30Oct09
As a modern progressive Barack Obama has been compared to Woodrow Wilson with good reason. More than any other President, Wilson was responsible for deviation from the founders vision of this nation. The public at large seems in disbelief that one man, one presidential term, could transform the direction of a country so quickly. But if Wilson was any indication, we're in for trouble.

Thomas Woodrow Wilson, America's 28th President, was considered among the leading intellectuals of the progressive era.

The progressives believed in the ability of the political/intellectual elite to govern society more effectively than the people at large, through the application of science as a disinterested expertise. The progressives sought sweeping change in the nature of American society through a wide ranging program of economic, political, social and moral reformations.

In just his first term Wilson, aided by a Democratic congress; passed the 16th Amendment to the constitution, instituted progressive income tax with the Revenue Act of 1913, the Clayton Antitrust Act, the Federal Farm Loan Act, created the Federal Trade Commission and the Federal Reserve. Wilson promoted growth of labor unions, central supervision of food production, he nationalized the railroads and suppressed anti war movements.

The Wilson administration created the American Protective League, a group of 250,000 members empowered by the Justice Department to conduct warrant less searches and interrogations, while spying on Americans for anti - government behavior.

The Wilson administration created the Committee on Public Information, run by George Creel. The committee trained more than 75,000 volunteers to be "four minute men", under the direction of William McCormick Blair the volunteers made canned 4-minute speeches on administration talking points in various public venues, reaching more than 11 million people in eighteen months.

Wilson pioneered the use of media to encourage uncritical loyalty to government, through systematic praise, and attacks upon detractors as unpatriotic. Wilson was depicted in a series of official photographs as a charismatic and selfless figure, and in words as a leader without which the nation would falter.

Is any of this sounding familiar? Obama is determined to finish what Wilson started, the transformation of this country from a constitutional republic, into a socialist oligarchy in the guise of participatory democracy. The administration is using the media, and community organizations to bully and silence opposition, creating a transformative leader without which the promised "change" cannot occur.

Oppose the administration. Speak up, speak out. Do not be silenced by the derision of neighbors and peers who drank the kool-aid. You are in the right.

An excellent visual representation of the ties within America's radical socialist left, courtesy of the folks at Founding Bloggers.

These are the people and organizations working to transform our republic into a socialist participatory democracy. Every mainstream news organization in the country knows about these ties, and should be leading every newscast with it, but they're complicit in it. They're gagging for it.

It's up to the citizen journalist and everyday people to get the word out. Do not be silenced.

I think every time Obama sits on the can, he tries to dream up another way to spend taxpayer's money.

From this time on, I will be observing and periodically cataloging attempts by this administration to pay off the voting public with targeted pork spending.

In the past few weeks a White House proposal to give every social security recipient a 250 dollar check next year, has received a lot of attention.

For the first time in decades, seniors will not be receiving a cost of living increase in their social security payments next year. According to the 1975 law, cost of living increases are tied to inflation, which ran negative falling from 2.5% to just 1.4%.

Citing isolated sectors like health care that have outpaced inflation (bandwagon much?), the senior lobby isn't buying into the idea that we've had a period of negative inflation. The federal reserve poured a trillion dollars into the system over the last year, how could we have fewer dollars out there chasing goods and services?

Other economic forces are holding inflation down. Energy prices have fallen, growth lending is down 1.8% as banks choose to grow their reserves over making more loans, job growth is down 4.2% and as a result consumers are spending less. All this results in dollars being pulled out of the economy.

You see many Americans have had a pay cut, resulting in seniors having less competition for the things they buy. Even a separate consumer price index that tracks seniors has shown a drop in prices.

The White House proposal would increase the deficit by 13 Billion dollars, for the purpose of currying favor with a block of voters. Call the White House at 202-456-1414, and tell them to obey the law.

26Oct09
President Obama has come under fire from his own party recently, for creating a negative 'frat boy' environment in his administration, with the president's senior advisers (all male) being collectively known as "The Boys" by women at the White House.

The left has long overlooked such tendencies in the president, refusing to believe that their chosen one could harbor such attitudes toward the fairer sex. The first lady has been out stumping for Obamacare, the administration is trying hard to paint Obama as strongly pro-female. But his actions on the campaign trail, and since taking office, haven't shown that to be the case.

Everyone will remember Obama's offensive "lipstick on a pig" campaign comment directed at Sarah Palin, and possibly Joe Biden's utter dismissal of her qualifications saying only "She IS pretty". But what about the constant gender based attacks on opponent Hillary Clinton?

