View all posts filed under 'redistribution of wealth'

College Students: The New “Useful Idiots”

Monday, 25. April 2011 8:16

If a child has been told since birth that the sky is green- not blue- they will grow up believing that the sky is, indeed, green.

If they’ve been taught that global warming is looming, Karl Marx had great ideas, Che Guevera was just a misunderstood dictator, the “f” word is just another “catchy” phrase, and drugs are the key to a happy, well-adjusted life, then they will grow up to mirror AND BELIEVE those ideas.

By the time our children get to college, they have been brainwashed, not just to believe that evil is good, but to balk at any authoritative figure, including their parents, who tell them otherwise. Young adults have been deceived into believing that their underdeveloped, undereducated, inexperienced brains know best.

How far we’ve come from the days when father knew best. How far we’ve come from the days where swearing in public was taboo, girls “saved themselves” for marriage, parents- not schools- were allowed to discipline their own children, families bonded around the dinner table, and kids were allowed to be “kids”.

Students of today have been kidnapped by our public institutions. Schools are gaining more and more authority over our children, no longer just educating them, but also being their primary source of food and discipline. The educational books have been “dumbed down” to a level where many college age kids have difficulty making change from a $5 bill. The good news is that although kids can no longer diagram a sentence, they CAN give you the top 30 reasons- in alphabetical order- that global warming must be stopped, and they ARE adept at interpreting a sentence like “im da friggin man ov my ^^^ block.”

Priorities, you know….

They are no longer individuals, they have now become a collective unit of useful idiots.

Useful idiots. These were Lenin’s people. These folks are the key to a successful communist regime. These are the citizens of a dictatorship who never think, they just act. Like good, little comrads, they believe what they’ve been told to be true, never questioning, never allowing themselves to draw rational conclusions. You see, if useful idiots were actually taught the power of reasoning, they would never vote themselves into slavery, never vote themselves into oppression.

They would understand the power in numbers.

There is only one reason that the college kids of today are supporters of guys like Barack Obama and his merry men: They have been taught from a young age to ignore individual reasoning and replace it with collective reasoning. They are taught that their own aspirations are not nearly as important as “saving the grass” or “serving” the government. They learn that guys like Marx and Che and Castro aren’t evil, they’re “cool”— if you denounce them, you will be scoffed at by your peers and your instructors, all of whom know better than you. It’s a form of peer pressure.

You, too, want to be associated with the “cool” group.

Here’s the irony: If any demographic has reason to protest our current administration, it is those young students in college. These future earners are the ones who are the most affected by the lack of jobs. They attend college for years, spending thousands of dollars educating themselves in an effort to eventually get out into the workplace and become successful, only to be told that the “good-paying” jobs that they covet are not available, especially to an inexperienced student.

Can they not see this?

They are the demographic who can least afford the high gas prices as they drive around in their old beaters. They are the group who will pay into social security for 30 years but never see a dime back. They are the group who will watch their taxes skyrocket, watch their paychecks dwindle, watch the demise of healthcare, and watch as potential job opportunities are moved overseas due to taxes and regulations.

They are the group who will pay for the sins of our previous and current political decisions. If we vote to raise the debt ceiling, to bail out the banks again, to bail out another corporation like GM, to allow the current level of spending, or to subsidize worthless forms of alternative energy, it is the youth of today who will eventually pay.

We’re all riding on their backs.

Liberal politicians are telling the college students that these unsustainable economic problems can be quickly solved if only the “rich” would redistribute more of their income. You see, excessive entitlement spending isn’t the problem, the “greedy rich” are the problem.

Believing the propaganda, the useful idiots- the students- then rise up and protest. Loudly. They join hands with the power-hungry union leaders and the socialists to collectively raise their fists in a show of solidarity. Hey, it’s fun, as a kid, to rally with a rebellious group. It’s fun to wave signs, run through the streets, and regurgitate professors’ words from a bullhorn.

It’s fun to be anti-establishment…

It won’t be nearly as much fun when the real world hits, the jobs are not available, the education they received doesn’t get them to the promised land, and whatever they earn goes back to the government in the form of high taxes.

The same taxes they marched to increase in college.

When it wasn’t their money.

If they are lucky, these kids will leave college and become successful-aka, “greedy rich”. Their wealth, no matter how it’s earned, will be redistributed to others who are needy, who choose not to work, and who didn’t want an education.

It is these young minds that the socialists need to further their cause….

Notice that when Barack Obama wants to get his message to the masses, he simply shows up on a college campus, a place where indoctrination has replaced critical thinking. He talks like the professor he was, imploring the youth to follow his lead. The students have heard this type of rhetoric for over 12 years and it plays like music to their ears.

All they’ve ever learned is that the sky is green. And so it is.

One day, when they look up and allow their eyes to focus on reality, they will see the blue skies. But by then it will be too late, by then they will have voted themselves into an economic mess, the likes of which this country has never seen before.

It is then they will realize that they were used, abused, and discarded by a government with an evil agenda.

These kids were never the “freedom-loving”, “tolerant” intellectuals who were protesting for a “cause” as they had been told.

They were merely a vote, a useful idiot.

Go to Home Page

Category:Obama, Uncategorized, children, communism, education, lsm, redistribution of wealth, socialism | Comment (0) | Author: lsm

Did The DOJ Encourage The Sale Of Guns To Drug Cartels?

Sunday, 27. March 2011 16:51

Project Gunrunner began in 2005 as a pilot project in Laredo, Texas by the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF). It’s original intent was to stop the flow of drugs and firearms across the border and in the process, control the level of violence by depriving the Mexican drug cartels of weapons.

The mission of this project has apparently “changed.”

You see, like all well-intended government programs left in the hands of bureaucrats, Project Gunrunner is now embedded in a web of controversy. There are allegations that since February 2008, one of the operations within Project Gunrunner- “Fast and Furious”- has been involved in what appears to be a huge scandal, one that has gone unreported by most of the mainstream media- with the exception of CBS News.

Here’s what you need to know….

According to sources within the government bureau, ATF has permitted and facilitated the “straw purchase” of firearms by drug cartels, allowing and encouraging these traffickers to transport them from the United States into Mexico.

Our government is allowing guns to be sold to members of drug cartels? Our government is encouraging these guns to be transferred across the border into Mexico?

Apparently so.

