Socialism at Bank of America

Bank of America has made a change to their employee's Medical Insurance coverage; and it is one that will please every good Communist, Socialist, and Progressive anywhere.

Starting immediately, coverage is being extended to every child up to 24 years of age, regardless of whether the child is making any attempt to make their life productive. This will jump to 26 years old in a few months. This particular feature is a direct result of the Obama Care requirements.

The policy that takes effect in 2011 will no longer be billed on the benefits you desire, rather, on the amount you earn. If you are close to a $50,000 annual salary, you may want to skip that next raise since it may cause your monthly paycheck deduction for medical expenses to triple. Starting from the baseline of the 2010 deduction amounts, employees will have their monthly expenses cut in half, if they are covering their whole family. If the employee only covers a partner or children, the deduction is 30%. For an employee only covering herself, the discount is only 10%. Employees that earn between $50,000 and $100,000 will get a decrease of 15%, 10%, or 5%. Those that earn over $100,000 will have a 14% increase in their premiums.

There's no reason to call the coverage insurance, anymore, because they have removed all restrictions for pre-existing conditions and preventive care is covered at 100%. There will also be NO LIMIT for any medical expenditure. This means that the common policy, shared between the young, the healthy, the elderly, and the careless, will be on the hook for unlimited expenses (e.g. cancer, heart disease, HIV, diabetes, and asthma). However, anything you get from the pharmacy, that you don't have a prescription for, will have no hope of being covered by any reimbursement plan.

How will they pay for these "benefits"? They are doing so by removing one of the most effective methods of managing health care costs: the Health Savings Account / Medical Reimbursement Account.

Joe The Plumber asked the question that is now on the minds of every employee of Bank of America that doesn't have money to burn: What is my incentive to succeed when "you're going to tax me more"? Socialism just spreads the costs around. It never gets around to creating any wealth to share; at least not beyond those who have firmly situated themselves at the top.

Repost from NewZeal.Blogspot.Com

There is such a wealth of information here, that I am concerned that the source site will be attacked and shut down by the leftists. I am only reposting this to preserve the information. The original poster is newzeal.blogspot.com

Obama File 102 America's Little Lenin? Joel Rogers and the Obama Movement.

Obama file 101 here

It is becoming increasingly clear that Barack Obama did not create a movement. A movement created Barack Obama.

One of the key leaders of that movement is a Madison, Wisconsin, law professor and sociologist - Joel Rogers.

While not widely known outside "progressive" circles, few people have exercised more influence in more strands of the movement that selected and elected Barack Obama, than has Joel Rogers.

Obama's former "Green Jobs" Czar, the Marxist-Leninist Van Jones has been part of Rogers' network for some years.

Rogers has served with Jones on the board of the Apollo Alliance , a radical led coalition of green groups and labor unions that had considerable input in writing Obama's massive "stimulus package". Rogers has served as Senior Policy Adviser to Jones' Oakland based Green For All - the Northern California affiliate of the Apollo Alliance.

In the video below Van Jones, takes time in his address to the January 2009 Mayors Innovation Project conference to praise his friend Rogers.

Jones points out three "great gifts" that Joel Rogers "has given our movement".

Firstly, there is "a new economic model ...high road development ...the best thinking that he represents is now reflected in the White House."

Secondly , "...the New Party, which is now the Working Families Party...the idea of a 'new politics' that you could actually have in this country bringing together labor, civil rights, feminists...and actually make a difference...is the basic framework for what just took over the White House."

Thirdly, ..."his idea of a new energy paradigm. His founding the Apollo Alliance. I believe the stimulus is going to put something like $80 billion in this direction..."

Jones credits Rogers with dreaming up the White House economic model - basically a 21st century "green" version of corporate socialism. Rogers also allegedly masterminded the electoral alliance that put Obama in the driver's seat. He then founded the organization that helped write the "stimulus bill", which is now funneling billions into a movement primarily designed to keep the Obama and the Democrats in power.

That's a lot of influence for one man. Does Van Jones exaggerate? Let's investigate.

The New Party which Rogers and Dan Cantor founded in the early 90s, was an attempt to to unite the poor, Blacks, Latinos , labor and "community groups" to work with and inside the Democratic Party to elect large numbers of leftist candidates to public office.

The party was essentially amalgam of four organizations -radical Washington DC "think tank" the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS), Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN).

The first strategic meetings to plan the New Party were held in Joel Rogers' home in Madison Wisconsin in the very early 1990s. Present were Rogers' wife Sarah Siskind, Dan Cantor (now leading the New party spin-off Working Families Party in New York) , ACORN leaders Wade Rathke , Zach Polett , Steve Kest and Jon Kest and IPS linked activists Steve Cobble , Harriet Barlow and Sam Pizzigati .

The very first meeting included Gerry Hudson from DSA and SEIU and early ACORN leader and IPS affiliate Gary Delgado. Anthony Thigpenn, from Los Angeles was also approached, but though supportive, did not wish to play a leadership role.

