives that illustrates the extent the left has shredded the Constitution to accomplish the power grab of Obama and the Democrats.
The following is a direct quote from a CNS reporter that asked what Constitutional authority the Congress had to demand that Americans buy health insurance or be fined.

CNSNews.com: “Madam Speaker, where specifically does the Constitution grant Congress the authority to enact an individual health insurance mandate?”
Pelosi: “Are you serious? Are you serious?”
CNSNews.com: “Yes, yes I am.”
Pelosi then shook her head before taking a question from another reporter. Her press spokesman, Nadeam Elshami, then told CNSNews.com that asking the speaker of the House where the Constitution authorized Congress to mandated that individual Americans buy health insurance as not a “serious question.”

Currently, each of the five health care overhaul proposals being considered in Congress would command every American adult to buy health insurance. Any person defying this mandate would be required to pay a penalty to the Internal Revenue Service.

In 1994, when the health care reform plan then being advanced by President Clinton called for mandating that all Americans buy health insurance, the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office studied the issue and concluded:

“The government has never required people to buy any good or service as a condition of lawful residence in the United States. An individual mandate would have two features that, in combination, would make it unique. First, it would impose a duty on individuals as members of society. Second, it would require people to purchase a specific service that would be heavily regulated by the federal government.”

Later on Thursday, CNSNews.com followed up on the question it asked Speaker Pelosi by sending written questions for the speaker via e-mail to her Spokesman Elshami.

“Where specifically does the Constitution authorize Congress to force Americans to purchase a particular good or service such as health insurance?” CNSNews.com asked the speaker’s office.

“If it is the Speaker’s belief that there is a provision in the Constitution that does give Congress this power, does she believe the Constitution in any way limits the goods and services Congress can force an individual to purchase?” CNSNews.com asked. “If so, what is that limit?”

Elshami responded by sending CNSNews.com a Sept. 16 press release from the Speaker’s office entitled, “Health Insurance Reform, Daily Mythbuster: ‘Constitutionality of Health Insurance Reform.’” The press release states that Congress has “broad power to regulate activities that have an effect on interstate commerce. Congress has used this authority to regulate many aspects of American life, from labor relations to education to health care to agricultural production.”

This is the most preposterous part of the contention/argument. Insurance company’s are presently forbidden to be domiciled in one state and sell in other states. That is what keeps the price of health insurance artificially high. If the Congress passed a law eliminating the provision that forbids a person in New York from buying a health insurance policy in any other state. This would create more competition and reduce the premium prices. There is no interstate commerce in health insurance now because of government prohibitions!

Further more, Doctors are licensed by the State not the Federal government. Where is the interstate commerce here?

The capitation clause of Article I of the United States Constitution, reads “[n]o capitation, or other direct, tax shall be laid, unless in proportion to the census or enumeration herein before directed to be taken.” Capitation here means a tax of a uniform, fixed amount per taxpayer. Direct tax means a tax levied directly by the United States federal government on taxpayers, as opposed to a tax on events or transactions. The United States government levied direct taxes from time to time during the 18th and early 19th centuries. It levied direct taxes on the owners of houses, land, slaves, and estates in the late 1790s, but cancelled the taxes in 1802.

The 24th Amendment, ratified in 1964, outlawed the use of the poll tax (or any other tax) as a pre-condition in voting in Federal elections. The 1966 Supreme Court case Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections extended this explicit enactment as a matter of judicial interpretation of a more general provision, ruling that the imposition of a poll tax in state elections violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Today we are facing a tax more heinous than a poll tax. WE all know that since the poll tax was abolished and made illegal, some (at times many) people still do not vote. Also, everybody does not get sick. Particularly the young adults who have not entered the years of debilitating and sometimes fatal diseases like hypertension, diabetes and cancer. Why should we force these people, who a large portion of the uninsured, to get insurance or be fined?

Americans who fail to sign up for a medical plan after health care overhaul takes effect could be hit with fines of up to $3,800, according to a new proposal circulated Tuesday by a senior Democrat.This would be included in the Baucus’s bill that is currently slated for a vote sometime before Christmas.