A few agents within the ATF -using the “Whistleblower Act” to grant them immunity from prosecution- are now coming forward to tell their story. CBS News broke this story when they were able to speak to six veteran ATF agents and some of the executives involved. The agents asked to remain anonymous because they fear retaliation. Here’s what they had to say (emphasis mine):

In late 2009, ATF was alerted to suspicious buys at seven gun shops in the Phoenix area. Suspicious because the buyers paid cash, sometimes brought in paper bags. And they purchased classic “weapons of choice” used by Mexican drug traffickers – semi-automatic versions of military type rifles and pistols.

Sources tell CBS News several gun shops wanted to stop the questionable sales, but ATF encouraged them to continue.

Jaime Avila was one of the suspicious buyers. ATF put him in its suspect database in January of 2010. For the next year, ATF watched as Avila and other suspects bought huge quantities of weapons supposedly for “personal use.” They included 575 AK-47 type semi-automatic rifles.

ATF managers allegedly made a controversial decision: allow most of the weapons on the streets. The idea, they said, was to gather intelligence and see where the guns ended up. Insiders say it’s a dangerous tactic called letting the guns, “walk.”

An important part of this story lies in the fact that as of January, 2003, the ATF has been under the control of the Department of Justice.

Yup folks, Eric Holder, our Attorney General is in the middle of this controversy.

This is the same attorney general who has instructed his department to ignore the intimidation of the Black Panthers toward voters on election day, the same attorney general who instructed his department to ignore all “black on white” voting complaints, the same attorney general who has unlawfully decided to no longer enforce certain provisions of the Defense of Marriage Act, the same attorney general who, in 2008, “urged” the Supreme Court to uphold Washington, D.C.’s handgun ban.

The same attorney general who challenged Arizona’s controversial immigration law in court, stating that it is “preempted” by federal law- but refuses to enforce that federal law.

That guy.

So our Department of Justice ALLOWED and encouraged gun shops to sell guns to drug traffickers so they could “follow” them and “gather intelligence”?


Two of these assault rifles were found next to the body of American border agent, Brian Terry when he was slaughtered in Mexico last December. The serial numbers on the rifles matched those of the guns which were sold to Jaime Avila. We’ve yet to hear from the Justice Department whether or not a bullet from one of these rifles actually killed Terry. Avila and some of his buddies have now been arrested, yet none have been charged with the murder.

There’s more. CBS also reports this:

On the phone, one Project Gunrunner source (who didn’t want to be identified) told us just how many guns flooded the black market under ATF’s watchful eye. “The numbers are over 2,500 on that case by the way. That’s how many guns were sold – including some 50-calibers they let walk.”

50-caliber weapons are fearsome. For months, ATF agents followed 50-caliber Barrett rifles and other guns believed headed for the Mexican border, but were ordered to let them go. One distraught agent was often overheard on ATF radios begging and pleading to be allowed to intercept transports. The answer: “Negative. Stand down.”

CBS News has been told at least 11 ATF agents and senior managers voiced fierce opposition to the strategy. “It got ugly…” said one. There was “screaming and yelling” says another. A third warned: “this is crazy, somebody is gonna to get killed.”


In December, 2010, before this scandal broke and just a few days before the death of Brian Terry, the Washington Post accused one of the gun store outlets in Houston, Carter’s Country, of illegally selling guns to members of the drug cartels. The next day, Carter Country’s lawyer, Texas criminal defense attorney, Dick Deguerin, took the story to task, airing what appears to be the truth:

“Let me tell you something about Carter’s Country. They have been co-operating with ATF from the get go.” Deguerin says the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms asked Carter’s Country to complete transactions, even when sales people strongly suspected the weapons were headed to Mexican drug gangs. “They were told to go through with what they considered to be questionable sales. They were told to go through with sales of three or more assault rifles at the same time or five or more 9 millimeter guns at the same time or a young Hispanic male paying in cash. It’s all profiling, but they went through with it,” said Deguerin.

Senator Charles E. Grassley of Iowa was alerted to this Gunrunner scandal shortly thereafter. He initiated an investigation by sending a letter to ATF on January 27, 2011, and again on January 31, 2011.

ATF denied all allegations. Grassley, not content with their reply, then responded with documentation supporting his allegations directly to Eric Holder on Feb. 9 and again in Feb. 16, 2011. A formal briefing of ATF was called by Grassley on Feb. 10. ATF refused to answer anything specific about the actions in question.


There are now five separate but connected accusations against ATF and DOJ officials in what has been dubbed “Project Gunwalker“:

First, that they intentionally allowed to perhaps as many as 3,000 firearms “walked” across the U.S. border into Mexico.

Second, that they instructed U.S. gun dealers to proceed with questionable and illegal sales of firearms to suspected gunrunners.

Third, that they intentionally withheld information about U.S.-sanctioned gun smuggling from the Mexican government.

Fourth, that one of the guns ATF allowed or helped to be smuggled into Mexico was involved in the death of CBP Agent Brian Terry.

Fifth, that they are, now in tandem with the FBI, involved in covering up all ATF and DOJ culpability.

When questioned about the actions of ATF during a Senate Appropriations Committee last week, Eric Holder boldly stated that “letting guns ‘walk’ is not something that is acceptable,” adding that “Guns are different than drugs or money when we are trying to follow their trail. That is not acceptable.

I guess we should be thankful that he knows the difference between right and wrong. Sometimes it’s hard to tell…

Janet Napolitano, Secretary of Homeland Security and the woman in charge of our border, denied any knowledge of this scandal.

Barack Obama also denied knowledge, claiming that the U.S. has “a pretty big government” with “a lot of moving parts”. Funny, but he also “didn’t know” Van Jones was a communist, Wright was preaching anti-Americanism, Ayers was a domestic terrorist, or that his aunt was illegally in this country.

Yes folks, the “smartest president in history” is once again left in the dark.

Coincidentally, after the Tucson shooting of Rep. Giffords, Obama DID mention that with all the violence on the border, we might need to tighten up the Second Amendment just a bit- because it seems that guns, especially assault rifles, are GETTING INTO THE HANDS OF CRIMINALS.

He failed to mention that the DOJ was compliant in this activity.

Meanwhile, Obama and his buddy, Cass Sunstein are concocting a plan that will limit the sale of guns to Americans, putting more constraints on the Second Amendment.

Our President creates the problem and then legislates a way to fix it.

And along the way, he steals our God-given rights.

Beautiful, just beautiful.

Go to Home Page:

Category:Obama, corruption, gun control, illegal immigration, lsm, redistribution of wealth | Comment (0) | Author: lsm

Reagan Must Be Rolling Over….

Friday, 28. January 2011 9:43

Time Magazine has chosen to take the reputation of President Ronald Reagan, put it into a blender, pulverize it, and then pour it down a proverbial drain.