"You challenge the status quo and suddenly the claws come out," Obama remarked of Clinton, painting her as as an emotional woman. Barack Obama's demonstrated lack of respect for his opponent sunk lower as the campaign went on, such that at one point former vice presidential nominee Geraldine Ferraro said she not vote for Obama because he was “terribly sexist”.

Blogger and author Taylor Marsh wrote, in her view Obama had "a way of thinking about women. A way of demeaning women in power; even saying we're not up to the job."

Obama confirmed his disdain by going on to tell reporters "I understand that Senator Clinton, periodically when she's feeling down, launches attacks as a way of trying to boost her appeal,"

Noted women's author Karen Stabiner wrote of attack "That was the moment when I, and other women of a certain age, all over the country, winced. The change candidate had embraced one of the oldest clichés in the book—that women are held hostage by emotion, that we can't be trusted with the big decisions because, depending on our age, we're either on the rag or having a hot flash."

This Sunday, October 25th, Obama played his 24th round of golf in the first 10 months of his presidency (more than Bush played his first three years), and now amid controversy, it was the first round to include a woman. 4% seems inclusive, right?

Of course we all know that Barry's real game is hoops. On October 8th President Obama invited several administration officials and 11 members of congress (2 Republicans and 9 Democrats), none of which were women. Not even Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, who played college basketball for Trinity university in Washington D.C. I guess Mr. Obama couldn't risk a woman dunking on him.

One in six American women has been raped or sexually assaulted, some form of domestic violence is present in nearly half of all marriages, and female employees earn on average .80 cents for every dollar of their male colleagues. Is the sexist in chief really the person to lead America in this new century?

23Oct09

"Transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstones of this Presidency" - Barack Obama

trans-par-en-cy something transparent; a:free from pretense or deceit, frank b:characterized by visibility or accessibility of information

Hmm, it sounds like transparency means being forthright, and above board, giving all concerned access to information.

Yet Senator Harry Reid is conducting negotiations on the Senate health care reform bill in absolute secrecy. Only Senators Reid, Baucus, and Dodd - all democrats; have been meeting with a small team of White House officials captained by chief of staff Rahm Emmanuel.

Well that doesn't sound like transparency to me.

Liberals see the government option as the measure of "winning" this fight, and as more Blue Dogs start to see it as a federal intrusion into the private marketplace, its chances are getting worse. You can believe that Reid and Emmanuel will tweak, spin, and massage this legislation every way they can to make it look as benign as possible while still accomplishing their goals. We need transparency now, or they'll just repackage this garbage and put a pretty bow on it and sell it back to us.

Get in someones face and get vocal. Call congress toll free at 866-220-0044, and demand to talk to your Senator.

21Oct09
For years the political left has joked of Richard Nixon's infamous enemies list. A list of individuals and groups that, for one reason or another, were viewed as being critical of the Nixon administration and were barred from White House functions.

The Obama administration has proved exceptionally thin skinned and quick tempered in regards to criticism, and certainly so when viewed in contrast with the constant assault both the Bush and Clinton administrations stood up to.

Since the beginning of Obama's Presidential aspirations, a political dirty tricks machine has been dealing with his detractors "the Chicago Way", with the politics of personal destruction. Since then numerous high ranking Democrats has come out in favor of various limitations to political speech, and House Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman is seeking speech restrictions with the FCC.

Obama's enemies list has been expanding since the beginning of his administration, and now that the White House is attacking Fox News, even the British media has taken notice. The left has labeled all dissenters as enemies of the state.

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.” - Joseph Goebbels

20Oct09
Fans of Star Trek will be familiar with Starfleet's first general order, otherwise known as the Prime Directive,the guiding principle of the United Federation of Planets.

The Prime Directive dictates there must be no interference with the natural internal development of a civilization. The fictional directive has its origin in the real world concept of Westphalian sovereignty, the principals of which are territorial sovereignty and the exclusion of external actors from domestic authority.

Since the United States government seems intent on ignoring previous limitations to constitutionally enumerated powers, and subjugates sovereignty by its participation in the United Nations, I propose this amendment to Article 2 item 1 of the charter of the United Nations. This amendment will forthwith be known as "The Sovereign Imperative".

"As the right of each individual to live in accordance with its normal cultural evolution is considered sacred, no United Nations agency may interfere with the normal and healthy development of member nation economies or culture.

Such interference includes regulating growth of member nation economies through 'climate change' policies, manipulating currency markets through the International Monetary Fund, the redistribution of wealth from larger nations to smaller ones in the guise of 'foreign aid', and exercise of any power that supersedes that of the member nation.