“A mandate requiring all individuals to purchase health insurance would be an unprecedented form of federal action,” said a 1994 report by the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office. “The government has never required people to buy any good or service as a condition of lawful residence in the United States.”

“An individual mandate would have two features that, in combination, would make it unique,” reads the report. “First, it would impose a duty on individuals as members of society. Second, it would require people to purchase a specific service that would be heavily regulated by the federal government.”

And the most odious thing about this whole fine,aka TAX, is that it would be the IRS that collects the fine! Not the state or federal law enforcement people or the courts. And there is another provision floating around Congress that the fine would be automatically taken out of a person’s bank account. What about those people who do no have $3,800 in their bank account. Will we once again establish Konzentrationslager /gulags or debtors prisons?







Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

CZAR ANOTHER NAME FOR POLITICAL COVER

Posted by Jax Hawk on Thursday, October 22, 2009 5:31:28 PM

Thursday, October 22, 2009

Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.” —Ronald Reagan
It will go down in history as one of Barack Obama’s signature decisions on the economy, a dramatic move to slash corporate pay at bailed out banks and automakers.
But on Wednesday night, administration officials said that the president of the United States didn’t have all that much to do with a decision that will, in many ways, come to define his relationship with Wall Street.
In fact, sources within the administration say the decision to cap corporate pay was Kenneth Feinberg’s, and his alone. A senior administration official tells POLITICO that Obama did not sign off on the pay master's decision. Feinberg didn’t even brief the White House on it, the official said, but he briefed Treasury officials instead.
“Decisions were his,” says the official. Treasury, in turn, briefed White House staff on the “shape and general direction” of the Feinberg decision last week, but didn't offer extensive detail. The president did not have to approve Feinberg’s plan.

Feinberg, a Washington attorney who was appointed to the unsalaried position as Treasury’s special master for corporate pay in June, has wide latitude to act independently of the administration. But it appears to me that the denial of the Obama syncophants is nothing more than giving Obama plausable deniability.

In fact I believe that the whole Czar set-up is an elaborate shield for the actions of Obama that could be damaging to the presidents "messianic" image.


The saying "the buck stops here" derives from the slang expression "pass the buck" which means passing the responsibility on to someone else.



History will show that on more than one occasion President Truman referred to his desk sign in public statements. For example, in an address at the National War College on December 19, 1952 Mr. Truman said, "You know, it's easy for the Monday morning quarterback to say what the coach should have done, after the game is over. But when the decision is up before you -- and on my desk I have a motto which says The Buck Stops Here' -- the decision has to be made." In his farewell address to the American people given in January 1953, President Truman referred to this concept very specifically in asserting that, "The President--whoever he is--has to decide. He can't pass the buck to anybody. No one else can do the deciding for him. That's his job.

Some one should remind Obama and the adoring press of this fact!!
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

DELEGITIMIZATION AND DEMONIZING ARE THE LATEST OBAMA ADMINISTRATION TACTICS

Posted by Jax Hawk on Wednesday, October 21, 2009 9:25:08 AM

Wednesday, October 21, 2009

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

 

What Ronald Regan left out, is apparently the watchword of the Obama administration,demonize your opponents.
Used against anyone or any group that opposes what the Obama administration is  trying to do to our Country.Make it a “banana republic” like his friend Hugo and Raul have done.
First it was the bond holders of GM who held  27 billion dollars of bonds. They were told they could lose all if they continued to oppose the Obama bankrutcy plan and went to unregulated bankruptcy.
At approximately the same time they turned the dogs of Acorn and SEIU upon the homes of those on Wall Street, who dared to defy Obama and his czars on salary and bonus restrictions(aka .caps)

Then there is the attempt to intimidate the groups who protested  peacefully at the Town Hall meetings and TEA parties. Obama and his “workers” said they were mobs, nazis, and tools of the Republican party in an atttempt to intimidate them! And they had help from the Media! Except for the FOX network.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid reportedly met with about a dozen doctors groups last week in which he promised to do the doctor “fix”.The next day the Senate bill included billions more for doctor payments for Medicare patients. But there still is 400-500 billion dollars that will be slashed from the medicare budget to fund the pool for the millions added to the plan who presently have no health insurance.
But several people familiar with the meetings with the doctors, say he also made it clear he would expect the support of medical groups for whatever health care bill emerges in exchange for sparing them from the deep reimbursement cuts.I guess he thinks they don’t know about the 400 billion taken from medicare!