You see, they’re attempting to make a comparison between our revered republican president and Barack Obama. On their latest cover, Time has superimposed a picture of the Messiah next to one of President Reagan, implying a connection, a link, a correlation between the two.

Of which there’s none.

Absolutely none.

Reagan was a capitalist, a man who believed that government needed to get out of the way if America was to prosper as a nation. Obama is a socialist/Marxist, a man who believes that government needs to have a hand in every aspect of society. He’s not concerned about our survival as a nation- he’s more concerned about creating a global government. Reagan wanted to lower taxes; Obama wants to raise them. Reagan believed in American exceptionalism; Obama believes in apologizing for America. Reagan brought this nation together, Obama has torn this nation to shreds.

Reagan spoke from the heart; Obama speaks from a teleprompter.

Reagan was genuine. Obama? Well, we don’t know who he is, where he was born, how he fared in college, who wrote his autobiography, or why his social security number comes out of Connecticut instead of Hawaii. All of that information has conveniently been wiped from the records. We know little about his mother, his father, his siblings, and his grandparents. What we DO know is disconcerting at best. Between his Marxist grandparents and his Muslim father and step-father, we can assume that his upbringing was not that of your average, patriotic, All-American child.

As far back as 1961, Reagan warned us about the dangers of socialism, often quoting socialist Norman Thomas to prove his point: “The American people will never vote for socialism, but under the name of liberalism, the American people will adopt every fragment of the socialist party.”

Reagan went on to warn us that “one of the main methods of imposing socialism on a people has been by way of medicine. It is very easy to disguise a medical program as a humanitarian project.” Obama also knows this to be true. The difference is that while Reagan warned us against socialized medicine, Obama forced it on us with lies, bribes, and 2000 pages worth of government control.

Despite the fact that 60% of the people begged him not to do it….

Reagan also warned us of an over-reaching government filled with unnecessary regulations that “invade every facet of business and every facet of our personal lives”. These regulations hinder production, cost the government billions of dollars, and steal freedom from the American people. Contrast that with Obama, the President who has hired himself a regulatory czar- Cass Sunstein- to regulate every aspect of our lives without our knowledge or consent.

Ronald Reagan stated emphatically that he wanted to take government “off the backs” of the American people. It seems that Barack Obama wants to strap us each with a backpack filled with limitless government intervention, one so burdensome it brings us to our knees- allowing us to pray at the altar of the federal government.

Oh, and to “donate” to their endless causes with our tax dollars.

Ronald Reagan believed in “equal opportunity”, a phrase which means that the government will not impede anyone who has the desire to succeed, while Barack Obama believes in “equal outcome”, a phrase which simply means “redistribution of the wealth.”

These two men are polar opposites. They have nothing in common- not their heritage, not their ideology, not their gravitas, not their patriotism, not their foreign policy. They even have opposing views on the value of our ruling document- the constitution.

Yet, we will hear every democratic pundit now proclaim that “Obama is the new Reagan”, hoping that if the American people hear it often enough, they will begin to believe it.

Interestingly enough, Ronald Reagan Jr.- aka “Ronnie”- has just penned a book that denounces his father, claiming that his dad had Alzheimer’s disease while he was still in office.

Is that true? We don’t know, but there are a few things that we do know….

We know that Alzheimer’s never took President Reagan’s patriotism from him. It never took away his faith in the American people. It never took his belief in the free market, his love of a capitalist society, or his ability to deliver a speech that made us proud. It never took away his ability to lead, his ability to show strength abroad, or his ability to rally the troops.

Ronald Reagan was a leader, an amazing conservative leader. With or without a crippling disease, Ronald Reagan was 10 times the leader that Obama could ever hope to be.

Come to think of it, maybe Time Magazine made a mistake….maybe they meant to superimpose a picture of Obama next to Ronnie Reagan Jr., not Ronald Reagan….

That, my friends, would have made sense. Two liberal back-stabbers on the same cover.


Go to Home Page:

Category:Czar, Obama, Uncategorized, constitution, lsm, political, redistribution of wealth | Comment (0) | Author: lsm

The Liberal Elite’s War On Wealth

Monday, 20. December 2010 7:57

I was looking through an old box of my grandparents “stuff” when I came across a newspaper from 1933, one in which the headline celebrated the end of prohibition: “Beer is Flowing Again!!”

My grandfather, a great Italian, liked to make wine.

On the bottom half of the fold was another, more interesting article, one that took my breath away. It was titled: Idle Rich Class Taboo In Hitler’s Economic Plans.

It spoke about the new leader of Germany, a guy named Adolf Hitler, who had come into power and was going to create the “perfect” society with a new economic plan, one that he claimed would “change” Germany.

I wonder if his “change” also included “hope”?

The main principle behind Hitler’s “new Germany” was a classless society, one in which the rich would be taxed to the level of the poor so that both classes would work together side by side to better the state:

Castes and classes are to go. In their stead, a community spirit is to be inculcated in which rich and poor, exalted and lowly, shall work side by side for the fatherland.

The idea is that capitalism as such is not to be abolished, but its excesses prevented. The principle, “the public wealth is paramount to private gain” must be the guiding factor in determining the extent to which individual capital can expand. But private property must not be directed against the state.

For instance, a man of means will not be permitted to support a theater in which plays are given that belittle the government. His surplus must be contributed to useful, patriotic purposes.

Taxes will be graded so as to prevent the amassing of vast fortunes. If a man acquires so large an income that he can live from it without further effort, ways will be found to reduce him to the necessity of again performing socially useful service. This will not apply to old people, who are to be permitted to live off incomes earned by a life-time’s hard work.

The inheritance tax is to be high and everything that might enable the heirs to live a life of laziness. It is not to be high on things that promote socially useful lives. Thus, a factory or a homestead can be passed on to the direct descendants, but distant relatives will be practically taxed out of inheritance.”

Any of this sound familiar? Listen to Megyn Kelley’s interview with Representative Weiner and you will hear history repeat itself. Weiner tells us that taxing inheritance really isn’t taxing someone twice because, in his words, “You’re dead.” He says that those who benefit from an inheritance should be taxed because it is “unearned wealth.”

Really? Didn’t someone earn that wealth? The government certainly didn’t earn that wealth…..why should they feel free to dip into it again?

Listen to the rhetoric of Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden, John Kerry, Michael Moore, Barack Obama, and the Hollywood crowd. All of them are wealthy elites who want to eliminate the extreme classes in society- they want to “spread the wealth around a little bit” – You know, take it from the guy who’s making $300,000 per year and give it to the guy who makes $30,000 so things are “fair.”