United Nations personnel may not violate these prohibitions, even to prevent recession/depression, unless they are acting to right an earlier violation. This directive takes precedence over any and all other considerations, and carries with it the highest moral obligation."

It almost sounds as though it could have come from the desk of Ban-Ki-moon, doesn't it? Anyhow, since I hold out very little hope for the U.N. to adopt this amendment, instead you should write your congressman and demand that the United States discontinue membership in the United Nations.

15Oct09

If you are not free to choose wrongly and irresponsibly, you are not free at all. – Jacob Hornberger

Obesity is epidemic. No other factor has had so great an impact on America's rising health care costs as the portliness of her citizens, and the nanny state has taken notice. They want to force people into better choices in much the same way they did smokers, by taxing "junk" food, beginning with soda.

The House Ways and Means Committee has proposed a tax of ten cents on each can of soda, to help fund the government option.

Harold Goldstein is the executive director of the California Center for Public Health Advocacy. He says it has to be taxed so the beverage industry pays its share for the obesity epidemic.

"This study that we did with UCLA showed that regardless of income or ethnicity, adults who drink one or more soda a day are 27 percent more likely to be overweight or obese," Goldstein says.

While I'm sure this data holds true, I'd find any claim of a causative effect to be suspect.

The 1999-2004 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey by the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition showed no correlation between the number of calories consumed in sweetened drinks and obesity. In reality healthy weight people drink more beverages containing sugar than overweight people.

The definitions seems poorly defined as well, covering soda, sports drinks, and other sugary beverages. As soon as you add sugar to water you owe the government some money. What if I make sweet tea in my kitchen, are the revenuers going to come knocking on my back door?

What if I choose to drink diet soda, which doesn't have any sugar? Are they going to tax that? Soon they'd be taxing all caffeinated beverages and you'd have an angry populace on your hands. Taxes like this punish even those who practice moderation, and like smoking taxes will disproportionately affect the poor.

American Beverage Association spokesman Kevin Keane says comparisons to taxes on tobacco are a poor analogy. "You can have a soft drink and be a healthy person," says Keane. "You can't say the same about smoking."

Historically increased taxation has created lower sales and demand, which in turn causes industry to decrease production, and put people out of work.

"We have some economic data that shows there'd be $22 billion lost in economic output," Keane says.

I wonder what these politicians think is more important, being a few pounds lighter, or having a job? Given Washington's penchant for taxation, you can be sure it wouldn't stop at soda. It will be salt and red meat next.

Go to FreedomWorks and join their email campaign to stop this regressive tax from becoming law.

Michigan Representative Thaddeus McCotter, a Republican, has proposed H.R. 3501 the so called H.A.P.P.Y. act.

If passed into law, the legislation would amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 would allow a tax deduction of up to $3,500 dollars per year for expenses related to any legally owned, domesticated, live animal; i.e. pet.



The resolution has been referred to the House Ways and Means committee, where it will hopefully be euthanized in the most humane manner possible.

In the meantime, call McCotter's office at 202-225-8171, and ask that he please put the bong down and get back to work.

13Oct09
"With this markup nearing its conclusion, we can now see clearly that the bill continues its march leftward," said Senator Grassley of Iowa.

The Senate Finance Committee will vote shortly on Senator Max Baucus' health care bill today. With a Democratic majority of 13-10, and Republican Olympia Snowe of Maine pledging her support, the bill's passage out of committee is all but assured.

If passed, President Obama's universal health care policy will have gone farther toward becoming a reality than any others president's since Theodore Roosevelt in 1912.

This is a mistake for America.

An independent PricewaterhouseCoopers report commissioned by America's Health Insurance Plans, shows that under the Baucus proposal,the cumulative increases in the cost of a typical family policy between 2010 and 2019 will be $20,700 more than it would be under the current system. $4,000 more than projected by lawmakers.

And the finance committee bill is the most conservative measure in the Senate. It will be be lumped in with more liberal versions passed by the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committees until what finally comes to the floor for debate resembles the the House measure.

Senator Snowe's "bipartisanship" will be used as justification. Call Snowe's Office at (202) 224-5344, and let her know that America is holding her accountable.

*Edit* The bill has now passed out of committee. We're one step closer to "fundamentally transforming America".

12Oct09


Let me preface myself by saying that as a libertarian, I am for gay rights in the same way that I am for the protection of the rights of all individuals from interference. The constitution guarantees gays and lesbians equal protection under the law. Any policy of the government to abridge those protections cannot stand.