Then an AARP executive warned Congressional opponents  of the Democrat health plan, of possible political consequences of voting against the plan as they were watching how the Congressmen and Senators voted.

And when Obama spoke to a joint session of Congress about “his” health care plan, he said this to any potential opponents of the plan. “But know this: I will not waste time with those who have made the calculation that it’s better politics to kill this plan than improve it. I will not stand by while the special interests use the same old tactics to keep things exactly the way they are. If you misrepresent what’s in the plan, we will call you out. And I will not accept the status quo as a solution. Not this time. Not now.

And Obama’s “capos” attack on the FOX network and specifically the Beck and Hannity TV opinion shows are classic examples of what Obama promised he would do to anyone who stood in his way to get socialized medicine.He calls it the government option, but any thinking man knows that is a bold faced lie!

First they attacked Fox news by putting a Mao loving women named Dunn on the tube to say that FOX was not a real news network. Then the Sunday talk shows on the “lame Stream media” carried Axelrod and Emanuel further villifying and excoriating FOX! All because FOX appears to be the only news TV network that is not a propaganda arm of OBAMA!

David Libaugh had it right when he wrote in todays Patriot Post that; “Obama’s perceived enemies are all those who have the temerity not to roll over for his extreme agenda. They all must be demonized, marginalized and silenced by a president who has turned the Oval Office into a glorified street organizing headquarters to attack his opponents. Indeed, this self-described uniter is the most divisive president in memory, and his uncontrollable ego can’t countenance legitimate dissent.

 

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

A DEAL WITH EVIL WILL LEAD TO CATASTROPHE

Posted by Jax Hawk on Tuesday, October 20, 2009 9:19:14 AM

 

Tuesday, October 20, 2009

 

Danger – if you meet it promptly and without flinching – you will reduce the danger by half. Never run away from anything. Never!…Winston Churchill

Nile Gardiner is Director of the Margaret Thatcher Centre for Freedom at the Heritage Foundation in Washington, DC, AND HE POSTED THIS ON THE INTERNET. I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT FOR ALL AMERICANS TO READ THIS POST.

In the face of rising domestic opposition to the war, mounting casualties and a clear unwillingness on the part of European allies to send additional troops for the NATO-led mission, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown has set his government down an extremely risky and dangerous path of negotiations with a barbaric enemy.

It is a dangerous strategy that is also backed in principle by some senior figures in the Obama administration such as Richard Holbrooke, the President’s Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan, who may be keen to use the British-led experiment as a trial balloon for a possible U.S. exit strategy as well. This is a disastrous approach that signals defeat, and one that must be firmly rejected by the next British administration, almost certainly Conservative, likely to take office in the spring of 2010.

Great Britain is the second largest contributor to the NATO-operation in Afghanistan, with over 9,000 combat troops on the ground. The British contribution in Afghanistan is roughly equal to that of continental Europe’s big four combined — France, Germany, Italy and Spain. So far 191 British troops have been killed serving in Afghanistan (more than were killed in Iraq), and hundreds wounded. In the month of July alone, Britain lost 22 soldiers in combat.

However great the bravery of British servicemen, it is being undercut by massive underfunding of Britain’s armed forces, crippling defence cuts, and by shortages of helicopters, armored vehicles, medical teams as well as basic equipment. Britain now spends less on defence than at any time since the 1930s, and is waging a major war on a peacetime budget. It is though the lack of political will in London that is the biggest threat to the British mission.
British Foreign Secretary David Miliband’s recent speech on Afghanistan at NATO headquarters sent completely the wrong message to our enemies. In his address on July 27, the foreign secretary called for a political deal with so-called moderate elements of the Taliban in an effort to split the insurgency:

First, a political strategy for dealing with the insurgency through reintegration and reconciliation. That means in the long term an inclusive political settlement in Afghanistan, which draws away conservative Pashtun nationalists — separating those who want Islamic rule locally from those committed to violent jihad globally — and gives them a sufficient role in local politics that they leave the path of confrontation with their government.