Interestingly enough, I would wager to bet that none of these individuals paid more than required to our government in taxes. I would bet that each of them took advantage of tax breaks wherever they could- even writing off their gifts of charity. I’m certain that none wrote an extra check to the government because they wanted to “have more in common with the little guy.”

Did Nancy Pelosi work without a paycheck last year, telling Congress that she didn’t need the extra cash since she and her husband are millionaires? Gosh, no. In fact, not only did Nancy happily collect her salary, she asked the rest of us to finance her private jet so she could fly home each weekend. She asked us to finance her food and drink on that jet to the tune of $101,000 per year (that’s just the food and drink, not the jet). She asked us to fly her friends to Italy so they could have a wonderful vacation together and she even hosted private parties at our expense.

Then Nancy turned around and passed legislation that specifically helped her husband make more money.

These people are hypocrites. They need to be called to the table and ratted out one by one. John Kerry parks his yacht in Rhode Island to protect himself from the high, Massachusetts taxes. Charlie Rangel, Tim Geithner, and Tom Daschle didn’t pay their taxes. Joe Biden gave a pittance to charity until he ran for Vice President and realized that he looked like a cheap-skate.

But they sit on their high horses and preach that the guy making $250,000 is “rich”. They call him names. They chastise his success, telling the world that he “has enough”, and ask that he “give more” to the government so they can spend it on themselves and their pet projects.

Oh, and on their reelections.

While liberals preach “diversity” and “tolerance” in our schools, they are actively preaching “hate” in the halls of Congress. Oh, it’s not “hate” toward blacks, latinos, or gays that they proliferate….it’s a different kind of hate, the kind that’s acceptable.

It’s a hatred of the “rich”, the “successful”, the “upper class”, the guy who has “too much”- the guy who probably gave you your job and is helping to feed your family. The guy who is taking care of the health of your kids because he busted his butt and became a doctor. The guy who mortgaged his family farm to pursue a dream, invent a product, or discover a cure for a horrible disease. The guy who took a risk and watched it pay off. The guy who opened up a little store or a restaurant and watched it thrive. The guy who has a unique God-given talent and decided to nurture it rather than ignore it.

Successful people get in the way of socialism, of government control. Why? Because they are smart, innovative, career-driven folks who are a thorn in the side of a big government mentality. Socialists need to dumb-down society, they need to create “useful idiots”, not entrepreneurs.

You see, in a socialist society like the one we saw in Hitler’s Germany, only the government officials are allowed to be rich. Only government employees are allowed to thrive. The “useful idiots” must rely on the government for everything, including their very lives.

When we read history, whether from an old newspaper or a book, we are holding everything we need to know in our hands. Why don’t we learn from it? Why are we teaching our kids to dismiss it? How can we read about the policies of Hitler or Stalin and not see a parallel to our current society?

What we’re seeing from this administration is pure “hate speech”- the hatred of the successful.

They’re making it acceptable for YOU to hate these folks, too. In fact, they’re encouraging you to be jealous, encouraging you to complain, demand, and organize against those who have wealth. They love the class warfare that they’ve created.

My grandfather, the one who loved to make his wine, came here from Italy at age 16 with a second grade education. He worked his tail off, delivering fruit and blocks of ice. He bought a small business and it became quite successful through his hard work. He died a “wealthy” man- a proud man, a man who proved that the American dream was real to those who found an opportunity and ran with it.

He went back and visited Italy often throughout his life, but each time he returned, he would look at us and say, “I love Italy, but thank God for America.”

Thank God for America.

If only our President would feel the same.

And the American Dream? Well, it’s slowly becoming a thing of the past as the useful idiots no longer strive for success.

They are brainwashed and entitled. And controlled.

Just where the wealthy socialist elites like them.

Go to Home Page:

Category:Obama, Uncategorized, communism, lsm, redistribution of wealth, socialism | Comments (3) | Author: lsm

The Financial Bill- Is It Racist and Sexist?

Wednesday, 28. July 2010 8:25

“We’ll have to sign the bill so we can find out what’s in it.”

I guess those famous words of Nancy Pelosi can now be applied to the Financial Bill.

You see, we now find out – after folks have had a chance to actually read it- that deep within the 2000 pages of the Financial LAW, there is a federal demand for diversity on Wall Street. According to Politico: In this law, “Congress gives the federal government authority to terminate contracts with any financial firm that fails to ensure the “fair inclusion” of women and minorities, forcing every kind of company from a Wall Street giant to a mom-and-pop law office to account for the composition of its work force.

This law now gives the government the power to look into the hiring practices of various firms and determine if they are hiring, not only their own workforce, but contractors and subcontractors that include a “proper” number of minorities and women.

The section of the law that lays all of this out is now (after its been signed) being called “vague.”


Who wrote this “vague” section of the bill? Well that would be none other than Rep. Maxine Waters, the African American democrat from California. She’s the same lady who let it slip that she “would be all about socializ- ah, ah, ah…..all about taking over all of your oil companies” when talking to oil executives last year. She was a member of SDS, the Students for a Democratic Society- a Marxist group who also included the likes of Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn. She, along with Al Sharpton, endorsed a revolutionary, communist group called, “World Can’t Wait–Drive Out the Bush Regime”.


Maxine also stated that the riots which occurred after the Rodney King verdict were “somewhat understandable, if not acceptable”, calling them “righteous.” When asked about the looting in Korean-owned stores, she responded, “There were mothers who took this as an opportunity to take some milk, to take some bread, to take some shoes. They are not crooks. Everybody in the street was not a thug or a hood.”

I guess the Koreans who owned the stores didn’t need the milk, the bread, the shoes…..or the money.

Does this woman understand the LAW? How do people like this get elected?

Anyway, this genius has just screwed the white man- and many in Congress are applauding her. The supporters of Maxine’s language in the financial bill claim that businesses owned by women and minorities didn’t receive an adequate share of contracts- things like legal contracts and accounting contracts- through the bank bailout and other “emergency programs” administered by the Treasury and Federal Reserve.

So much for “content of character” being more important than race or sex.

These same supporters are claiming that this is fair because the collapse of the housing industry disproportionately affected African-Americans and Latinos.

Ya think that had anything to do with the fact that they were given loans they never should have had? Ya think it had anything to do with the fact that Barney Frank and Chris Dodd ordered the banks to disproportionately give out bad loans to minorities? Ya think?