Incidentally, both Delgagdo and Thigpenn were later supporters of Van Jones' anti Iraq War magazine War Times.

The party was socialist in character, but only revealed its true nature to friends.

In March 28-30 1997 Democratic Socialists of America convened their annual Socialists Scholars Conference at Borough of Manhattan Community College, New York. Barack Obama, incidentally, attended some of these conferences in the early 1980s.

The 1997 conference was themed "Radical alternatives on the eve of the millenium".

Invitees were asked to join the debate on "changes in the labor movement, Marxist theory, the state of the economy, market socialism, and other areas where theory and practice meet...listen to the United States' only independent and socialist congressman, Rep. Bernie Sanders..."dialogue with Joel Rogers of the New Party... "

Barack Obama joined the New Party in Chicago, during his 1995 Illinois State Senate run. Obama was also a leader of the Chicago New Party sister organization , Progressive Chicago, as far back as 1993. Other Progressive Chicago leaders included Keith Kelleher of SEIU and ACORN, Kelleher's wife, Madeline Talbott (ACORN) and Ron Sable, Danny K . Davis and Lou Pardo of DSA.

The New Party relied on "fusion" voting for its success. Candidates ran on both the Democrat and New Party lines, combing the vote totals from both. This practice was illegal in many states, so in 1997, Rogers and his wife Sarah Siskind took a case to the Supreme Court seeking to overturn the state bans.

According to the The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel December 5, 1996;

With allusions to possible electoral chaos, justices of the U.S. Supreme Court expressed skepticism Wednesday over an effort to overturn 40 state laws that forbid nominations of the same candidate by more than one political party.

The high court heard arguments in a case from Minnesota that was orchestrated by a Wisconsin couple Joel Rogers, a University of Wisconsin-Madison law professor, and his wife, Madison attorney Sarah E. Siskind.

Rogers is a co-founder and national chair of the New Party, which describes itself as progressive and claims 10,000 members nationwide. The party has elected candidates for local offices in Wisconsin and elsewhere.

The case failed and '"fusion" voting was ruled unconstitutional. Deprived of its main tactic, the New Party, went into sharp decline, surviving under the Working Families Party banner in New York and a few other states.

Coincidentally, Sarah Siskind worked for the the Madison Wisconsin office of Barack Obama's Chicago law firm, Miner, Barnhill and Galland.

In 2002 Sarah Siskind represented ACORN in a successful class action against sub-prime mortgage lender Household Finance Corporation.

According to Miner, Barnhill and Galland.;

For the last ten years, the firm (principally Sarah Siskind) has also represented individual consumers and organizational plaintiffs in class action lawsuits challenging predatory lending practices. These include a series of deceptive practices actions brought in Illinois, California and Massachusetts against Household Finance Corporation, and recently consolidated in In re Household Lending Litigation, Case No. C-02-1240 and Related Cases, N.D. Ca.) and settled for $152 million in benefits and future practice change relief...

Siskind won a settlement against Household Finance Corporation which gave delinquent borrowers interest rate reductions, waivers of unpaid late charges, deferral of accrued unpaid interest and principal reductions.

It was a socialist "win-win" situation. Siskind and Miner, Barhill & Galland made money, ACORN was able to force another mortgage lender to make more soft loans to its "core constituency" and the 2008 sub-prime mortgage collapse was brought one step closer.

Some commentators have surmised that some socialists leftists, working through ACORN and similar groups may have deliberately promoted sub- prime lending as a way of creating economic chaos, thereby provoking a subsequent increase in government involvement in the economy.

They point to the now famous Cloward-Piven Strategy devised in th e 1960s by Richard Cloward and his wife Frances Fox Piven. The "Cloward-Piven" plan involved enrolling as many people as possible onto state welfare programs. The point was to overload and collapse the state systems, leading to a Federal takeover of welfare.

Interestingly, when Richard Cloward died in 2001, 500 people gathered at the CUNY Graduate Center in New York City to celebrate his life and work. Speakers included Frances Fox Piven, Barbara Ehrenreich, Cornel West, (all New Party founders and DSA members) Gus Newport (DSA member) Howard Zinn (New Party founder) , Joel Rogers and Miles Rapoport.

Coincidentally Rapoport was the president of the New York based "think tank" Demos, an official partner organization of the Institute for Policy Studies and a close ally of ACORN.

Barack Obama helped establish Demos in 1999-2000 and became a Trustee of the organization. Van Jones also later served as a Demos Trustee, but is currently on leave.

In 1998 Chicago DSA activist and IPS affiliate James Weinstein presided over a major Chicago "Back to Basics" conference designed to re-align the U.S. left back to "class politics"

To explore how we (the Left) can increase our presence in the mainstream of American political and intellectual life.

Speakers included Dr. Quentin Young (DSA member , New Party founder , Barack Obama long time friend , mentor and physician) Roxanne Dunbar-Ortiz (a San Francisco based activist and comrade of Van Jones'), plus DSA comrades Christine Riddiough, Joseph Schwartz and Roberta Lynch.