In effect Miliband is saying that Britain and the United States must be willing to place cooperative, supposedly more reasonable wings of the Taliban back in local power in Afghanistan. This would be like putting the Nazis back in office after the fall of Berlin or the Khmer Rouge in charge of Cambodia again. No matter how much spin is placed on this negotiating strategy, it smacks of defeatism and appeasement, and a failure to place the conflict in Afghanistan within the broader context of a global war against a brutal Islamist ideology that seeks the destruction of the West and the free world.

British, American, Canadian and other NATO troops are not dying on the battlefields of south Asia to facilitate the return of a medieval-style government steeped in barbarism and savagery where women are treated as fourth-class citizens and individual liberty is non-existent. It would be only a matter of time before an Afghanistan dominated by “moderate” Taliban returned to its old position as a safe haven for al-Qaeda to launch attacks against New York, Washington or London.

Great Britain and the United States should have no truck with any strategy that allows a return to political power for the Taliban of whatever stripe. If this foolhardy policy is executed, it may ultimately lead to negotiations with al-Qaeda-linked groups in the region as well.

It is vital that a future British Conservative administration reverses what is a disastrously naïve approach, and commits to the complete political isolation, as well as the ultimate military defeat, of the Taliban in Afghanistan. This will require a significant increase in British defence spending to adequately fund a major military mission on this scale, as well as leadership in Downing Street that takes Britain’s great power responsibilities seriously.

As UK Shadow Defence Secretary Liam Fox wrote in a recent article for The Times of London,

If we abandoned our task in Afghanistan today, we would put the security of our own country in greater peril. Al-Qaeda used Afghanistan for training, and to plan attacks on the West. We must not let that happen again. To throw in the towel at this stage would encourage every jihadist to believe that we lack the moral courage to see through a difficult mission. And it would gravely undermine the credibility of NATO, the alliance that has protected this country for six decades.

Negotiations with a fundamentally barbaric organization such as the Taliban will never result in anything good for the people of Afghanistan and will undercut both Britain and America’s long-term security. If NATO talks to the various wings of the Taliban, the Allied coalition will negotiate only with different shades of evil. This is a recipe for failure and defeat as well as a monumental surrender to a totalitarian Islamist ideology based on a doctrine of hatred, fear and destruction.

With the announcement that Obama is using the mess in the Afghanistan election as reason to once more delay the sending of more troops as requested by the Commander in the field. It is feeling to this veteran that the President is putting the lives of the brave men/women in jeopardy, because he would rather spend the tax payers money rewarding those who voted him into the Oval Office than he is to give the General he sent to Afghanistan, the tools he needs to win a victory over the evil Taliban. After all Obama said he has trouble with the word VICTORY!

Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)

 

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

THE DUPLICITY OF OBAMA ADMINISTRATION

Posted by Jax Hawk on Monday, October 19, 2009 9:40:43 AM

Monday, October 19, 2009

 TEL AVIV – President Obama's presidential campaign focused on "making" the news media cover certain issues while rarely communicating anything to the press unless it was "controlled," White House Communications Director Anita Dunn disclosed to the Dominican government at a videotaped conference.


"Very rarely did we communicate through the press anything that we didn't absolutely control," said Dunn.
"One of the reasons we did so many of the David Plouffe videos was not just for our supporters, but also because it was a way for us to get our message out without having to actually talk to reporters," said Dunn, referring to Plouffe, who was Obama's chief campaign manager.
"We just put that out there and made them write what Plouffe had said as opposed to Plouffe doing an interview with a reporter. So it was very much we controlled it as opposed to the press controlled it," Dunn said.
Continued Dunn: "Whether it was a David Plouffe video or an Obama speech, a huge part of our press strategy was focused on making the media cover what Obama was actually saying as opposed to why the campaign was saying it, what the tactic was. … Making the press cover what we were saying."
SOURCE: WORLD DAILY NET

And if a Network like the Fox Network does not allow the Obama "captains" to force feed them as they do the other compliant Networks. They attack, and smear the Networks as this quote found on the internet illustrates!
White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel told CNN that President Obama does not want "the CNNs and the others in the world [to] basically be led in following Fox."

