I have been watching the Obama cabinet appointments with a certain amount of amusement. We have a president elect who won by promising "change," and now we see him filling up his cabinet with Washington insiders and former Clinton people. Hardly seems like change, but then again, I did not really expect to see any bold changes out of someone who votes in lockstep with his party more than anyone else in the Democrat party. I say that I was watching the appointments with amusement, that is up until the appointment of one Janet Napolitano as the secretary of Homeland Security.
This is probably not a good choice for this position. This department is supposed to be in charge of protecting our borders. This woman, as governor of Arizona, cut off all funding for the Maricopa County sheriff's (Sheriff Joe Arpaio, if you do not know who he is, search him on Google. He is the best sheriff in the country.) illegal immigration enforcement. She clearly has no interest in protecting our borders. So, why would Obama appoint her? It just does not make sense.
Or maybe it does make sense. Maybe he is setting the tone that he does not care about protecting our borders. Maybe for the next four to eight years we will have an open door policy to anyone who wants to come here whether they want to help or harm American society. I have no problem with immigration, I just want only people looking to contribute to society to come here. People who want to work should be welcomed with open arms. People who want to leech off our welfare system, government education system, commit crimes or acts of terrorism need not apply.
Obama has shown that he does not care who enters this country with one political move. Appointing Napolitano is a strong statement of what he thinks about the sovereignty of this nation.
On an unrelated note, this is a good proposal of an alternative to the government bailout:
http://townhall.com/columnists/NealBoortz/2008/12/09/the_perfect_stimulus_package
LibertyWatchdog@gmail.com
Tuesday, December 9, 2008
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
Global Warming
I am one of those heretics that does not believe that we caused global warming. There is just not enough evidence to support it. There is, however, plenty of evidence supporting cyclical changes in global temperature caused by factors outside of human control. It just seems to be all too typical liberal thinking to believe we can control things that are beyond our control.
The global warming movement is more an anti-capitalism movement than a true environmental movement. After the fall of communism, there were many displaced people who found refuge in the environmental movement, and they have succeeded in hijacking an entire agenda. If environmentalism was not an anti capitalism movement, way more pressure would be put on countries, like China, who pollute way more than the USA to curb emissions. That is not how it works though. All they talk about is how bad the United States is, and how evil we are to pollute so much.
There is nothing wrong with wanting clean air to breathe and clean water to drink, and wanting to lessen and eventually eliminate our dependence of foreign oil, but the "green" movement is completely out of control. We have Al Gore running around like Chicken Little screaming "the sky is falling," while at the same time accusing Dubya of playing on our fears. Seems like the pot and the kettle to me. We do not control the weather, and we probably never will. We should want to go green for the right reasons, we do not need to do it based on lies. We should do it when the technology makes it cost effective to do so.
Another horrible thing that has come out of green technology is ethanol. Ethanol is a terrible idea. Who thought it would be a good idea to use a food source as fuel? Now, on top of the rising cost of everything else, we have rising food costs to contend with. I know, i have heard the argument too that the corn used for ethanol is not human food grade, but it is feed grade. Now it is more expensive to feed livestock, which leads to higher food prices. Now that there are ethanol subsidies, less of other crops are being grown, like hops, which led to an increase in the price of beer last year. Now you are mad, right? They will not tell you that the reason you are paying more for a case of Pabst (or your beer of choice) is because of ethanol. They think we are stupid. When you look at most people, they are right.
So, I will now probably be forced to drink hemlock by Obama, even though I am right. If humans do contribute to global warming, it is in a minuscule way. Compared to mother nature, we humans are weak and insignificant. We should not be assigning more importance to ourselves than we are capable of achieving. I suspect the dumb masses will continue to blindly follow false prophets such as Al Gore and the rest. Here is a funny article about the subject and about over anxiousness to proclaim travesty:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/11/16/do1610.xml
LibertyWatchdog@gmail.com
The global warming movement is more an anti-capitalism movement than a true environmental movement. After the fall of communism, there were many displaced people who found refuge in the environmental movement, and they have succeeded in hijacking an entire agenda. If environmentalism was not an anti capitalism movement, way more pressure would be put on countries, like China, who pollute way more than the USA to curb emissions. That is not how it works though. All they talk about is how bad the United States is, and how evil we are to pollute so much.