Joel Rogers, founder of The New Party, listed people's concerns: education, campaign finance reform, environment, raising the minimum wage, and concern about global capitalism. Neither Democrats nor Republicans take this list seriously. Liberalism relied on favorable government regulation and mass politics to deal with problems. A new time calls for new politics, emphasizing economic strategy, citizen participation, and electoral strategy.

In 2004, Joel Rogers from the Center On Wisconsin Strategy, and Robert Borosage from IPS enlisted DSA friendly Steelworkers President Leo Gerard and SEIU President Andy Stern, to propose a new alliance of labor, environmental groups, business and "social justice" leaders - the Apollo Alliance. The Alliance, which soon included over 200 supporting organizations, released a report "High Road or Low Road? Job Quality in the New Green Economy" arguing for a ten-year program of investment in a “clean energy, good jobs” economy.''

Joel Rogers was the Alliance's founding chairman and continues to serve on its board. Borosage is also a board member, as is Leo Gerard. John Podesta from the Center for American Progress also serves, but took a break while co-chairing President Obama's "transition", where he

"coordinated the priorities of the incoming administration’s agenda, oversaw the development of its policies, and spearheaded its appointments of major cabinet secretaries and political appointees."

Podesta also looked after another Apollo Alliance board member Van Jones, giving him a job with Center for American Progress , when Jones was forced to exit the White House.

Besides Rogers, two old New Party affiliates are involved in the Apollo Alliance. Gerry Hudson of DSA and SEIU serves as a board member. Anthony Thigpenn serves on the Apollo Alliance advisory board and runs the Apollo affiliate in Los Angeles - which trains "anti racist environmental organizers."

Thigpenn is a former member of the Maoist leaning Black Panther Party, but that's pretty mild by Apollo standards. The former head of the New York Apollo Alliance Jeff Jones, once led the terrorist Weather Underground Organization with he and President Obama's 's mutual friends , Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn.

Former DSA youth leader and SEIU organizer Ron Ruggiero, serves as Apollo Alliance National Field Director.

It's a safe bet that a good portion of the "stimulus package" $80 Billion dollars will be going to Van Jones' Green For All in San Francisco in San Francisco, to Anthony Thigpenn's "environmental anti racism" trainers in Los Angeles and Jeff Jones' former crew in New York.

Any good Leninist will tell you. It is not gaining power that is important, it is the KEEPING of power.

Joel Rogers' New Party, modeled the movement that put Obama in power. His Apollo Alliance provides a means for holding that power.

It is essentially a massive patronage system, where huge amounts of taxpayer's money is channeled into radical led "green" camouflaged mass organizations.

These "green" armies will be the vote herders of the future. They will confront the Tea Party movement and other patriots on the streets of America. They will be the paramilitary armies used to intimidate the very people who fund them.

In a January 2 2009, tribute to late to Democratic Socialists of America founder Michael Harrington, Gerry Hudson of the Apollo Alliance/SEIU/DSA wrote;

It’s tragic for so many reasons that Michael died too young; his voice and his wisdom are sorely needed. How he would marvel at the election of Barack Obama and the promise that this victory affords all of us on the democratic left! He is sorely missed. But were he alive, I would hope—and expect, that he and others who are informed by this vision of democratic socialism would join with us in SEIU as we seek to take advantage of a moment most of us have spent our lifetimes only dreaming of.

Joel Rogers is the glue that ties many of these threads together - Institute for Policy Studies, Democratic Socialists of America , ACORN, SEIU, New Party, the Apollo Alliance - even possibly the sub -prime mortgage crisis.

I believe, had there been no Joel Rogers, there likely would have been no President Barack Obama

What do you think?

Analyze That!

"I got a letter -- I got a note today from one of my staff -- they forwarded it to me -- from a woman in St. Louis who had been part of our campaign, very active, who had passed away from breast cancer. She didn't have insurance. She couldn't afford it, so she had put off having the kind of exams that she needed. And she had fought a tough battle for four years. All through the campaign she was fighting it, but finally she succumbed to it. And she insisted she's going to be buried in an Obama t-shirt." - Barack Obama

What does it say about this man, that he thinks this story is an example of why he should control health care in America?

It turns out that this lady (and her partner) chose to invest in a small business instead of a more comprehensive health care policy. She chose not to have routine exams, because this expense would have come out of pocket. Her policy would have kicked in to cover her illness, and she would have only had to pay $10,000 out of pocket. Not a desirable price, but not an insurmountable amount either.

What does it say about the Democrats, and politicians in general, that they don't provide the coverage to their staff that they claim the rest of the country needs?

It would seem that a campaign that spent over $700 Million to elect Barack Obama as President, could have set an example of their flagship issue by providing Universal Coverage for their own campaign workers. To give this perspective, Obama spent $400 million more than his rival, McCain.