Obama senior adviser David Axelrod went further by calling on media outlets to join the administration in declaring that Fox is "not a news organization."
Other news organizations like yours ought not to treat them that way," Axelrod counseled ABC's George Stephanopoulos. "We're not going to treat them that way."
By urging other news outlets to side with the administration, Obama aides officials dramatically upped the ante in the war of words that began earlier this month, when White House communications director Anita Dunn branded Fox "opinion journalism masquerading as news." This attempt by the Obama Administration to silence FOX NEWS violates all that is American. What they are trying to accomplish is strangely reminiscent of what the Nazis in Germany and the Communists in Russia did to their Press!
And in our time is similar to what Hugo Chavez did when he shut down all the television and radio stations who were critical of him     Freedom of the Press and  speech is in danger if this is continued unopposed by the voting public!


What's scary is how this administration has so readily turned their backs on debate and free speech and resorted to bullying and thuggery in their attempts to silence their critics.Americans meet Chicago politics now take residence in the White House!

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

NETWORKS ARE USING SAUL ALINSKY'S RULES TO ATTACK RUSH!!

Posted by Jax Hawk on Saturday, October 17, 2009 11:39:40 AM

 


Not since Marge Schott, the managing partner, president and CEO pf the Cincinnati Reds baseball team from 1984-1999 has the " Mean Stream" media stooped so low to destroy a Conservative. ABC, CBS, NBC and MSNBC have all printed and spoke lies that were SPOKEN as actual quotes that Rush limbaugh is a racist and as such should not be part owner of the Saint Louis Rams.
This is a case of character destruction by hearsay as was Schotts case.
One of Saul Alinsky's rules for Radicals is target your enemy and demonize him/her! The networks have done just that!!
 
On November 13, 1992, Charles "Cal" Levy, a former marketing director for the Reds, stated in a deposition for Tim Sabo, a former employee who was suing the team that he'd heard Schott refer to then-Reds outfielders Eric Davis and Dave Parker as "million-dollar ni**ers."[2] Sabo, whose position was "team controller," alleged that his 1991 firing was due to testifying against her in another lawsuit brought against Schott by several limited partners and because he opposed the unwritten policy of not hiring blacks. Schott's countersuit alleged that Sabo wrote unauthorized checks to himself and paid health insurance premiums to retired front-office employees. She asked for $25,000 in damages for defamation. Sabo ultimately lost his suit. source:Wikapedia


The media lies about Limbaugh, alleging that he said "slavery was a good thing" and the lies were repeated on MSNBC, CNN, NBC and ABC. Not satisfied with on lie the once reliable media carried this story to jump on Limbaugh with full force!:

"I mean, let’s face it, we didn’t have slavery in this country for over 100 years because it was a bad thing. Quite the opposite: slavery built the South. I’m not saying we should bring it back; I’m just saying it had its merits. For one thing, the streets were safer after dark".

It’s also been spoken on the TV that he said this, about the death of the man who assassinated Martin Luther King: "You know who deserves a posthumous Medal of Honour? James Earl Ray. We miss you, James. Godspeed". Both statements are blatant lies, but once spoken it becomes the task of the accused to prove that he did not say the lies. You could hold your breath until you pass out before the Media attack dogs would admit they told  bold faced lies to smear a Conservative.

Chris Matthews of MSNBC actually said esentially that Rush should blow-up! CHRIS MATTHEWS: You guys see Live and Let Die, the great Bond film with Yaphet Kotto as the bad guy, Mr. Big? In the end they jam a big CO2 pellet in his face and he blew up. I have to tell you, Rush Limbaugh is looking more and more like Mr. Big, and at some point somebody’s going to jam a CO2 pellet into his head and he’s going to explode like a giant blimp. That day may come. Not yet. But we’ll be there to watch. I think he’s Mr. Big, I think Yaphet Kotto. Are you watching, Rush? And this man is an ancor man NBC is broud of after he wishes the death of another human being?