Yesterday gay rights activists protested Washington in what's being called the National Equality March for, among other things, equal access to marriage and to serve openly in the armed forces.

These are issues of liberty. Yet one of the largest groups represented among the protesters seeks to destroy American liberty as we know it. The Party for Socialism and Liberation, a labor and community organizing party founded to promote, in their words "revolutionary change".

They advocate for American solidarity with Venezuela/Cuba, amnesty for illegal immigrants, unionizing of all industry, community organizing, and you guessed it, socialism.

They blame capitalism, which they define as "The system in which all wealth and power is held by a tiny group of billionaires and their state.", for everything from poverty to war to gay/lesbian oppression.

Webster's defines capitalism as:

"An economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market."

I don't see anything in there about a preferred sexual orientation. The reality is, capitalism doesn't give a damn who you choose to sleep with. Capitalism isn't centrally planned. There's no set of bureaucrats to decide what groups are and are not desirable within an economy. If there were, that would be socialism.

The PSL doesn't care about the GLBT rights. This is just another example of socialists targeting a disenfranchised group of people from the left, and co opting its struggle for their own agenda. It was done to Blacks with Social Justice and Black Liberation Theology. It was done to Hispanics with La Raza. Gays and Lesbians are just the next minority to be used.

If you're Gay, Lesbian, Bi-sexual or Transgendered, stand up for all of your rights, and fight the socialist agenda that sees you as nothing more than a means to an end.

11Oct09

The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism, but under the name of liberalism, they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program until one day America will be a socialist nation without ever knowing how it happened. – Norman Thomas

Senator for just 143 days before becoming President, President for less than two weeks before being nominated for the Nobel Peace prize, and less than a year before winning it. If there has been a more meteoric rise to power in American history, I have yet to hear about it.

Barack Obama Flags are being sold in earnest, rather than satire. In just ten months more iconic imagery has been created and distributed of Obama than any other sitting president.

A cult of personality is not unlike hero worship. But where hero worship grows organically and innocently, a cult of personality is exclusively manufactured.

Cults of personality are seen in regimes that seek to transform the very nature of a society, in accordance with a set of 'revolutionary' ideals. A single leader comes to be associated with the transformation, without whom, the transformation cannot occur.

Like the "great helmsman" Mao Zedong who said he would lead China from poverty into a bright communist future, Barack Obama's change is a lie. It is not a rebuke of the big government machine that left Americans feeling alone, and without hope. It is an escalation.

It's time to get off the fence. You either resist tyranny, or you are complicit in it.

09Oct09
"I intend to leave after my death a large fund for the promotion of the peace idea, but I am skeptical as to its results. " - Alfred Nobel

The Nobel Peace Prize has been awarded 89 times to 119 Nobel Laureates between 1901 and 2008 – 96 times to individuals and 23 times to organizations.

President Barack Obama was awarded the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize today not for concrete achievements, but as encouragement for “his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples,”

It's like giving the Congressional Medal of Honor to a soldier, in hopes he'll be inspired to go on and perform heroic acts.

The deadline for the nomination process was a mere two weeks into Obama's presidency when the only thing he'd done was spend a lot of taxpayer's money. Either this is a trophy for "participation", or the Nobel committee regards the further destabilization of the American economy as essential to world peace.

The only honorable thing for him to do would have been to politely decline, but his narcissism would not allow it. Instead he magnanimously declared he was accepting the award for "all those men and women across the world who sacrifice their safety and their freedom and sometime their lives for the cause of peace. That has always been the cause of America. That's why the world has always looked to America. And that's why I believe America will continue to lead."

Freedom has always been the cause of America, not peace. He might not understand the difference. While one may enjoy Freedom without peace, there is no peace without freedom.

The cult of personality has gone worldwide.

08Oct09
Hob·son's choice (n)

1 : an apparently free choice when there is no real alternative

2 : the necessity of accepting one of two or more equally objectionable alternatives

3 : a free choice in which only one option is offered, and one may refuse to take that option

Choosing between Democrats and Republicans is like choosing between Coke and Pepsi. It's all cola. There is no real choice.

Wendy Kaminer:

A liberal is a conservative who's been arrested. A conservative is a liberal who's been mugged

P. J. O'Rourke:

The Democrats are the party of government activism, the party that says government can make you richer, smarter, taller, and get the chickweed out of your lawn. Republicans are the party that says government doesn't work, and then get elected and prove it.