There is nothing wrong with wanting clean air to breathe and clean water to drink, and wanting to lessen and eventually eliminate our dependence of foreign oil, but the "green" movement is completely out of control. We have Al Gore running around like Chicken Little screaming "the sky is falling," while at the same time accusing Dubya of playing on our fears. Seems like the pot and the kettle to me. We do not control the weather, and we probably never will. We should want to go green for the right reasons, we do not need to do it based on lies. We should do it when the technology makes it cost effective to do so.
Another horrible thing that has come out of green technology is ethanol. Ethanol is a terrible idea. Who thought it would be a good idea to use a food source as fuel? Now, on top of the rising cost of everything else, we have rising food costs to contend with. I know, i have heard the argument too that the corn used for ethanol is not human food grade, but it is feed grade. Now it is more expensive to feed livestock, which leads to higher food prices. Now that there are ethanol subsidies, less of other crops are being grown, like hops, which led to an increase in the price of beer last year. Now you are mad, right? They will not tell you that the reason you are paying more for a case of Pabst (or your beer of choice) is because of ethanol. They think we are stupid. When you look at most people, they are right.
So, I will now probably be forced to drink hemlock by Obama, even though I am right. If humans do contribute to global warming, it is in a minuscule way. Compared to mother nature, we humans are weak and insignificant. We should not be assigning more importance to ourselves than we are capable of achieving. I suspect the dumb masses will continue to blindly follow false prophets such as Al Gore and the rest. Here is a funny article about the subject and about over anxiousness to proclaim travesty:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/11/16/do1610.xml
LibertyWatchdog@gmail.com
Some Noteworthy Articles
A great article by Mitt Romney about the automakers bailout. Bailing them out would basically be prolonging the inevitable. Restructuring of the industry would be a better solution. The only thing I would add is that the big 3 should start, once again, creating vehicles that people are excited about, like they used to. Bring back the Hemicuda...
http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/Romney_detroit_bankrupt/2008/11/19/152984.html
Let the Minnesota recount begin. Now that Ted Stevens lost the race in Alaska, it is more important than ever that we do not let the democrats steal this one. If they do, we are in big trouble:
http://www.twincities.com/ci_11013851?source=most_viewed
Tom Daschle, yet another partisan Washington insider, is appointed to Obama's cabinet. Yes, another liberal political hack appointed. With all of the established Washingtonians and former Clinton people being appointed, this does not seem like any kind of "change we can believe in." Where are the Republicans that Obama is supposed to appoint? I am sure there will probably be a token Republican in the cabinet that nobody in the administration will listen to, but so far, the appointments have shown anything but change and anything but intentions to "govern from the center." The appointment of leftist Daschle only furthers my argument.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081119/ap_on_go_pr_wh/obama_health_daschle;_ylt=AlHE9ya4G_R0.6_rmlN__KayFz4D
LibertyWatchdog@gmail.com
http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/Romney_detroit_bankrupt/2008/11/19/152984.html
Let the Minnesota recount begin. Now that Ted Stevens lost the race in Alaska, it is more important than ever that we do not let the democrats steal this one. If they do, we are in big trouble:
http://www.twincities.com/ci_11013851?source=most_viewed
Tom Daschle, yet another partisan Washington insider, is appointed to Obama's cabinet. Yes, another liberal political hack appointed. With all of the established Washingtonians and former Clinton people being appointed, this does not seem like any kind of "change we can believe in." Where are the Republicans that Obama is supposed to appoint? I am sure there will probably be a token Republican in the cabinet that nobody in the administration will listen to, but so far, the appointments have shown anything but change and anything but intentions to "govern from the center." The appointment of leftist Daschle only furthers my argument.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081119/ap_on_go_pr_wh/obama_health_daschle;_ylt=AlHE9ya4G_R0.6_rmlN__KayFz4D
LibertyWatchdog@gmail.com
Joe the Plumber
I wanted to talk a little about Joe the Plumber. Here is a man who is concerned about his, and his fellow Americans' ability to achieve the American dream. Sure, he may not have all his ducks in a row yet, but I would wager most Americans do not. The key is that he has plans, as do many people and he asked a valid question about how Obama's tax plan would affect those plans. What happened next is that people friendly to Obama's goals proceeded to try and invalidate his question by publicly humiliating him, rather than listening to his concerns.