This is the main preoccupation of the once major  television networks. To malign all conservatives including past president Bush, and protect and promote any thing that Obama does that couldl destroy our  Free Enterprise Republic. Not since Goebbels was the propaganda minister for the Nazis has the media network been such a cheerleader for a "ruler"!  
And lest we forget the two hustlers Al Sharpton and Jessie Jackson who have both encouraged the Black players on  NFL teams to vocally oppose Limbaughs involvement! Some have even appeared on TV to mouth their objections to Rush.It is the owners of NFL teams to decide not the players. I believe they would play for the devil as long as they get their muti-million dollar salaries!
Michael Vick, a convicted felon, was given a second chance as were  many players who have been involved in felonious assualts, but because of inuendo the consortioum that is trying to buy the Rams has dropped Rush from their list of potential owners. He is being unfairly treated because he is a popular radio talk show host who has 50 million listeners!
 
And get this, yesterday it was discovered that the White House staff was responsible for starting at least one of the lies!

TEN TOTALLY REAL AND NOT FAKE QUOTES THAT THE MEDIA SHOULD CONCENTRATE ON!
10. Democrat Fritz Hollings of South Carolina thinks being from Africa makes you a cannibal: “You’d find these potentates from down in Africa, you know, rather than eating each other, they’d just come up and get a good square meal in Geneva.”

9. Howard Dean(former DNC Chair) reaches out: “I still want to be the candidate for guys with Confederate flags in their pickup trucks.”

8. California Democrat Diane Watson thinks interracial marriage is icky: “He’s married to a white woman. He wants to be white. He wants a colorless society. He has no ethnic pride. He doesn’t want to be black.”

7. Howard Dean thinks service positions are for minorities, not big fancy white people: “You think the Republican National Committee could get this many people of color in a single room? … Only if they had the hotel staff in here.”

6. Joe Biden explains why southern Democrats should vote for him: “My state was a slave state.”

5. “Conscience of the Senate” and former Klansman Robert Byrd on equal opportunity: “I’ve seen a lot of white n*###ers in my time.

4. Hillary Clinton does an impression (complete with accent) of an African-American man who didn’t know what Emily’s List was: “She’s supportin’ all these people. She’s supportin’ Sen. Dianne Feinstein . She’s supported Sen. Barbara Boxer . . . She supported everybody. Why won’t she support me?”

3. Democratic Mayor of New Orleans Ray Nagin denies that white people might live in New Orleans: “I don’t care what people are saying Uptown or wherever they are. This city will be chocolate at the end of the day.””

2. Democrat Steny Hoyer reviews Michael Steele’s career: “[He has] a career of slavishly supporting the Republican Party.”

1. Then Senator Joe Biden fills us in on who works at convenience stores: “You cannot go to a 7-11 or a Dunkin’ Donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent .
Every single one of those quotes is a real, legitimate, well-sourced quote. Totally real; not fake.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

FEDERALISM UNDER ATTACK BY THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION

Posted by Jax Hawk on Friday, October 16, 2009 9:38:36 AM

 

Posted by Jax Hawk on Friday, October 16, 2009 9:28:34 AM
Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.” —Ronald Reagan

 

Despite the fact that Obama advocates, Senator Reid and Speaker Pelosi are pushing hard to force unread and undwritten Health Care legislation through their respective bodies of Congress. There is still a slim chnce that some Democrats, and all but the  RINOS, will realize that what they are supporting is not only anti-free enterprise, but dangerously close to being un-constitutional.
In the middle of the 19th century Americans fought a bloody war that pitted in many cases brother against brother to determine if we would remain one country or two divided by the Mason Dixie line.

Survey after suevey has shown that once again this is a country divided! Half of the country wants the government to take care of them from cradle to grave, and a good portion of this group has bought into the class hatred principal of hating the sucessfull wealthy, and desire redistribution of the wealth. Unfortunately so does our president! As he has said numerous times before he was elected president.

The other half still believes in states rights and the freedom to prosper if they become educated, work hard and follow the rules. But now it appears the Democrats in control are about to put a knife in the back of the free enterprise system in the name of “reforming” our healh care system. The envy of the world!
And unfortunately, this is only the begining of the demolishing of our Republic as this following quote illustrates.

“The founding fathers of the American Republic are the authors of a brilliant design of the distribu­tion of political power between the national govern­ment and the states. The national government, under the Constitution, is responsible for the gener­al concerns of the republic; the state governments are the custodians of the people’s trusts and are authorized to address their particular concerns. This is the essence of federalism.
America’s federalist system should not be destroyed in a narrow ideological hot pursuit of an illusory perfection: a nationalized health care sys­tem that will provide perfect security and will “bend the cost curve” downward. The massive bills on Capitol Hill will do neither.