What does this say about the President's assessment of our ability to reason, when they claim cause and effect with this story?

This story is supposed to illustrate that if Universal Health Coverage existed, this lady would be alive today. It assumes that if her exams were covered at no cost, she would have had them done. But, the exams are inexpensive at a regular doctor's office and often offered for free for at-risk patients and the poor. Furthermore, it is common to be diagnosed early and yet still succumb to cancer. We can not be certain that catching this early would have saved her life or diminished her suffering.

What does it say about a person, that they feel compelled to tell the world that someone chose to be buried in a shirt with their name on it?

Is that really an honor? Is it truly a show of solidarity? The audience didn't think so, as they felt compelled to respond with a macabre laughter. Obama, however, was completely sincere. He proceeded to tell the crowd that the shameful thing to do would be to deny passage of a bill that would give immense taxing powers to the Federal Government. He claimed that the only dishonor would be in halting his fight to give the government the supreme authority over its citizens lives and health. In short, he claims that he could have managed this lady's health care better then she herself did. And, he does so with a completely straight face.

Nero Fiddles While Rome Burns

While Obama has his concert series, the soldiers in Afghanistan are dying; waiting for a response to their August request for either a troop surge or a pullout.

While Obama jaunts to Europe to pursue a Chicago Olympics, the United States groans under the weight of oppressive national debt and unclear economic direction.

While Obama collects the Nobel Peace Prize, the world teeters at the brink of Nuclear War. North Korea, Venzuela, and Iran draw closer to developing nuclear weapons, having already stated a desire to use them. China and Russia maintain their arsenals while Obama dismantles America's.

A Culture of Death

Don't you think you should be concerned about, or at least wary of, any movement that celebrates death? Traditional Democrats exhibit this cause for concern when dealing with those who support the Death Penalty. This legitimite concern has shaped the laws that require an exhaustion of all appeals before the death penalty is applied.

It is an established fact that Adolf Hitler felt he was simply the best at carrying out an improvement in the species. A commonly held, and taught, belief at the time was that the human species could be improved by removing the inferior humans from the gene pool. Whether or not this is true is irrelevant, when compared to the obvious question of who is qualified to make the assessment of which humans are inferior. At the time, a democratic process would have voted for exactly those people who were sent to the gas chambers. How do we feel about that in hindsight?

Any person that advocates for Abortion, has to deal with the prospect that they are celebrating death. Either they decide that the benefits outweigh the costs, coming to the conclusion that it is acceptable to celebrate these deaths; or they decide that the underdeveloped fetus is not a life, so they are not causing a death. This is a personal decision that each person must make now that abortion has become such an accepted practice. It is now unmistakable that many people have indeed come to the conclusion that some lives should be extinguished, some even up to the fourth month after birth.

The Green Movement has also become more vocal about the desire for negative population growth - meaning a decrease in the population. This can only be achieved in two ways. The average family, globally, could have less than 2 children and attrition will reduce the number of people on the earth. The only other option is to institute policies that will lead to an abnormal reduction in the population. This could be coerced suicides, dangerous conditions, or outright killings. The attempts to decrease by attrition have been pushed since the 1960's, and are clearly not working. What will the hardcore greenies resort to in order to accomplish their goals?

An obvious defense for the Death Penalty, traditionally supported by Republicans and Conservatives, is that it is only ever applied where the convicted person has made a clear choice to ignore the laws and commit a heinous crime. It is not a general call for clearing out the prisons. On the other hand, Democrats, Liberals, and Progressives are on the record, in the 20's and 30's, supporting racial cleansing; and in the last few decades strongly advocating abortion and full adoption of the Green Movement's agenda.

SEIU - The Next ACORN to crack

In a speech to the SEIU in 2008, Presidential Hopeful Barack Obama spoke about his close association with Andy Stern and Eliseo Medina. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Al8yw_E0Vm8)

Andy Stern has been consolidating Unions in hostile takeovers and increasing the Union customer base exactly like the most ruthless CEO he claims to be working against. Mr. Stern has also been appointing people to high position, only to find that they are using their authority to use hundreds of thousands of dollars in Union money for personal use. There is an allowance of corruption in the Unions, as has been known for years.

Eliseo Medina is an Honorary Chair of the Democratic Socialists of America. He makes no apologies for his attempts to reshape America into a country like Russia. This is probably why the SEIU has now removed his bio page from its website.

It will be interesting to find out what else can be dug up on SEIU with more than a couple simple Google searches.

Are You Scared Yet? If not, you're not awake.

The news today reports that a Senate Proposal would give the White House power to disconnect private users from the internet in times of emergency. Add to that the claims directly from Barack Obama himself that we need a civilian security force, just as powerful as the military. Why would he think he needs additional forces beyond the FBI, CIA, Secret Service, NSA, National Guard, and Local Police? What emergency is he preparing for?