Is his treatment after asking a valid question what we can expect if we ask a question of Obama that his is considered hostile to his goals? Will Obama's buddies with access to government computers dig into your background and will his lapdogs in the media gleefully report your private information on national news if you should happen to ask something they do not like? That does not sound like good change to me. We should be allowed to ask the tough questions as it is important for political discourse. Now, anybody who has a question that Obama might not want to hear should make sure there are no skeletons or embarrassments hiding in their closet. Obama's thugs will be happy to root your deepest secrets out and put them on a national stage for you, along with help from a media already proving itself to be a mouthpiece for our new "ruler," the treatment of Joe the Plumber proves this. Get ready to no longer be able to question your government, or risk public humiliation if you do.
LibertyWatchdog@gmail.com
Is his treatment after asking a valid question what we can expect if we ask a question of Obama that his is considered hostile to his goals? Will Obama's buddies with access to government computers dig into your background and will his lapdogs in the media gleefully report your private information on national news if you should happen to ask something they do not like? That does not sound like good change to me. We should be allowed to ask the tough questions as it is important for political discourse. Now, anybody who has a question that Obama might not want to hear should make sure there are no skeletons or embarrassments hiding in their closet. Obama's thugs will be happy to root your deepest secrets out and put them on a national stage for you, along with help from a media already proving itself to be a mouthpiece for our new "ruler," the treatment of Joe the Plumber proves this. Get ready to no longer be able to question your government, or risk public humiliation if you do.
LibertyWatchdog@gmail.com
Saturday, November 15, 2008
Tolerance
Liberals claim to be the tolerant ones. In many situations, they go out of their way to be overly tolerant. They, however, are not tolerant of other political ideas. I have found liberals to be very intolerant of conservative ideas, they think conservatives should not even have a voice in the nation's political discourse. Conservatives get shouted down on college campuses all the time. Congressional liberals are salivating at the thought of the fairness doctrine being brought back, which will kill talk radio. Never mind the fact that they own most of the print and broadcast media, since they cannot seem to get a foothold in talk radio, they want to shut it down. In fact, biased news is more dangerous than talk radio. Talk radio hosts make no bones about their political leanings, whereas news is supposed to be balanced coverage, which it is not. Not disclosing where you are coming from and reporting something as fact is way more damaging than speaking from a certain point of view and disclosing that point of view. Conservative talk show hosts qualify everything they say as being from a conservative standpoint. When CNN reports something, they report it as fact even though they are reporting it with a leftist tint. So, will the fairness doctrine include MSNBC and CNN? Somehow I doubt it. Hardly seems "fair," right? Back to intolerance, if you disagree with a liberal politically, prepare yourself for an angry retort about how you are wrong, with no substantive argument to back it up, or even worse, a self-righteous tirade of insults calling you a racist or some other name. They will not take the time to learn why you think the way you do. Let us never forget the people saying that you are a racist if you do not vote for Obama. If not liking leftist redistribution politics, and not wanting somebody who embodies those views to occupy the White House makes one a racist, than maybe I am one. I would not vote against anyone because of their race or religion, just like I would not vote for somebody for the same reasons. That does not make me a racist, if fact, quite the opposite.
Don't get me wrong here, conservatives are not always the most tolerant people either, but then again, most do not claim to be. I am just pointing out that liberals claim to be so tolerant, but I guess they get to choose what to be tolerant about. Pretty neat deal for them. Most conservatives, though, are at least willing to let somebody else express their views. Most conservatives will not try to shut down free speech. No conservative I ever heard of has tried to shut down liberal talk radio, but the liberals sure try to silence conservative voices in the name of "fairness," just because they are not very good at radio. They think their way is the only way and all opposing voices should be silenced. They believe conservatives should not be allowed a seat at the table.