From the inception of the Republic, Americans have been instinctively skeptical of the notion that Washington politicians, and the national bureau­crats who supposedly answer to them, are success­fully able to micromanage the affairs of tens of millions of individuals and their families.

Americans desperately need sound common sense and consequential health care reform. This means a reform that will result in a measurable expansion of private insurance coverage and control of cost. There is a great deal of work to do. While guaranteeing accessibility and controlling the costs of health care, Americans should reject national micromanagement and let the market work. They, and their elected representatives in Con­gress, should support major federal reforms that change tax policies that undercut consumer choice in the health insurance markets and federal regulatory burdens that stifle state reforms and subvert patient choice.

The states have a key role to play. State policy­makers should support the growing movement in the states themselves that support the protection and expansion of patient choice in health care. State officials should also insist on keeping state control of health insurance regulation. At the same time, they should take bold steps to enhance patient choice, and create an environment that rewards high-quality care from physicians and other medical professionals. If they are true to their public trust, if they are to defend the legitimate interests of their citizens, state officials must stand with their citizens and reject policies that would put the United States on a glide path to single-payer, government control of the health care of every American”.

The Honorable Thomas C. Feeney is Senior Visiting Fellow at the Heritage Foundation and former Member of the U.S. House of Representatives from Florida and former Speaker of the Florida House of Representatives

Amen to all of what he has to say!!

Source:

[1]David F. Forte and Matthew Spalding, eds., The Heritage Guide to the Constitution (Washington, D.C.: Regnery Publishing Inc., 2005), and Eugene W. Hickok, Why States? The Challenge of Federalism (Washington, D.C.: The Heritage Foundation, 2007).

 

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

THEN WHERE WILL WE GO TO FIND FREEDOM?

Posted by Jax Hawk on Thursday, October 15, 2009 9:10:23 AM

The statue of Liberty in New York harbor has been the light that people sought who were fleeing from tyrants, famine and religious persecution for over one hundred years. America has beeen the beacon of freedom and opportunity for those born here and especially those imigrants who passed through Ellis Island to try to get their little piece of a free society. Free fom government persecution, free from tyranny,freedom of religion and the freedom of speech!

But today we are faced with the diming of the light of freedom that the torch held high by Miss Liberty represents.
Not only has free speech been replaced by political correct speech, but freedom has been replaced by license, As we see in the "right to choose" that our un-august Supreme Court declared in Roe vs Wade.
Anything goes has replaced the rules of public speech as long is it isn't speech that offends some minority group or the present ruling class in Washington. Lewd an lascivious words, swear words are o.k, but do not say something that offends the minority groups

Now we are faced with a radical change of enormous affect on not only our health and welfare, but how we make decisions about our health and the health and welfare of our loved ones.
Thomas Sowell said it well in todays piece in the Patriot Post.
"Almost never are the dangers of having uninsured people weighed against the dangers of having government bureaucrats over-ruling doctors and deciding whether money would be better spent saving the life of an elderly person or paying for an abortion for some teenager.

The crowning irony is that the problems caused by insurance companies refusing to pay for certain medications or treatment are to be solved by giving government bureaucrats that same power, along with the power to prevent patients from using their own money to pay for those same medications or treatments".
More than two centuries ago, Edmund Burke said, "Nothing is good but in proportion"--

It appears to me that the present administration in Washington is he## bent on power over every sector of our way of life. It apso appears, that unfortunately the Democrats have the votes to ram through Congress a bill that will never see the light of day(only a synopsis of the over 1000 page bill) that will turn over 1/6th of our GNP to the federal government, and destroy millions of jobs presently held by people employed by the private insurance companies that offer health insurance that over 85% of our people have and are satisfied with! This at a time when unemployment is in excess of 10%!
 
When President Obama was inaugurated and gave his inaugural speech.He talked about the importance of transparency in government. He said ‘transparency breeds accountability and builds public confidence.' Where has this gone, or was it just another lie from a man who will say anything to gain power?