Joe Biden let that slip before the elections. "Mark my words, it will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy.... Watch, we're gonna have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy.... And he's gonna need help. And the kind of help he's gonna need is, he's gonna need you - not financially to help him - we're gonna need you to use your influence, your influence in the community, to stand with him. Because its not gonna be apparent initially, its not gonna be apparent that we're right."

The only international crisis so far has also been the most underreported. An attempt was made by the sitting President of Honduras to force changes to their Constitution. When the military refused to obey his orders, which had been declared unconstitutional by the courts, he was deposed. Barack Obama sides with Hugo Chavez in denouncing these actions. This leads one to the conclusion that, like Chavez, Obama feels the President has the right to act contrary to the Courts, the Congress, the Military, and the People.

Putting this all together, there is legitimate cause for concern that the change proposed for America is to turn it into a totalitarian state. I don't think the American people would allow it. But, that won't stop the attempts. Especially when they are this large and this well orchestrated.

Not Just Non-Negotiable

There are certain bills coming through Congress that are designed to fundamentally change this country. These bills are being debated, while some Congressmen seek concessions and others seek compromises. These bills are absolutely NON-NEGOTIABLE. They are so insidious in their design that they cannot be accepted in any form. I am talking about Cap and Trade and Universal Health Care.

The Cap & Trade system has been tried in other countries. Whether or not you consider it effective in its goal of reducing pollution, it has ALWAYS cost far more than it has provided benefit for. Not only that, but it puts even more power over every company and citizen into the hands of people that are seeking absolute and in systems that are rife with fraud.

Universal Health Care seeks to put full control of your health into the hands of faceless bureaucrats. It is already frustrating to deal with an insurance company, who faces competition from other companies and excessive regulation from government. You don't have to imagine how much worse it would be with a Single Payer system, because there are real life examples throughout Europe and Canada. The answer is never to reduce competition. The answer is to remove the barriers and foster competition. Only then will we awaken the innovative and entrepeneurial spirit that has made America the best nation on earth.

These bills are not simply non-negotiable. Despite all of the hateful rhetoric, standing against these bills is an imperative. If not, we will reach a time, in this country, when we will say:
When they pushed through Green Initiatives, I did nothing because I didn't want to look like a polluter.
When they pushed through Health Care for All Americans, I did nothing because I didn't want to look insensitive.
When they pushed through radical changes to my ability to travel, communicate, and assemble I was no longer able to do anything.

Historical Deaths

On June 25, 2009, history will record the deaths of cultural icons Farrah Fawcett and Michael Jackson.

On June 26, 2009, Americans will record the death of liberty. Today the House of Representatives has passed legislation allowing the taxation of every energy producer and user in the United States. The proceeds of this tax will be realized by mega-corporations like General Electric and AIG, and distributed among dictatorial politicians. The Senate is the last possible hope to stop this bill from becoming law, but the Democrat majority there makes that highly unlikely.

It is time to call upon the powers of Heaven to sustain the Sons and Daughters of Liberty again. "Sir, we are not weak, if we make a proper use of the means which the God of Nature hath placed in our power." "I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death!"

Non-Negotiables

There are several issues before Congress right now that are completely non-negotiable for Americans. Any one of these cannot be allowed to pass in any form, or the freedom we have treasured will be lost until a bloody revolution has been fought to restore them.

Cap & Trade
The research is not settled. Every energy tax proposal that has been implemented has resulted in fraud, taxes, and increased carbon emissions. Without legislation of this type, the United States has decreased its carbon emissions more than most every other nation on earth. We cannot afford to take even one step on this road until we have more assurance that the costs do not exceed any benefits.

Universal Health Care
This has been proposed to the American public repeatedly, in the 1940's, 1960's, 1990's, and again this year. Americans have consistently stated that they want to make their own health care decisions, even if that means we have to pay a little more for that right. Politicians are now treating this as an emergency, but it appears that more Americans have medical insurance than at any time in history, approaching 85% of American families.

Card Check
Using mafia tactics of coercion and forcing a rushed decision is never going to result in the best desicion. Once a company is unionized, do they have the option of disbanding the union? How frequently has that ever happened?

Fairness Doctrine
This is not an attempt to get both sides of the story. With the numerous news outlets, including radio, TV, newspaper, satellite radio, internet search, and blogs, it is ridiculous to profess that someone is unable to get the full story. This is merely a thinly veiled attack on the Freedom of Speech.

Not one shred of allowance can be made for any of these issues. We have been pulled to the edge of a wide river, raging to an unknown destination. Any compromise from this point will drag us into dangerous waters.

Federal Government Corruption

Nancy Pelosi - Earmarked funds to benefit her husband and his company. Diverted PAC funds for her husband's personal use. Defended by John Murtha and White House.

Harry Reid - Received $700,000 from sale of land that he didn't own. This should be considered a gift, and treated accordingly. It was buried.

Charlie Rangle - Filed ethics complaints against himself for misusing 4 rent-stabilized (government subsidized) apartments for personal use and soliciting funds on congressional stationary. He has also evaded taxes on income from renting his Caribbean villa.