Dave Barry:

The Democrats seem to be basically nicer people, but they have demonstrated time and again that they have the management skills of celery. They're the kind of people who'd stop to help you change a flat, but would somehow manage to set your car on fire. I would be reluctant to entrust them with a Cuisinart, let alone the economy. The Republicans, on the other hand, would know how to fix your tire, but they wouldn't bother to stop because they'd want to be on time for Ugly Pants Night at the country club.

In 2008 I voted for John McCain. Not because I think that he would make a good president. I knew that McCain was basically a big government progressive who would erode our freedoms over time. But I voted for him. Because I knew that Obama was a big government progressive who would pillage our freedoms in record time leaving them forever unrecognizable.

I chose the lesser of two evils.

That's not voting for something, it's voting against something. It's the surest way to ensure that we'll always be stuck with the same bloated cola government. Both parties are coming for my freedom, and if that's the case I want to go down swinging.

Next election, I want the un-cola. I'm voting Libertarian.

07Oct09
The Obama administration has chosen to launch yet another wealth redistribution initiative, this time in the guise of urban renewal. The administration will be utilizing multiple agencies to sink more than 20 billion dollars of stimulus money into urban areas, the largest such program since Lyndon B Johnson's Great Society of the 1960s.

In charge of the initiative is Obama's Urban Czar, former Bronx borough president Adolfo Carrion Jr., head of the White House's new Office of Urban Affairs.

Much of the funds will be channeled into inner city public transportation subsidies, and improvement of public housing through the addition of housing, sidewalks, parks and other amenities. This is a continuation of a HUD program to influence negative social behaviors (class distinction), by transforming public housing into mixed income developments with a range of housing and job types.

These fund are being invested in areas occupied by the bottom 40 percent of earners, who don't pay anything into the system through taxes. According to the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, they'll actually have a negative rate of taxation, due to President Obama's "Making Work Pay" program and the earned income credit. That means they'll get back more than they paid in, receiving a cash subsidy of as much as 10% from those of us who do pay taxes.

Our government has borrowed money that it did not have, which will have to be paid back with interest by those who pay taxes. It is giving this money to those who do not pay taxes in the form of a cash subsidy and programs to increase their standard of living. Money is being taken from one group of people and given to another. This is the essence of wealth redistribution. Add in Obamacare, Cap and Tax, and the transfer of wealth is mounting.

Do America a favor, redistribute your own wealth. Lower your tax liability by maximizing your deductible charitable contributions, it will keep you money out of the tax man's hands, and ensure it's spent where it will do the most good.

06Oct09
"We are going to have a public option before this bill goes to the president's desk," Senator Harry Reid told constituents in a conference call last week.

Democrats are pulling out all of the stops, tightening the phalanx around the government option. The past week has seen the Obama White House running a fevered behind the scenes campaign to get divided party members behind the option, with the President personally calling to press more than a dozen lawmakers.

Reid as Senate majority leader has lead the efforts to unify the Health and Finance Committees bill into one piece of legislation. Plunging forward even as the Finance committee has yet to vote on its bill, pending congressional budget office cost estimates of the plan, and then delayed by Senator Rockefeller's maneuvering on CHIP.

President Obama has said almost ad nauseum he's only interested in providing "choice and competition". Really? There's more than 1300 companies in America currently selling health plans. Shouldn't he be in favor of allowing the consumer to buy policies across state lines? He's never been concerned with state's rights before, why would he be now?

No, his focus grouped words don't mask his true intent. As he said in a 2003 Senate campaign rally "I happen to be a proponent of a single payer universal health care plan."

All other arguments aside, a government option is too damned expensive. The Obama administration has estimated that if all of their reforms were put into effect, it could cost as much as $1.5 trillion dollar over ten years. That's $5000 dollars per year for each of the quoted 30 million uninsured in America. Besides which Medicare and Medicaid have vastly exceeded the cost estimates at the time they were created.

Remember this Obama gem “We can’t drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times … and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK,”

Call congress, and tell them "You can't drive up our national debt, redistribute our wealth, and not listen to us at all times ...then just expect us to say 'OK'."

04Oct09
A democracy is government by the people where majority rules. Supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly, or indirectly through periodically elected representation.

A constitutional republic is a government where officials are elected as representatives of the people, and must govern in accordance with a constitution that limits the power of government over the individual.

In a constitutional republic, the will of the majority is tempered by protections for the individual, so that no group wields supreme power.

Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide. – John Adams

The problem is that democracy is not freedom. Democracy is simply majoritarianism, which is inherently incompatible with real freedom. Our founding fathers clearly understood this. – Ron Paul

Democracy must be something more than two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner. – James Bovard

Democracy is the road to socialism.
-Karl Marx

Ask yourself, which system do you feel you're living under today?

03Oct09
As the Senate Finance Committee finished its health care bill, Harry Reid (D-Nev.) took negotiations behind closed doors. Senate democrats worked late into the night to pull a unified piece of legislation from the health and finance committee's proposals. So what did they come up with?

A stronger back door option.

The bill will have a provision for each state to create a government option program with the backing of the federal government. This places the responsibility, and blame, on state legislators in hopes that their constituencies will let blue dogs off the hook.

With Obama in the White House and a 60 seat majority, democrats should be able to pass any damn thing they want. But Reid looks for consensus where none exists to diffuse responsibility. Ultimately he knows that too many of the American people are against a public option, and passing it would cause a massive power shift in 2010.

"All of the queasiness about this bill is on the Democratic side, not the Republican side. . . . They ought to be able to do anything they want to, the question is: Will they?" Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) put it best.

For a a state run universal health plan, like that of Massachusetts. Like Massachusetts, where they mandated health care and saw premiums rise by 10%. Like Boston, where the average wait time to see a specialist is 49.6 days. Medicaid is state run, and is so poorly managed, that 49% of doctors refuse to take it.

Work it and rework it however you want. No matter what level of government administers it, or what they choose to call it. They will never create a better solution than the free market can.

Contact congress, 202-224-3121, and tell them to knock off the back door plays.

02Oct09
This movie presentation is brought to you by the Political Left of the United States, makers of Dr. O's -ISM.

Do you find that with all of your rights and protections there's just too many choices about what to do with your life?

Do you find yourself exhausted after a long day of honest work for honest pay?

Do you have too darned much money, but just don't know how to spread it around?

Are you plagued by excessive freedom, dispensation, emancipation, liberation, self-determination, autonomy, sovereignty or liberty??

Well fear not comrades citizens, Dr. O's -ISM is the guaranteed remedy for persistent liberty. Just give us your money, and we'll make all the decisions for you. After all, we're the government, that's our job.

02Oct09
"O" squared leaves Copenhagen empty handed.

As any American I want to see the Olympics come to our shores, especially so close to home.

But not the "Chicago Way". Not if it has to be Bought, Bribed, Bullied, or oBama'd out of the International Olympic Committee.

01Oct09

“The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries.” - Winston Churchill

Salesmanship is all in the language.

The left talks a big game for "equal opportunity", when what they promise is "equal results". Redistribution of wealth and parity of income to share the blessings and level the playing field.

So why can't they have the intellectual honesty to just come out and say that? To say that they are advocating socialism? To take part in an open debate within the halls of government?

Salesmanship.

Socialism has a history of failure so pronounced that only the most deluded can ignore it and claim its continued viability. That's a hard sale. It needs continual re-branding. Progressivism, Liberalism, The New Deal, The Great Society, Hope, Change...

In a capitalist system there are only two acceptable reasons to add to a nation's debt; to fight a war, or to a much lesser degree to counteract recession.

Though we have only been debt free once in our nation's history, prior to the great depression maintaining a balanced budget and paying down the national debt were second only to national defense in the government's responsibilities. Before 1930 we averaged a budget surplus two out of every three years. A budget surplus can be regarded as the government's "Profit". It can be used to pay down debt, or reinvest in the economy with tax breaks.

Capitalist economies depend on profit to save and make capital reinvestment, the engine of increased productivity. With greater productivity comes economic expansion, income growth and falling prices. Standard of living increases and everyone benefits. Capitalism is the increase of total benefit within the system. It is like neguentropy.

Socialism abhors profit. It subsidizes failure, discourages innovation and destroys capital through consumption. Less capital and savings leads to lower reinvestment and productivity. Slowing or negative economic growth follow, debt rises to fund consumption. Standard of living declines. Socialism is a cycle of the destruction of benefits within a system. It is entropy.

Both parties have increased the size of government and the debt with their entitlement programs, without regard for their constitutionally enumerated powers. They try to limit the cost of their socialist programs, or increase revenue to pay for them, but it's all just buying time. They are destroying capital through consumption.

Socialism isn't coming, it's here.

We are in the very early stages of socialist governance. It's difficult to say precisely when it started, but no, it wasn't with Obama. He just accelerated the pace and let us all see what was happening, before it was just too slow to notice.

Wake up. Oppose them. Live free, or Die.