Here’s the most disturbing part of this: The 1,261-word section authored by Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) barely registered during the legislative debate. And even weeks after the legislation moved through the House and Senate, Washington groups tasked with protecting business interests on Wall Street and beyond say they have yet to study that part of the bill.

They’ve yet to “study that part of the bill” and it’s already been signed into law?

It gets worse. This section of the law now “establishes at least 20 new Offices of Minority and Women Inclusion across the Treasury Department, Federal Reserve, Securities and Exchange Commission and other finance-related agencies. It orders the directors of these offices to develop standards that “ensure, to the maximum extent possible, the fair inclusion and utilization of minorities, women, and minority-owned and women-owned businesses in all business and activities of the agency at all levels, including in procurement, insurance, and all types of contracts.”

Who’s affected by these new regulations? Well, again, it’s “vague”. It says that it “applies to “services of any kind,” including investment firms, mortgage banking firms, asset management firms, brokers, dealers, underwriters, accountants, consultants and law firms. Every contractor and subcontractor must now certify that their workforces reflect a “fair inclusion” of women and minorities.”

And what if you don’t comply? Well, it’s seems that your company could be reported to the Labor Department. Termination would follow.

Would you say that our government is now enforcing racial and sexual “quotas”?

Well, 4 Republican members of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights wrote a letter of opposition to this section of the bill, claiming just that. Interestingly enough, Senator Susan Collins of Maine was one of those members.

Here’s what she had to say: “It is very sweeping, from my review of the legislation. It talks not just about federal offices and agencies. It also talks about contractors and subcontractors, and so the implications are very unclear and can be read to require quotas, and that’s an entirely different and controversial debate and does not belong in the financial bill.


Now she’s writing letters of opposition to it.

Anyone who isn’t outraged at the ineptitude of those in Congress is not paying attention. Successful, white males- even democrats- should be outraged that they are being legislated out of contracts, and forced to hire a workforce based upon color and sex, not qualifications. .

Show me the place in the Constitution that OK’s quotas. Show me the place that favors minorities or women above others.

We’re a lost nation, folks. We’ve become a screwed-up place with screwed up values and screwed up laws. Our legislators consist of people who are either radical or inept. They are writing and voting away our rights- without reading them, without discussing them, without disclosing them- and JUSTIFYING them once the audacity is made public.

Does anyone else care what this bill will do to our children- and their children? Does anyone care that reverse racism is alive and well? Can anyone see beyond today’s baseball game and tonight’s dinner?

They are stealing our country, folks.

Dinner can wait.

Go to Home Pge:

Category:government policies, lsm, racism, redistribution of wealth, socialism | Comment (0) | Author: lsm

Tax The Obese- And Everyone Else.

Monday, 26. July 2010 7:15

Not worried that the government wants to know your Body Mass Index? Not concerned that Uncle Sam is now interested in how obese you are? Think that the government is just concerned about the health of its citizens?

Think again.

A news story from AOL news helps shed new light on the real reason the government wants your obesity numbers. They recently published an article titled, “Germany Considers Tax on the Obese”- a headline which says everything you need to know about the government’s concern over your health. Oh, it’s not just the tax that should worry folks- there are members of the German teachers association who have recently called for school kids to be weighed each day.


I know, I know….the article is about GERMANY, not the United States. Why should we care what’s happening there?

Well, if you haven’t noticed, America is on a fast-track to becoming Europe. These socialist countries have paved the way for us in many areas- including socialized health care, taxing energy, the equalizing of wages- and other idealistic entitlement programs- programs that are supposed to make everyone “feel good”, but actually keep everyone from prospering more than anyone else. If only we were smart, we’d learn from their mistakes.

If only.

“Marco Wanderwitz, a conservative member of parliament for the German state of Saxony, said it is unfair and unsustainable for the taxpayer to carry the entire cost of treating obesity-related illnesses in the public health system. “I think that it would be sensible if those who deliberately lead unhealthy lives would be held financially accountable for that,” Wanderwitz said, according to Reuters.

Basically - If it moves, tax it. If it’s fat and moves, tax it more.

Music to the ears of our own White House.

You know, if we’re going to tax the rich for making too much, tax smokers for smoking too much, tax luxury vehicles for being too nice, tax tanning salons for changing someone’s skin color, and tax medical device companies for making gadgets that keep us alive, then maybe we SHOULD tax people who eat too much.

What do you think, liberals? Should we tax all the fat people in the inner cities- the ones who get their food dollars from the government? Should we tax all of those couch potatoes who are sitting home on unemployment, eating potato chips? Should we tax the overweight folks who we see in WalMart, buying Cheese Puffs and Red Licorice with their food stamps?

And who will pay the tax for their obesity since they don’t even have the cash to buy their own health insurance- or their own Cheese Puffs?

Or will we just tax the RICH obese? Will we just tax the Fat Cats on Wallstreet, the overweight CEO’s of big business, and the porky shoppers at Neiman Marcus?

Liberals who love their twinkies in every class of society will soon be screaming as the government begins to track their weight. Most of them will throw their arms up at the outrage: “Who in the world gave the government the power to control MY weight, MY eating habits, MY health.”

Welcome to the world of conservatism, guys. We’ve been saying that for years. Why should we allow the government to control ANY aspect of our rights as Americans- you know, the rights laid out by the constitution, the rights given to us by “our creator.” Why should we allow a government to get so big and so powerful that they can control whether or not we wear a seatbelt, get a toy in our Happy Meal at McDonalds, buy a soft drink, or put salt on our food.

Let’s stop buying the argument that our government cares about us. Understand that the government only cares about what we can give them- votes, power, and money. Our tax dollars are precious because they give the politicians the ability to spend- and spending brings them votes. Votes give them power. It’s a vicious cycle.

Hey liberals- Ever heard of a “slippery slope”? Do you understand that allowing the government to get their hands on YOUR healthcare, on YOUR BMI, is another slide down that slope? It isn’t only the current position on the slippery slope that is important…it’s where the slope leads.

Ronald Reagan stated it best his famous quote:

“Freedom is a fragile thing and is never more than one generation away from extinction. It is not ours by inheritance; it must be fought for and defended constantly by each generation, for it comes only once to a people. Those who have known freedom and then lost it have never known it again.”

Reagan was a man who understood the evils of communism, totalitarianism, and socialism. He was a man who would have fought tooth and nail against the current administration and the “defreedomizing” of America which is rapidly happening today.

Open your eyes. See the freedom that we still have. Close your eyes. Imagine it gone.

That’s what we’re facing folks.

Another tax, another law, another regulation. The taking over of the autos, banks, student loans, health. The regulations on oil, energy, cars, financial markets… the slope is getting steeper.