Dick Durbin - Insider Trading: Following his meeting with Hank Paulson and Ben Bernanke, Durbin sold over $100K in stocks and bonds. This is fishy because almost all of this money went directly to one company, headed by Warren Buffet. How did he know that a single company would outperform the entire marketplace?

Kevin Johnson - Mayor of Sacramento has been shown to have used Americorps funds for personal use. There are unsettled allegations of sexual contact with a minor and a payoff of $230K.

Barak Obama - As a result of the investigation into Kevin Johnson, Inspector General Gerald Walpin has been fired. Senator Obama signed onto a bill that requires 30 days notice to Congress, including a statement of cause, before any Inspector General is fired. He did not follow his own procedures in this case.

Tax Evasion - Tim Geithner, Nancy Killefer and Tom Daschle.

Have any of these people have been prosecuted? In fact, do a Google search and more often you will find articles defending every one of these unethical acts. Why do some others get hung out to dry, but then absolved, while these people get a free pass? Only one reason, they are an active participant in the secret society called - The Democratic Party.

Boycott the Census?

We all know the government has overstepped its bounds. One place where every citizen can fight back is by boycotting the census. Why would you boycott the census? There are so many people that will tell you that it will only hurt you if you are not counted. Let's look at what the census is used for and the reasons it would hurt you if you fail to return your card.

Primary Purpose
The census is designed to count the number of people in order to proportionately divide the members of the House of Representatives. How many people actually vote for the people in Congress? How much response do you get from your Representative? I happen to like my representative, and how he fights against all earmark spending. Of course, I'll still have only one representative for me, regardless of how many we have in my state.

Secondary Purposes
There are numerous secondary purposes for the census, from a simple accounting of the population to gathering details on how you live your daily life. For a government that has shown an amazing audacity in intruding into the affairs of corporations and individuals, the less they know about me the better off I will be. My only regret would be for individuals in the future that may be seeking information for research purposes.

Only Hurting Yourself
The main proponents of boycotting the Census prior to 2010 were illegal aliens and their advocates. They were loudly told by publications like the Los Angeles Times that Federal assistance for education programs, housing, social programs, health policies, and public transportation would be cut, if they were not counted. This logic clearly identifies those who are seeking to turn our country into a welfare state, beholden to none but the Nanny Government. In fact, this money flows whether or not there is any funding for it, just like all of the other bailouts.

A more effective claim for working families is that the information will be used to allocate funds for roads and highways, provide aid to farmers, and set economic policies. While we can all agree that the highways have been a boon to the country, energy conservation policies will continue to limit the access we will have to use them. It is also obvious that Washington is awash with corruption and failed programs when it comes to farming subsidies and economic policies. These programs should be one of the first places where Congress should look to cut the current budget.

ACORN, etc.
The last, best reason for me to boycott the census is that it is being outsourced to Community Organizers like ACORN and their kind. These groups refuse to come clean on their activities and fund-raising throughout and between their organizations. If I cannot trust them with public monies, I certainly will not trust them with my private information.

Quotes from Common Sense that Apply Today

"PERHAPS the sentiments contained in the following pages, are not yet sufficiently fashionable to procure them general favor; a long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right, and raises at first a formidable outcry in defence of custom. But tumult soon subsides. Time makes more converts than reason. "

"SOME writers have so confounded society with government, as to leave little or no distinction between them; whereas they are not only different, but have different origins. Society is produced by our wants, and government by our wickedness; the former promotes our happiness POSITIVELY by uniting our affections, the latter NEGATIVELY by restraining our vices. The one encourages intercourse, the other creates distinctions. The first is a patron, the last a punisher."

"For were the impulses of conscience clear, uniform and irresistibly obeyed, man would need no other lawgiver; but that not being the case, he finds it necessary to surrender up a part of his property to furnish means for the protection of the rest; and this he is induced to do by the same prudence which in every other case advises him, out of two evils to choose the least. Wherefore, security being the true design and end of government, it unanswerably follows that whatever form thereof appears most likely to ensure it to us, with the least expense and greatest benefit, is preferable to all others."
(One can readily replace King with today's perpetuity of Congresspersons and the current adulation of the President)

"This shall be the manner of the king that shall reign over you; he will take your sons and appoint them for himself for his chariots, and to be his horsemen, and some shall run before his chariots (this description agrees with the present mode of impressing men) and he will appoint him captains over thousands and captains over fifties, and will set them to ear his ground and to read his harvest, and to make his instruments of war, and instruments of his chariots; and he will take your daughters to be confectionaries and to be cooks and to be bakers (this describes the expense and luxury as well as the oppression of kings) and he will take your fields and your olive yards, even the best of them, and give them to his servants; and he will take the tenth of your seed, and of your vineyards, and give them to his officers and to his servants (by which we see that bribery, corruption, and favoritism are the standing vices of kings) and he will take the tenth of your men servants, and your maid servants, and your goodliest young men and your asses, and put them to his work; and he will take the tenth of your sheep, and ye shall be his servants, and ye shall cry out in that day because of your king which ye shall have chosen, AND THE LORD WILL NOT HEAR YOU IN THAT DAY."