Here is an interesting article about this very subject:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=80938
LibertyWatchdog@gmail.com
Don't get me wrong here, conservatives are not always the most tolerant people either, but then again, most do not claim to be. I am just pointing out that liberals claim to be so tolerant, but I guess they get to choose what to be tolerant about. Pretty neat deal for them. Most conservatives, though, are at least willing to let somebody else express their views. Most conservatives will not try to shut down free speech. No conservative I ever heard of has tried to shut down liberal talk radio, but the liberals sure try to silence conservative voices in the name of "fairness," just because they are not very good at radio. They think their way is the only way and all opposing voices should be silenced. They believe conservatives should not be allowed a seat at the table.
Here is an interesting article about this very subject:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=80938
LibertyWatchdog@gmail.com
Friday, November 14, 2008
FairTax
Our current tax system in America is a bloated monstrosity laden down with bureaucracy. Most people would agree that something needs to be done. In my opinion, the plan that would work the best is the FairTax. For those who have not heard about it, it is a plan to eliminate all current federal taxes and replace them with an embedded 23% sales tax on everything we buy. For more information about the details, visit http://www.fairtax.org/. I am not going to get into all the details of the plan, mainly because of time concerns. I just want to hit on a few points about it.
Most politicians are not on board with the FairTax, mainly because it takes a lot of power away from them. In order for it to pass, people are going to have to push their elected officials into it. If you support the FairTax, let your congressman and senators know that you will not be voting for them if they do not support it. The FairTax would do great things for our economy.
Critics of the FairTax generally lie about it to keep people ignorant of the true terms of the bill. They will leave out details, such as the provision that ends all other taxes and simply state that supporters just want a 23% increase on everything you buy. They try to paint a picture that the cost of living will go up by 23%, when this is not true. If you are not paying anymore income or payroll taxes, you will have more money. Also, since corporations will not be paying taxes, their cost of doing business goes down. When their cost of doing business goes down, generally their prices go down or their employee's wages go up. Corporations do not hold wealth, individuals do, and you cannot tax an entity that does not hold wealth.
If the FairTax were to pass, companies that have gone overseas for more favorable tax rates would come back. America would be a mecca for companies looking to cut expenses, and this means more jobs for Americans. More products made in the USA, fewer products made in China.
The FairTax would also force people who do not pay taxes, to pay taxes. Illegal aliens, vacationers from other countries, drug dealers, prostitutes, all of these people would be paying taxes. Over the last year, here in Minnesota, many Canadians have been coming down here to buy stuff, such as cars, because of the strength of Canadian money. These people would all be paying into our tax system. Under the current system, they pay nothing to the federal treasury.
I know what you are saying, poor people cannot afford this. Under the bill, as written, there will be a prebate sent to everyone for the amount of the taxes they would pay on necessities, so poor people still would not be paying any taxes at all.
No tax plan is perfect, but the FairTax is as close as we are going to get. I firmly believe that this is the way to dig ourselves out of the current economic situation and get this great nation back on the right track. The bill faces a lot of hostility with the current political situation, but if the people scream loud enough, and the political hacks in Washington fear for their jobs enough, it could be a possibility.
Liberty Watchdog
LibertyWatchdog@gmail.com
Most politicians are not on board with the FairTax, mainly because it takes a lot of power away from them. In order for it to pass, people are going to have to push their elected officials into it. If you support the FairTax, let your congressman and senators know that you will not be voting for them if they do not support it. The FairTax would do great things for our economy.
Critics of the FairTax generally lie about it to keep people ignorant of the true terms of the bill. They will leave out details, such as the provision that ends all other taxes and simply state that supporters just want a 23% increase on everything you buy. They try to paint a picture that the cost of living will go up by 23%, when this is not true. If you are not paying anymore income or payroll taxes, you will have more money. Also, since corporations will not be paying taxes, their cost of doing business goes down. When their cost of doing business goes down, generally their prices go down or their employee's wages go up. Corporations do not hold wealth, individuals do, and you cannot tax an entity that does not hold wealth.
If the FairTax were to pass, companies that have gone overseas for more favorable tax rates would come back. America would be a mecca for companies looking to cut expenses, and this means more jobs for Americans. More products made in the USA, fewer products made in China.
The FairTax would also force people who do not pay taxes, to pay taxes. Illegal aliens, vacationers from other countries, drug dealers, prostitutes, all of these people would be paying taxes. Over the last year, here in Minnesota, many Canadians have been coming down here to buy stuff, such as cars, because of the strength of Canadian money. These people would all be paying into our tax system. Under the current system, they pay nothing to the federal treasury.