How are we doing at passing that freedom onto our kids?

Reagan is rolling over.

Go to Home Page:

Category:Obama, Uncategorized, children, government policies, health care, lsm, redistribution of wealth, socialism | Comments (1) | Author: lsm

Body Mass Index- A New Tool For Health Care Rationing

Tuesday, 20. July 2010 7:52

We all have important numbers in our lives: There’s the year we were born, our social security number, our telephone number, our address, our weight, our age….

You get the picture.

There’s a new number that you’re going to be hearing about, one which may become the most important number of all. It’s called your BMI- Body Mass Index- and it seems the government is suddenly becoming very interested in this little statistic of yours.

What is your BMI? Well, it’s a number which indicates your level of obesity, using a ratio between your height and your weight. In the past, your family’s “fat content” was a private matter, something you only discussed with those you chose to. Thanks to our new president and his the 2009 stimulus law, by 2014 your “fat number” will be required to be filed electronically when you go to the doctor.

It’ll be listed with your other records for all doctors and “appropriate” government officials to see. It will be an indicator of your health to those who sit on the rationing boards in Washington DC- they can factor your fat information into their decisions as to whether or not you will be getting certain health care.

Hey, Obama promised us that he wasn’t going to ration….

Unfortunately, he just appointed a Medicare czar who has other plans. His new appointee is Donald Berwick, a man that believes in both rationing and distribution of the wealth. In an interview last year, Berwick was quoted as saying, “The decision is not whether or not we will ration care — the decision is whether we will ration with our eyes open. And right now, we are doing it blindly.”

What does that mean for the millions of Americans who are on Medicare and rely on this government body to determine whether or not they qualify for certain doctors, certain procedures, certain drugs?

We don’t know for sure, but a 2008 speech Berwich gave to a British audience may hold part of the answer:

“You could have protected the wealthy and the well, instead of recognizing that sick people tend to be poorer and that poor people tend to be sicker and that any health care funding plan that is just, equitable, civilized and humane must, MUST redistribute wealth from the richer among us to the poorer and the less fortunate. Excellent health care is, by definition, redistributional.”

Gosh, this guy sounds radical.

He is. The reason that Barack did not allow Berwick to go through the usual confirmation process and instead hired him as a “recess appointment” (when congress was on vacation) was because he knew that Berwick wouldn’t pass muster with the Senate, especially those Senators who are up for reelection. When seniors, who rely on Medicare, hear that there’s a new sheriff in town who will be rationing their care, they will be up in arms.

Keeping Berwick’s appointment out of the news was essential for the democrats.

How does the BMI factor into all of this?

Many factors go into a system of rationing. The “death panels” will take into consideration your age, for instance, to decide if you “qualify” for a certain procedure. Your BMI will play a similar part in either qualifying or denying you health care. If you’ve taken care of yourself and have kept your weight to a reasonable level, you will be more likely to get the care you need. Plain and simple- Fat people may not be given the same care as thin people.

Unless, of course, they are poor or of a minority race. You see, those folks are considered “victims” and need affirmative action.

Rich, white folks should know better.

Listen to Berwick’s own words and you will see that this is true: “Here is a question I often ask my students,” added Berwick. “When you meet a new patient, what is the one test that you could do that would tell you how long that patient is likely to live?

“Typically, students answer: ‘Ask them if they smoke,’ or ‘Test their blood sugar.’

“No,” Berwick said. “Just look at the color of their skin.”

Berwick’s theory goes down the tubes when you look closer at the statistics. There is a high death rate among young minorities who kill themselves -and each other- with drugs and violence- which brings the life expectancy numbers of the whole black population down. The New England Journal of Medicine reports that among older black and white men, the level of education has a greater effect than race on total life expectancy. Older black and white women had virtually the same life expectancy, even without factoring for education. Over the age of 80, blacks actually have a higher life expectancy than whites.

Hey, will Berwick ration more health care to whites than blacks over the age of 80? Doesn’t he promote “fairness”?

A recent study from Mayo concluded, “BMI fails as a cardiovascular risk factor“. It also found that “BMI cannot discriminate between body fat and lean mass”.

While the CDC (Center for Disease Control) claims that BMI is a reliable indicator of body fatness, studies obviously show otherwise. People who are “fit” and have a high level of muscle mass will weigh more, giving them a higher BMI, yet actually be healthier than those who have a lower BMI but are couch potatoes. How can the government use BMI as a reliable factor in health care if it cannot tell the difference between fat and muscle?

And do you want radical men like Donald Berwick relying on this unreliable number to determine your course of health care? Do you want Donald Berwick looking at the color of your skin before determining your course of care? Do you want the government, not your doctor, deciding how fat you are, how much weight you should lose, how much you need to exercise, or what you should eat?

Think this isn’t happening? Think again. I went to the doctor for a routine check 2 months ago. For the first time in my life, my doctor told me what my BMI was- I didn’t ask, she just blurted it out.


Our weight is no longer a private matter. Our fat is no longer a private matter. Our health, or that of our kids, is no longer a private matter.

Big government….had enough yet?

Go to Home Page:

Category:Obama, Uncategorized, ethics, government policies, health care, lsm, redistribution of wealth, socialism | Comment (0) | Author: lsm

Anybody Know About Our New Medicare Czar?

Friday, 9. July 2010 10:19

You have the right to vote for whomever you wish.

You also have a right to know what you’re voting for. Our mainstream media is not doing its job, not even slightly. While evidence is popping up every day showing the current White House to be a socialist, out-of-step, radically inspired administration, there are only a handful of media outlets that are giving Americans even a smidgen of that information.

Worse yet, most are helping our President with his leftist agenda. Tales of Lindsay Lohan’s antics, “The Bachelor’s” new conquest, and Lebron’s nail-biting decision fill the airwaves of the liberal media, giving a false sense of security to most Americans. Even so, if you were to ask people on the street to be completely honest, they would tell you that “in their gut” they know something ain’t right.

They know.

They can feel that something has changed, that there IS a “fundamental transformation” happening in this country. It’s all happening too fast, isn’t it? The roller coaster is speeding up and going out of control in an election year, a year where Congress is usually on their best behavior.

It makes you wonder why.

Barack Obama recently appointed a Medicare Czar- a man named Donald Berwick- who will be running the Medicare system in our country. This should be big news to the millions of elderly folks who rely on Medicare, right? Evidently not. Most major news organizations- the same ones who spent a week investigating the rumor of Sarah Palin’s breast implants- ignored this story.