"the same tyranny which drove the first emigrants from home pursues their descendants still."

"And by a plain method of argument, as we are running the next generation into debt, we ought to do the work of it, otherwise we use them meanly and pitifully."

"Though I would carefully avoid giving unnecessary offence, yet I am inclined to believe, that all those who espouse the doctrine of reconciliation, may be included within the following descriptions:
Interested men, who are not to be trusted; weak men who cannot see; prejudiced men who will not see; and a certain set of moderate men, who think better of the European world than it deserves; and this last class by an ill-judged deliberation, will be the cause of more calamities to this continent than all the other three."

"It is the good fortune of many to live distant from the scene of sorrow; the evil is not sufficiently brought to their doors to make them feel the precariousness with which all American property is possessed."

"I mean not to exhibit horror for the purpose of provoking revenge, but to awaken us from fatal and unmanly slumbers, that we may pursue determinately some fixed object."

"Every quiet method for peace hath been ineffectual. Our prayers have been rejected with disdain; and only tended to convince us, that nothing flatters vanity, or confirms obstinacy in kings more than repeated petitioning- and nothing hath contributed more than that very measure to make the kings of Europe absolute:"

Stand Up or You Will Be Shut Up

People and institutions have been told that they are not allowed to grow and package food for their own use or purposes. The reason for this was given that it would impact the economy. But, there is apparently no concern of the impact to salespersons, mortgage companies, or renters when the government steps in and provides food and housing to poor people. (I can't say citizens here because they are even passing around the gravy to non-citizens, even ones here without authorization.)

This is a logical argument that would require a direct confrontation in order to dispel. We have been badgered and belittled from Republicans, Democrats, and people that are totally apathetic to politics when attempting to stand up for personal freedom. There is always going to be a potential cost to some other individual or industry if you can extrapolate far enough. If you want a current example, just consider the number of places in this country where driving without a seat belt on is a primary offense. We have allowed this infringement on our freedom because we "have nothing to hide" or consider it a "good idea". But, the cost of not wearing a seat belt is a personal one.

We have another recent example, where a mother has decided that chemotherapy is not the right choice for her 13 year old son. Most Americans would agree that radiation treatment, with all of its side effects, would be a good idea in this situation. But, what responsibility is the government taking on when they mandate treatment. They are threatening to become the legal guardian for this boy, meaning they will bear the costs of not only the treatment but his entire upbringing. This decision, and the associated costs, were never intended to be borne by taxpayers that have never met this person or even set foot in the same state.

When "good ideas" are legislated, people give up the ability to determine their own "good ideas". At that point, we have turned over our ability to decide what makes an idea good, and what we once called evil is called good on our behalf.

First 100 Days

We are drawing close to the end of the first 100 days of the Obama Presidency. What have we seen out of this President.

1) TOTUS - He is unable to deliver a speech without the use of the Teleprompter Of The United States. What kind of person is so insecure in his principles that he needs a constant reminder of what he is talking about?

2) Habitual Liars - When Hillary Clinton was caught in a lie about being fired upon in Bosnia, it must have been just setting the prerequisite for inclusion in the Obama Cabinet. Joe Biden has also been caught lying about being fired upon in Somalia. He has gone on to tell belittling stories of the former President, where Sen. Biden "set him straight". Hillary Clinton has gone on to lie to the American People, stating that 90% of guns used in Mexican crimes come from the US. She knew this was a lie then, and has never recanted her statement. The true number is 90% of the guns they have decided are American made actually are, but they make that determination with only 20% of the guns used in crimes in Mexico.

3) No Taxes, of any type, on People making less than $75,000 - This is obviously not true when the largest Tobacco Tax increase in US history took effect on April 1, 2009. Federal Cigarette taxes became two and a half times all prior increases combined. For those trying to save money by rolling their own, the tax on papers has more than doubled and the tax on rolling tobacco went from $1.10 to $24.78 per pound. That is a 2250% increase. Next in line - energy taxes.

4) American Apology Tour - Obama stammered and stuttered his way around Europe, fumbling through speeches and press conferences without the aid of his TOTUS. In every stop, Obama apologized for American enterprise and peace keeping, both of which are directly responsible for the worldwide improvement in mortality rates and standard of living over the last century. But, Obama's coup de grace was in bowing to the King of Saudi Arabia. He has claimed it was not a bow, but it is blatantly obvious that the head of the President is bowed below that of the (much shorter) Saudi King.

President's Day

What did Pres. Obama do to honor former Presidents on his first President's Day? It appears all that he did was pat the current President on the back for pushing through his agenda with the help of a cooperative Congress.