I know what you are saying, poor people cannot afford this. Under the bill, as written, there will be a prebate sent to everyone for the amount of the taxes they would pay on necessities, so poor people still would not be paying any taxes at all.
No tax plan is perfect, but the FairTax is as close as we are going to get. I firmly believe that this is the way to dig ourselves out of the current economic situation and get this great nation back on the right track. The bill faces a lot of hostility with the current political situation, but if the people scream loud enough, and the political hacks in Washington fear for their jobs enough, it could be a possibility.
Liberty Watchdog
LibertyWatchdog@gmail.com
Random Thoughts...
Government bailouts. President Bush, and Republicans in general, have taken a hard hit over the current financial situation. When something like this happens, the blame usually falls squarely on the shoulders of the party in power. Let us not forget, the Democrat party has been controlling congress for some time now, and doing quite a lousy job, I might add. Let us also not forget that it takes two parties working together to mess things up this badly. This financial situation can be traced back to Jimmy Carter's reign of terror, that is when the government started pressuring Fannie May and Freddie Mac to make ill-advised sub prime loans. That's right, I said it, the Democrats are as much to blame as the Republicans in this. Giving the Democrats total control is not going to fix things, it is only going to waste more money. As I recall, both Democrats and Republicans supported this $700 billion bailout, which has done exactly nothing for the economy. Now, they are talking about having additional bailouts. We, as taxpayers, should demand that the government knock off this nonsense and start acting in the interest of the people instead of wasting our money. Let the free market handle the situation. The only thing bailout plans do is get more and more companies lining up at the trough to feed at our expense.
Guns. I have purposely avoided this topic, but I cannot anymore. Obama says he will not take our guns. The other side says he will. They are both off base on this. Obama cannot take our guns, the Constitution forbids it. We will not see all guns made illegal. I do expect to see the assault weapons ban passed again, which is nonsense (assault weapons on the list were shown to focus groups and the ones they said looked "scary" were the ones included in the ban. It had nothing to do with the dangerousness of the weapon itself.). Obama will, however, increase taxes on weapons and ammunition so much that we cannot afford them anymore. That is what liberals do. When they cannot figure out a way around the Constitution, they will tax something to death rather than pass an outright ban. Sure, guns will still be legal, we just will not be able to afford them. We may also lose the right to defend ourselves in our own homes.
Personal responsibility. We will not have to take responsibility for our actions anymore. Obama will be there to bail all of us out when we fail. Oh sure, he is counting on many people to continue to be responsible, otherwise there would be nobody to pay for his entitlement programs. Under Obama, if you do what you are supposed to, work, make your house payments, etc... you will have the fruits of your labor confiscated and given to someone who does nothing to improve themselves or their lot in life. If you make the choice to be irresponsible, the government will be there to make sure you are taken care of, so drink up. What happens when people get sick of paying for entitlements? If you have not read it, I recommend reading "Atlas Shrugged" by Ayn Rand. It may scare you.
Just for fun. Maybe liberalism really is a mental disorder:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=56494
Liberty Watchdog
LibertyWatchdog@gmail.com
Guns. I have purposely avoided this topic, but I cannot anymore. Obama says he will not take our guns. The other side says he will. They are both off base on this. Obama cannot take our guns, the Constitution forbids it. We will not see all guns made illegal. I do expect to see the assault weapons ban passed again, which is nonsense (assault weapons on the list were shown to focus groups and the ones they said looked "scary" were the ones included in the ban. It had nothing to do with the dangerousness of the weapon itself.). Obama will, however, increase taxes on weapons and ammunition so much that we cannot afford them anymore. That is what liberals do. When they cannot figure out a way around the Constitution, they will tax something to death rather than pass an outright ban. Sure, guns will still be legal, we just will not be able to afford them. We may also lose the right to defend ourselves in our own homes.
Personal responsibility. We will not have to take responsibility for our actions anymore. Obama will be there to bail all of us out when we fail. Oh sure, he is counting on many people to continue to be responsible, otherwise there would be nobody to pay for his entitlement programs. Under Obama, if you do what you are supposed to, work, make your house payments, etc... you will have the fruits of your labor confiscated and given to someone who does nothing to improve themselves or their lot in life. If you make the choice to be irresponsible, the government will be there to make sure you are taken care of, so drink up. What happens when people get sick of paying for entitlements? If you have not read it, I recommend reading "Atlas Shrugged" by Ayn Rand. It may scare you.