Why is this important? Well Donald Berwick is not your ordinary, guy. Like most of Obama’s czars, he doesn’t think in terms of the “free market” or capitalism. He’s a self-avowed socialist, a man who believes in redistribution of wealth, along with government rationing of health care. He was appointed by Obama in a controversial way, something called a “recess appointment” instead of undergoing the usual scrutiny of a Senate confirmation process.

It’s a rarely used, sneaky, backdoor way for Obama to get this man into his inner fold.

As Senator Mitch McConnell stated:

“As if shoving a trillion dollar government takeover of health care down the throat of a disapproving American public wasn’t enough, apparently the Obama Administration intends to arrogantly circumvent the American people yet again by recess appointing one of the most prominent advocates of rationed health care to implement their national plan. Democrats haven’t scheduled so much as a committee hearing for Donald Berwick but the mere possibility of allowing the American people the opportunity to hear what he intends to do with their health care is evidently reason enough for this Administration to sneak him through without public scrutiny.”

You see, Donald Berwick is a huge proponent of the health care system in Great Britain, the system which turns away women in labor, has a 6 times greater death rate from prostate cancer than the U.S., does not give certain life-saving drugs to breast cancer patients because of cost, and in the words of one researcher, “Have waiting lists for waiting lists.”

Hey, what’s not to like…?

While Germany and other western European countries have decent health care systems run by private insurance, Great Britain is unique in that it uses a system modeled on Lenin’s dream of universal ‘free’ provision- universal health care. This Soviet-style health care was pushed through years ago by a man named Nye Bevan. The ‘free provision’ ultimately destroyed private health care for most people and created the system they have in place today.

In a report called Delay, Denial, and Dilution, Laura Casper and David G. Green, describe the UK health care system this way: UK health care is cheap. They spend less on health care than does any comparable nation, but the cheapness of the NHS is subsidized by the exhaustion and demoralization of the staff and by the second-rate service it so often provides. It is the cheapness of the miser who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing. And it is a cheapness that demeans patients as supplicants and which hides the medical realities of rationing from them.

So Donald Berwick, a socialist, wants to bring a failing British, communist-inspired health care system into the United States. Why do the words “communist”, “socialist”, and “Obama’s Czars” all seem to tie together time and time again? Why would a man be inspired by a health care system that is CLEARLY subpar, one that rations care to the point of killing people?

And why would Obama WANT that man to run the elderly care in our country?

Berwick has stated publicly, “the decision is not whether or not we will ration care, the decision is whether we will ration with our eyes open.”

Hey seniors, how does it make you feel to know that the man who is now in charge of YOUR health care, YOUR life believes in rationing care? How do you feel about a President who would appoint a man- during a recess in Congress to avoid Senate hearings- to be in charge of YOUR body for the rest of your life?

How many of you believed Barack when he promised you that there would be no rationing under his health care plan?

Sadly, most seniors will be unaware of Mr. Donald Berwick because our press will keep this dirty little secret from them. They will turn on the Today Show and watch Matt Lauer make raspberry lemonade and show us how to tile our kitchen floor. They won’t understand the ramifications of Obama’s latest action until they go to an emergency room one day and are denied care.

By then it will be too late.

And for those of us who aren’t seniors, yet…we will be.

Obama just screwed ALL of us, young and old.

Our media is complicit in the rape.

go to Home Page:

Category:Obama, communism, government policies, health care, lsm, political, redistribution of wealth, socialism | Comments (2) | Author: lsm

Cloward Piven and the Demise of Democracy- Part II

Thursday, 10. June 2010 7:54

Richard Cloward, Frances Fox Piven, and their Alinsky-inspired socialism continue to leave a legacy in America.

Through their methods of overwhelming the system and creating chaos, these two Columbia University professors were able to collapse the New York welfare system, and then use their strategy to help destroy the housing market in 2008, an effort they had been working on since the 1970′s.

Unfortunately, the story doesn’t end there…

Cloward and Piven realized early on that in order to completely collapse capitalism, they needed a multi-pronged approach. One of the “prongs” they needed to control was the electoral system. You see, as Stalin once stated, “The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything.”

In 1983 they founded the organization Human SERVE. The group advocated registering people to vote when they came into government offices like the Department of Motor Vehicles or Social Services. They argued that “the poor” didn’t have as many opportunities to register as others did, so making registration available to them when they were getting government services would help solve that problem.

Sounds good, right?

You see, Cloward and Piven understood that they were able to manipulate almost any system when they pretended to care about “the poor.”

Human SERVE was actually a socialist effort to control our elections. Cloward and Piven, like their communist mentors, understood that signing more folks up to vote, especially signing them up multiple times, would create the chaos they needed to skew elections. The two professors also knew that low turn-out at the voting booth was usually attributed to low interest by those who lived in the inner city. These folks, who are dependent upon the government for entitlements, usually vote for the democratic candidates, so getting them registered and voting would help to elect candidates who were sympathetic to their socialist agenda.

ACORN was used as a tool in this effort.

Remember, ACORN was founded by Wade Rathke with the help of Cloward and Piven. It began as a small organization in Arkansas and became a nationwide community organizing group. As we now know, ACORN has been “outed” for signing up voters, many of whom don’t exist, to overload and create chaos within the electoral system.

In the early 1990′s, Barack Obama joined an offshoot of Human SERVE called “Project Vote” and helped to get Carol Moseley Braun, a New Party (Socialist) member, elected to the Senate. He was identified early by an ACORN worker as a gifted organizer and was subsequently asked to move to ACORN to help train ACORN leaders in community organizing.

Our Messiah trained ACORN employees in Alinsky’s socialist-promoting tactics, including the tactics of direct action, targeting, confrontation, and intimidation.

He later became a lawyer who represented ACORN in a lawsuit against Citibank.

That’s strange because he now says that he’s not that familiar with ACORN…


In 1993, President Clinton signed a piece of legislation based on the principles of Human SERVE nicknamed the “Motor Voter Act” which accomplished the goals of Cloward and Piven. It was touted as a bill that would increase voter turn out, but was actually just a sloppy way to sign people up to vote.

Here’s an interesting tidbit: Examine the picture taken of President Clinton signing the Motor Voter Act and you will see Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven standing behind him, grinning from ear to ear.


Even more interesting: WND reports that “as a lawyer with civil-rights law firm Davis Miner Barnhill & Galland, Obama sued the state of Illinois on behalf of ACORN to implement the federal “motor voter” law.”

And he continues to say the he is unfamiliar with ACORN…..

The question still remained: Could this Cloward-Piven strategy- including the Motor-voter Act and ACORN- really affect our system of elections?