The bill passed in the Senate Finance Committe yesterday. Mmost of it will not be implemented until 2013,but the taxes begin in 2010!
Iit is not an inconvenience for the Senate to let those who voted them into their princely position to post at least what they ae voting on to allow those who are interested to read!
Thist is not something we ought to overlook, the opportunity to get the American people to be able to read it.There has been a lot of discussion at town hall meetings and elsewhere. People are mad about Congress voting on things we haven't even read. But unfortunately I think this is the way Obama and his sycophants will operate until they totally socialize our once great country!

Waiting in the wings is the Cap and Trade bill that will certainly be passed by the same lock step majority that will further the ambition of their messia, OBAMA!
This will destroy the energy system as we know it today by high taxation and fees, and replace it with a "Goreite" system that will certainly cost US more taxes and make life less free and more unpleasant due to regulations on how much energy the government believes we should be allowed to use each day.
 
Where will people who seek freedom rom tyrannts and opression go then?



Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

WHY DID THE WHITE HOUSE ATTACK FOX NETWORK?

Posted by Jax Hawk on Wednesday, October 14, 2009 9:03:33 AM

 







SAUL ALINSKY'S "RULES FOR RADICALS", RULE 10: If you push a negative hard enough, it will push through and become a positive. Violence from the other side can win the public to your side because the public sympathizes with the underdog.
 RULE 12: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it. Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions.


First the Obama administration and his Democrat sycophants attacked Rush Limbaugh, in what many saw as a foreboding sign about what Congress and President Barack Obama will try to do with the so-called "Fairness Doctrine,"
Even though Obama has stated he will not  push the fairness doctrine--he has made falls promises before!!
Democrats are continuing their attacks on talk radio icon Rush Limbaugh over his opposition to what he has described as "Obama's Porkulus Bill." And recently they have also targeted the growing ever popular Glenn Beck'

Radio and television ads were launched by MoveOn.org and other organizations condemning Limbaugh's opinion that such government spending is wrong, and then linking Republican lawmakers to Limbaugh through their opposition to Obama's massive $1 trillion "stimulus" plan.

Now they have committed the biggest mistake since Obama promised that unemployment would never exceede 8%.
The Communications director has labeled Fox News as the enemy and an arm of the Republican party! This is an absurdity not worthy of a spokesperson for the President of the United States. Ms.Anita Dunn is claiming something that anyone who has watched Fox News for at least 4 years will attest that they were as critical of President Bush as they have of Obama.

The problem is that president Obama has done so much to destroy the free enterprise system, redistribute the wealth, and make our country less solvent and safe. That there are so many stories to report is a fact no one who is aware of what is going on in Washington can deny. Unfortunately, the other major news organisations like NBC,CBS, ABC and CNN are so enamoured with Obama that they are wont to print or speak anything negative about their "messiah"!

There is no pressure on Congress by any of the major media except Fox, as they continue to spend our country into insolvency. Congress has got away with so much , all the while they were keeping the pressure on anyone who prints or says they are destroying our financial stability.
As reports surfaced about Obama’s coming $9 trillion in new debt that will place the United States on course for anywhere between $17 trillion and $20 trillion in federal debt when Obama is done was hardly discussed this week by anyone by Fox.
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, both companies with federal ties, announced their bonuses shortly after Congress and the Obama White House staff(and he too) excoriated Bankers and Brokerage houses for bonuses.
Not much was said by the main stream media, because that would put Barney Frank in a compromised position. The House passed HR1388, which was Obama’s plan for required community service for all children. Remember a few days after the election, the unpopular idea showed up on Change.gov and was quickly removed once word spread, helped by Fox's Beck, creating anger towards Obama. All this and so much more was overlooked by the "Lame" Media.


Now Team Obama would dismantle the world’s greatest health care system and substitue a government health plan. That’s a losing proposition, which is why Mr. Obama is increasingly resorting to fear and misleading claims. It’s all the candidate of hope has left. And as a Lone Ranger , Fox News is reporting the facts that Obama does not want the public to know for fear that his major promise to the Left is in danger of being rejected in Congres as it has in the American populace. Thus the targeting of Fox News by Ms. Dunn as the enemy, aka an opponent!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous12345678910…6465Next »