Just for fun. Maybe liberalism really is a mental disorder:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=56494
Liberty Watchdog
LibertyWatchdog@gmail.com
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
A video for you. It is "Election Day" by the Anti Heros:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D7faNjpaGL8
I missed this one, but better late than never. Somebody should tell the Obama people, namely his transition team co-chair Valerie Jarrett, that presidents govern, they do not "rule." Dictators rule their people. This is just another example of the arrogance displayed by the Obama team. Obama thinks that he owns you and that we are meerly his subjects who should grovel at his feet. Get ready for a huge expansion in the amount of government control over your lives. Read all about it here:
http://media.newsbusters.org/stories/obama-spokesman-says-obama-ready-rule-day-1.html?q=blogs/warner-todd-huston/2008/11/10/obama-spokesman-says-obama-ready-rule-day-1
I live in Minnesota and have been watching this play out over the last week. Al Franken and his ilk are trying their best to steal the election. On Wednesday, we woke up to hear that incumbent senator Norm Coleman had a more than 700 vote lead in the senate race. Now, we are hearing that there were votes for Franken "found" since the election. In fact, there were so many votes "found" for Franken that the lead is down to 206. Funny, these "found" votes are only votes for Franken, none for Coleman. If there was no foul play here, shouldn't some of these votes be for Coleman? Especially as close as the race is. My favorite out of all of this is the 32 votes for Franken, none for Coleman, that an election official "found (more likely filled out) in her car. If Franken steals this election, it will be proof that the Minesota election process is broken. Also interesting to note, the secretary of state in Minnesota, Mark Ritchie, was financially supported in his election by a group co-founded by a member of moveon.org and is an ally of ACORN, the group that has fraudulently registered thousands of voters for this election. Here is the article:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122644940271419147.html
Liberty Watchdog
LibertyWatchdog@gmail.com
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D7faNjpaGL8
I missed this one, but better late than never. Somebody should tell the Obama people, namely his transition team co-chair Valerie Jarrett, that presidents govern, they do not "rule." Dictators rule their people. This is just another example of the arrogance displayed by the Obama team. Obama thinks that he owns you and that we are meerly his subjects who should grovel at his feet. Get ready for a huge expansion in the amount of government control over your lives. Read all about it here:
http://media.newsbusters.org/stories/obama-spokesman-says-obama-ready-rule-day-1.html?q=blogs/warner-todd-huston/2008/11/10/obama-spokesman-says-obama-ready-rule-day-1
I live in Minnesota and have been watching this play out over the last week. Al Franken and his ilk are trying their best to steal the election. On Wednesday, we woke up to hear that incumbent senator Norm Coleman had a more than 700 vote lead in the senate race. Now, we are hearing that there were votes for Franken "found" since the election. In fact, there were so many votes "found" for Franken that the lead is down to 206. Funny, these "found" votes are only votes for Franken, none for Coleman. If there was no foul play here, shouldn't some of these votes be for Coleman? Especially as close as the race is. My favorite out of all of this is the 32 votes for Franken, none for Coleman, that an election official "found (more likely filled out) in her car. If Franken steals this election, it will be proof that the Minesota election process is broken. Also interesting to note, the secretary of state in Minnesota, Mark Ritchie, was financially supported in his election by a group co-founded by a member of moveon.org and is an ally of ACORN, the group that has fraudulently registered thousands of voters for this election. Here is the article:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122644940271419147.html
Liberty Watchdog
LibertyWatchdog@gmail.com
Monday, November 10, 2008
He is not even president yet
and Obama is already creating new offices. The One has named an "office of the president elect." He just cannot wait until he is president. He is already proving to be pretty arrogant and it is not even a week after the election.