Could it ever…..

One example of the theory in action was the 2008 Senate Race in Minnesota.

Mark Ritchie, an ex-ACORN community organizer, is the Secretary of State of Minnesota, the elected official who runs Minnesota elections. His 2006 campaign was well-funded by heavy hitters like George Soros and SEIU in a concerted effort called the Secretary of State Project. This “project” was really a 527 organization with a goal to get Democrats elected to the offices of Secretary of State in selected swing, or battleground, states, specifically those whose margin of victory in the 2004 presidential election contest was 120,000 votes or less.

Minnesota qualified as one of these states. Richie was the benefactor.

The 2008 elections in Minnesota saw a highly contested Senate race between Norm Coleman and Al Franken. While ACORN was busy signing up voters and creating the necessary chaos, Ritchie was holding firm on his resolve for “same day” registration, something only 4 states in the U.S. still adhere to.

He has also firmly opposed Photo Voter ID in Minnesota, an initiative that would significantly cut down on voter fraud.

The election results were right out of the Cloward-Piven book of rules: There were immigrants who couldn’t speak English, yet were able to get someone to vouch for them. There were multiple precincts where the ballots exceeded the number of people registered. There were hundreds of ballots found with the wrong date on them, along with ballots found in the back seat of an election official’s car.


In the middle of the crisis, lawyers were flown in from all over the nation to help defend Al Franken. They demanded that every vote count- every vote THEY WANTED, that is. They helped lay the groundwork so that the criteria to count a ballot in a democrat precinct was different from that in a republican precinct.

More chaos.

With all of the confusion and mounting costs, the logical thing would have been a run-off election, but with Sec. of State, Mark Ritchie, obviously “in bed” with Franken and Soros, that was not going to happen.

Norm Coleman simply ran out of the necessary funds to continue the fight. It didn’t help that in a liberal state with liberal judges, Coleman couldn’t get even one court ruling to go his way.

Al Franken was crowned the winner.

The Cloward Piven strategy, along with some funding by the far left, had successfully influenced the system.

We’ve watched these 2 socialist professors collapse the NY welfare system, the housing market, and now influence our election outcomes.

Where else are we going to find them?…

Stay tuned….they’re not done yet.

Go to Home Page:

Category:Obama, Uncategorized, communism, lsm, redistribution of wealth, socialism | Comment (0) | Author: lsm

Stand and Cheer For Socialism

Friday, 21. May 2010 6:47

The last time we saw the democrats collectively give a standing ovation at a Joint Session of Congress was when Barack Obama ridiculed the Supreme Court Justices for their ruling on Campaign Finance Reform.

This time when they rose, it wasn’t Obama they were cheering for. On Thursday, the democrats stood and applauded the President of Mexico, Felipe Calderon, as he berated the United States, and specifically Arizona, for its stance on immigration.

Let me get this straight, the democrats cheered a foreign President for coming into OUR country and slamming the laws of OUR land?

Who, exactly, do these politicians represent? The brain-dead? Who votes for these turncoats?

Isn’t there a “for better or worse” clause- where you have to defend the country no matter what- when you become an elected official? Isn’t there a “country first” oath that you must swear to? What ever happened to patriotism? How about decorum?

Remember when Rep. Joe Wilson yelled out “You Lie!!” during Obama’s speech on health care? That was considered by the democrats to be an outrage. I guess Barack didn’t like Rep. Wilson doing the job of the media and calling attention to his lies.

He assumed that no one would bother reporting the facts.

After that incident, House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn, D-South Carolina was furious with Rep. Wilson and stated, “I was always taught that the first sign of a good education is good manners. I think that what we saw tonight was really bad manners.”

Is it “good manners” to cheer when the President is berating the Supreme Court, Jim? Is it “good manners” to cheer when a foreign leader verbally rips your country and your laws to shreds?

Huh, Jim?

If Rep. Wilson deserved to be censured (which he ultimately was), then I believe we have a number of democratic legislators who should also be censured from their spontaneous ovation on Thursday.

What in the world has happened to our country? The election of Barack Obama has completely polarized this country into two distinct groups: Those who are patriotic and love their country, and those who hate this country and apologize for it at every turn.

Guess which group is now in the White House?

Think back to Barack’s candidacy…..He wouldn’t wear a flag pin on his lapel and finally conceded when Americans began to question his patriotism. He didn’t put his hand over his heart during the National Anthem. He talked repeatedly about “fundamentally changing” this country and most people cheered because it sounded exciting and fresh. Yet, think about it….what in the world was so wrong with our country that we would want to “fundamentally” change it?

You know what they say, “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.”

Capitalism and America go hand in hand. It may not be a perfect partnership, but the free markets have enabled the greatest proportion of people to prosper in all of the world.

Milton Friedman, the brilliant economist has been quoted as saying, “The world runs on individuals pursuing their separate interests. The greatest achievements of modern civilization have not come from government run bureaus. Einstein didn’t construct his theory under order from a bureaucrat. The only cases in which the masses have escaped from grinding poverty – are cases where they have had capitalism and free trade. If you want to know where the masses are worse off, it’s in exactly the kinds of societies that depart from that. So the record of history is absolutely crystal clear- there is no alternative way of improving the lives of ordinary people that can hold a candle to the productive capacities that are unleashed by a free enterprise system.

Unfortunately, those who we have in charge of our current administration are diabolically opposed to Milton Friedman’s theory. They believe in the universal redistribution of the wealth. They haven’t explained where the wealth will be coming from, since under their system, people will find it easier to stay home than to work, but I guess they have it all figured out in their little “intellectual” brains.

Whew. Glad they have a plan.

But there’s a problem….

You see, their plan doesn’t include seeing the United States as a great nation. Their plan doesn’t include 3 equal branches of government that have checks and balances. Their plan doesn’t include government by the people or term limits or states rights.

Their plan says that we need more control in the Executive Branch.

Their plan says we need subjects and socialism and limited speech and controlled media and regulated airwaves.

Their plan says we should rip up our borders, our laws, our constitution and live as a One World Government.

It’s happening before our eyes.

For Obama’s plan- the democrats’ plan -to work, America, as we know it, must be destroyed. It must be fundamentally changed.

Obama wants to deliver on his promise.

If this were a movie, Obama and his cohorts would be destroyed and the good patriots would be victorious.

How will THIS movie end?

Stay tuned….

Go to Home Page:

Category:Uncategorized, communism, constitution, ethics, lsm, redistribution of wealth, socialism | Comments (1) | Author: lsm