Obama Lifts Restrictions on Funding Foreign Abortions

Regardless of your personal convictions on abortion, is it appropriate that America spend its taxpayers money to fund abortions in foreign nations? Is this a smart action at a time when we are heading into a depression, with national debt spiraling out of control?

In addition to the considerations of the unnecessary expense, once donated we will have no controls on how this money is used. Nations with divided loyalties could use the money to enforce abortions on their enemies. Nations with more lenient morals than the U.S. could fund the killing of small children under the umbrella of abortion. Don't say it can't happen - it already has, within our own borders.

The Legacy Begins

Obama continues to build his legacy with today's announcement. "Obama Orders Guantanamo Prison Closed"

Obama has cemented in history his ignorance of politics, conflict, and history itself. Never in the course of history has any nation allowed the enemy to dictate its actions, and survived. How many people would play chess if the captured pieces were left on the board? It certainly sends a message to the soldiers engaged in the fight. That message is "take no prisoners". If an enemy combatant has the potential to be returned to the fight, then that combatant should be killed NOW! And, we have already found scores of former Gitmo detainees again engaged in combat with America.

So, what Obama has done is ensure that American troops kill even more people when engaged in conflicts. What Obama has decreed is that death is preferable to humane imprisonment as a POW.

The First 100 days

So, today is Inauguration Day. As we go through the first 100 days of the Obama Presidency, we should get an idea of what he will accomplish during the rest of his Presidency. Granted, nobody knows what the future will hold, but we will see how President Obama intends to lead. Something that NOBODY has been privileged to witness heretofore.

His first act - a Proclamation. So far he is following the same pattern as during his few years as a Senator: meaningless, symbolic gestures; full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. The proclamation, true to his course, stresses Renewal and Reconciliation. But, what are we renewing and who is being reconciled?

From the Inaugural Address, it appears that we are renewing our resolve to read and understand the Constitution and our Founding Fathers. Yet, we are also Renewing our dependence on direction in our daily lives by our ruling government, as expected by our one-time King George III. I think Obama expects us to renew our resolve to act for the 'common good' of our nation's citizens. In the tradition of the greatest Americans, we actually should renew our liberties by ensuring that we can provide for ourselves and our loved ones, through hardships and prosperity.

I can only assume that President Obama reconciles his supposed belief in our founding documents and his love of Socialism by invoking the name of Abraham Lincoln. As you may recall, in the process of holding this nation together and abolishing slavery, America paid a great price. Not only did we lose many Americans to the fighting, we also lost much of the strength that States' Rights brought to our Federalist system. President Obama seems to have no compunction against destroying any part of our Constitution, Law, or Procedure that does not fall in line with his goals.

In honor of the Day of Renewal and Reconciliation, I pledge to renew my resolve to "form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure Domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, AND secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves AND our posterity". I will NOT attempt to reconcile with any man or ideology. The only reconciliation that I will do will be between me and my Creator - to insure I am in line with His ideas of how to secure the unalienable rights of Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.

Economic Crisis 2008 - Call To Action

In the previous post (below) I provide a simplified version of what happened to the Stock Markets and Financial Industry. The reason everyone needs to understand this now is because the same thing is happening in governments. In order to stave off the problems this has brought to the markets, and thereby every major company that relies on these markets, governments are incurring large debts with no thought of their future ability to pay.

Pretend that you have credit card and car loan balances totaling $50,000. Also pretend that your house is worth $200,000, and you only owe $100,000. As long as you are paying your bills, you are a good credit rating and can get credit if you need it. You know you can refinance your house, if necessary, for money to pay off your obligations. But, what happens to you if the value of your home drops to $100,000? Now your ability to pay is reduced through no fault of your own, even if your income is the same.

Let's assume that you don't currently rely on debt for the day to day business of your home. But, if your car breaks down or you have a non-routine medical expense you no longer have the ability to get the cash you need to meet your obligations. You can ask your boss for a raise, but this minor increase in your income cannot help you to pay off the large obligations that are dragging down your credit rating. With this new obligation, your ability to pay your other existing obligations is further diminished. Due to your diminished ability to pay, your credit cards are closed by the banks and your interest rate goes up. You no longer have access to any funds other than the income from your job. As long as your income holds, and you don't have any unplanned expenses, you may be able to hold on. But, consider that the change has affected many others. This could easily impact your employer, and your income.

Now, simply assume that you are the government. It works exactly the same. When the ability of your government to acquire capital is reduced, all of the existing debt becomes a greater burden. The government can raise taxes, but there is not enough money in the system to pay off the debt enough to improve our credit rating. It will have to reduce its expenses. Not only that, in a recession, overall income is reduced. This means that less tax money will be collected, even if the rate is increased.

Every person in America needs to reduce their expenses now. You can stop spending on discretionary purchases and obligations (cell phones, cable, etc) while it is still an option. You cannot stop spending on debt. You don't want that to be all that you can afford. Everybody needs to speak up so that Congress and The Fed stop spending money while it is still discretionary. They will refuse to listen until a large section of the electorate speaks out.