http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/obama_president_elect_/2008/11/10/149643.html
In other news, Obama will force your kids to do community service. Community service is supposed to be volunteer work, but the chosen one will make it mandatory. Oh, sure, he has backed off that language now, but for how long? When can we all expect to be forced to be good citizens? I thought it was our right as Americans to not have to participate in any good-government nonsense.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=80539
Liberty Watchdog
http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/obama_president_elect_/2008/11/10/149643.html
In other news, Obama will force your kids to do community service. Community service is supposed to be volunteer work, but the chosen one will make it mandatory. Oh, sure, he has backed off that language now, but for how long? When can we all expect to be forced to be good citizens? I thought it was our right as Americans to not have to participate in any good-government nonsense.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=80539
Liberty Watchdog
I do not have a lot of time this morning, so i will keep this short. There are few troubling things I heard or read over the weekend. The first was from an article that I now cannot find, if I do find it, i will post a link. Someone involved with Obama's transition used the phrase "the common good." Where in the constitution does it state that a government function is to confiscate your money and put it towards the "common good?" Nowhere, that is where. That phrase comes straight from Karl Marx, but Obama is not a socialist, right? He is a leftist, and we will see just how far left. He is incapable of "governing from the center" because he is blinded by the left.
Big surprise, the media is biased toward Obama:
http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/post_obama_bias_media/2008/11/09/149343.html
Maybe you do not want to unionize at work. Your boss treats you fairly and you do not want to spend your hard earned money on a union that will not do anything for you anyway. A union may not do anything for you except take your money and give it to democrat candidates. Your boss may decide he/she does not need the headache of a union and switch to all temp labor. Under Obama, you will no longer have a private vote on the matter:
http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSTRE4A81L720081109?feedType=RSS&feedName=politicsNews
Economy be damned, Obama will spread fairness and raise taxes even in this tough time. He will kill what is left in our weak economy, and the best part, he thinks it will help. If raising taxes on employers (I know he claims taxes will not go up on 95% of small businesses, but that 5% includes most small businesses that have employees) and lessening our dependence on foreign oil without drilling in America will help, he is right, but I think we all know the truth:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20081109/pl_nm/us_usa_politics_stimulus
Liberty Watchdog
Big surprise, the media is biased toward Obama:
http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/post_obama_bias_media/2008/11/09/149343.html
Maybe you do not want to unionize at work. Your boss treats you fairly and you do not want to spend your hard earned money on a union that will not do anything for you anyway. A union may not do anything for you except take your money and give it to democrat candidates. Your boss may decide he/she does not need the headache of a union and switch to all temp labor. Under Obama, you will no longer have a private vote on the matter:
http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSTRE4A81L720081109?feedType=RSS&feedName=politicsNews
Economy be damned, Obama will spread fairness and raise taxes even in this tough time. He will kill what is left in our weak economy, and the best part, he thinks it will help. If raising taxes on employers (I know he claims taxes will not go up on 95% of small businesses, but that 5% includes most small businesses that have employees) and lessening our dependence on foreign oil without drilling in America will help, he is right, but I think we all know the truth:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20081109/pl_nm/us_usa_politics_stimulus
Liberty Watchdog
Friday, November 7, 2008
Goodbye Freedom, Hello Government
We are about to enter an unprecedented and dangerous time in our great republic. For the first time, we have elected a president who views taxation as a way to spread wealth and “fairness,” not as a means to fund the necessary functions of government such as protecting our borders, infrastructure, enforcement of contracts, etc (not that taxes have been funding only necessary government functions for some time, but that is a topic for another day)… The voters have said no to personal liberty and yes to the nanny state. People have figured out that they can use the ballot box to plunder what rightfully belongs to others (remember the freeloader who thinks Obama is going to pay her mortgage and pay for her gas?). Not only have the people figured this out, the leftist politicians are now blatantly pandering to that notion. When you take money from achievers and turn it over to non-achievers, it tends to lessen the desire to better oneself.
Obama has done a couple of things successfully during this marathon election. He has managed to change the definition of tax cut to mean a handout for people who are not paying any taxes. He has also managed to get most people on board with the notion that it is a good idea for fewer people to pay taxes. This is an effective scheme because the fewer people there are paying taxes, the less people there are that will vote against him and other big government types when they raise taxes to create new unnecessary social programs. A third thing he managed to do, with the help of many over the last several years, is get people believing that health care is a right, not a responsibility. Your healthcare is your responsibility and nobody else’s.
Part of the problem here was the lack of any credible opposition candidate. McCain was not a particularly exciting candidate. He is not a small government conservative; he is more a liberal in conservative’s clothing. Obama just so happens to be a silver-tongued demagogue that claims that government can be everything to everyone and he is slick enough to make a majority of voters believe it, and was able to capitalize on that ignorance. Bob Barr is a true small government conservative, but he made some errors. First, he ran as a Libertarian. As we all know, just like any other third party candidate, Libertarians have very little chance of getting elected. Even though the lesser of two evils is still evil, we are stuck with the Republican and Democrat parties, at least for now. Second, he split the conservative vote, albeit not by enough to change the outcome of the election. He would have been a good choice, had he been a credible candidate.
The Republican party needs to lick its wounds, regroup and figure out where they are going, and figure out how to rebuild conservatism. They have lost the trust of their base because they have been spending money like drunken Democrats in Washington. They will not be able to continue to be the party of “less big government” that they have become. The Democrats may hang themselves, and a revamped conservative movement needs to be there to capitalize before we get pushed past the tipping point and tumble into the abyss of socialism. If we are to save this great nation, a new conservative movement will need to emerge and actually stick to the principles of protecting liberty and fiscal responsibility. The Democrat party is the party that offers a free lunch. There is no room in this country for two major political parties that do that, so the Republicans need to stop moving in that direction. The Democrats try to be all things to all people, and we need a check on that because the government cannot be all things to all people. Our nation simply cannot survive an ideology like that, as there are too many parasites that will suck the treasury dry.
If we do not act quickly, the liberals will run roughshod over our rights. Over the next two to four years we will see our economic freedoms further erode. I fear we may already be past the tipping point and the damage will be irreversible. We need a strong voice for individual liberty. If one does not step forward, and soon, our days as a nation may be numbered.
Liberty Watchdog
Obama has done a couple of things successfully during this marathon election. He has managed to change the definition of tax cut to mean a handout for people who are not paying any taxes. He has also managed to get most people on board with the notion that it is a good idea for fewer people to pay taxes. This is an effective scheme because the fewer people there are paying taxes, the less people there are that will vote against him and other big government types when they raise taxes to create new unnecessary social programs. A third thing he managed to do, with the help of many over the last several years, is get people believing that health care is a right, not a responsibility. Your healthcare is your responsibility and nobody else’s.
Part of the problem here was the lack of any credible opposition candidate. McCain was not a particularly exciting candidate. He is not a small government conservative; he is more a liberal in conservative’s clothing. Obama just so happens to be a silver-tongued demagogue that claims that government can be everything to everyone and he is slick enough to make a majority of voters believe it, and was able to capitalize on that ignorance. Bob Barr is a true small government conservative, but he made some errors. First, he ran as a Libertarian. As we all know, just like any other third party candidate, Libertarians have very little chance of getting elected. Even though the lesser of two evils is still evil, we are stuck with the Republican and Democrat parties, at least for now. Second, he split the conservative vote, albeit not by enough to change the outcome of the election. He would have been a good choice, had he been a credible candidate.
The Republican party needs to lick its wounds, regroup and figure out where they are going, and figure out how to rebuild conservatism. They have lost the trust of their base because they have been spending money like drunken Democrats in Washington. They will not be able to continue to be the party of “less big government” that they have become. The Democrats may hang themselves, and a revamped conservative movement needs to be there to capitalize before we get pushed past the tipping point and tumble into the abyss of socialism. If we are to save this great nation, a new conservative movement will need to emerge and actually stick to the principles of protecting liberty and fiscal responsibility. The Democrat party is the party that offers a free lunch. There is no room in this country for two major political parties that do that, so the Republicans need to stop moving in that direction. The Democrats try to be all things to all people, and we need a check on that because the government cannot be all things to all people. Our nation simply cannot survive an ideology like that, as there are too many parasites that will suck the treasury dry.
If we do not act quickly, the liberals will run roughshod over our rights. Over the next two to four years we will see our economic freedoms further erode. I fear we may already be past the tipping point and the damage will be irreversible. We need a strong voice for individual liberty. If one does not step forward, and soon, our days as a nation may be numbered.
Liberty Watchdog
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
