American Reader

Have we really gone too far?

noreply@blogger.com (AmericanReader) — Sun, 07 Aug 2011 23:25:00 +0000

Have you heard people talk like this?

"There won't be much left by the next election. At the rate they're destroying the country, I don't see that we have much time . . . "

"The way things are going . . . we're already elected our last POTUS . . . "

Do you think our free society has passed the point of no return?

The American Reader does not think so. As the Reader has said before, had John McCain been elected instead of Obama, we would be heading slowly and steadily in the same direction we are heading right now.

The Tea Party movement would not exist. The conservative movement would still be effectively marginalized by the media and the political parties. The slow and steady course would not have awakened the sleeping opposition.

See: http://americanreader.blogspot.com/2009/07/obama-blitzkrieg-awakens-opposition.html

This crisis of government is the opportunity of your lifetime to reclaim the Constitution, the Congress, the States, and the Presidency for the cause of American Liberty.

People who say "It's over," really don't know what "it" is.

It is our inalienable right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

It will never be over.

The American Reader keeps coming back to Discovery of Freedom, the great work by Rose Wilder Lane:

"Very few Europeans have ever known what liberty is. All the others take it for granted that Authority controls individuals. When they say 'a free country,' they mean a country not conquered by foreigners . . . When they speak of liberties, they mean what an American means when he asks, 'May I take the liberty?' They mean a permission, granted to them, to do a certain act . . . Freedom is not a permission granted by any Authority. Freedom is a fact. Whether or not this fact is known, freedom is in the nature of every living person, as gravitation is in the nature of this planet. Life is energy; liberty is the individual control of human life-energy. It cannot be separated from life. Liberty is inalienable; as I cannot transfer my life to anyone else, I cannot transfer my liberty, my control of my life-energy, to anyone else . . . This fact is not recognized when individuals submit to an Authority that grants them 'freedoms.'" (from Discovery of Freedom, by Rose Wilder Lane http://mises.org/books/discovery.pdf)

Is socialism a dirty word?

noreply@blogger.com (AmericanReader) — Mon, 11 Oct 2010 11:26:00 +0000

In his editorial column this month, National Underwriter Editor-in-Chief Bill Coffin writes:

I take offense at people using “socialist” and “Marxist” like a dirty word, and towards people who are proposing certain kinds of policy in the American political sphere. There is nothing remotely socialist or Marxist about healthcare reform, financial services reform, tax policy, or anything else we’ve seen while the Democrats and Obama have been in power. Their policies are no more socialist or Marxist than Bush’s policies were fascist or Nazi, although during his administration, Bush got plenty of that kind of commentary, too, and it was just as ignorant and as unfair then as it is now.

Coffin is writing to defend a similar editorial viewpoint written by one of his senior editors, Trevor Thomas, entitled “Taxes are Not the Problem.” Coffin also writes:

There is something called Godwin’s Law, which states that on an infinite timeline, any heated discussion on the Internet will inevitably result in one side likening the other side or the other side’s point, to Hitler . . . All one has to do is actually read the Communist Manifesto or Main Kampf to get the difference. But for a depressingly large number of people, that’s too much work.

Like Bill Coffin, Rose Wilder Lane also visited the Soviet Union. But she was older than Bill, who was a teenager at the time of his visit, and Lane was, evidently, better educated. When Lane returned from the Soviet Union, she wrote Discovery of Freedom.

In this book Rose Wilder Lane makes the case that that human beings, or human energy, works best under its natural, individual control. She wrote that "in demanding that men in Government be responsible for his welfare, a citizen is demanding control of his affairs by men whose only power is the use of force."

Lane said that "The use of force must progressively destroy all the protections of an American citizen's natural human rights, and eventually - if at last he protests - his life. The men in public office can no more prevent this result of their assuming, or accepting, responsibility for the citizen's welfare, than they can prevent water from seeking its own level."

Bill Coffin and Trevor Thomas don't have a grasp of the relationship between government and the use of force. They don't understand what Marxism or Socialism really are. Do you? Read Thomas Sowell's Marxism to gain a basic knowledge. [ Get it on Amazon.com Marxism: Philosophy and Economics ] I heartily recommend all of Thomas Sowell's books.

You might also enjoy Alexis de Tocquville's Democracy in America. Read the section “On the use that the Americans make of Associations in Civil Life.”

In contrasting America with Europe, de Tocqueville wrote: “Everywhere at the head of a new undertaking you see government in France and a great lord in England . . .”

He is not talking about voluntary undertakings. He is talking about the fact that behind every undertaking of government, behind every undertaking of a great lord or king, is the ability and the will to use force to compel citizens to comply.

de Tocqueville explains that this is how the Egyptians built the pyramids and how the Romans build the aqueducts. All of the resources of society - human and material - were marshaled by force into a great undertaking.

This is how the Lenin and Stalin built the Soviet Union.

At the end of the day, the reality is that behind the great undertaking of Healthcare Reform is the ability and the will of the Federal Government of the United States of America to use force to compel citizens to obey its decrees.

Public Enemy No. 1: Critics of ObamaCare

noreply@blogger.com (AmericanReader) — Wed, 31 Mar 2010 12:14:00 +0000

Connect the dots - what picture emerges?

Dot 1.

The ObamaCare Writedowns—II: Democrats blame a vast CEO conspiracy (Wall Street Journal, 3/31/2010).

"Presumably the White House is familiar with the Financial Standard Accounting Board's 1990 statement No. 106, which requires businesses to immediately restate their earnings in light of their expected future retiree health liabilities. AT&T, Deere & Co., AK Steel, Prudential and Caterpillar, among others, are simply reporting the corporate costs of the Democratic decision to raise taxes on retiree drug benefits to finance ObamaCare. . .

"Democrats have responded to these writedowns not by rethinking their policy blunder but by hauling the CEOs before Congress on April 21 for an intimidation session. The letter demanding their attendance from House barons Henry Waxman and Bart Stupak declared that 'The new law is designed to expand coverage and bring down costs, so your assertions are a matter of concern.' . . .

"The Towers Watson consulting firm estimates that the total writeoffs will be as much as $14 billion, and the 3,500 businesses that offer retiree drug benefits are by law required to report and expense their losses this quarter or next."

Dot 2.

Chávez's Gag Orders: It's a crime to criticize El Jefe. (Wall Street Journal, 3/31/2010)

"On Thursday military intelligence briefly detained the president of Globovision, the country's final remaining independent media voice. According to Attorney General Luisa Ortega, Guillermo Zuloaga is under investigation for criticizing Mr. [Hugo] Chávez at the Inter-American Press Association meeting in Aruba earlier this month for closing down independent media outlets. Mr. Zuloaga said press freedom had been lost.

"Ms. Ortega said that Mr. Zuloaga is being investigated for spreading false information and making comments 'offensive' to the president. The media owner was released but can't leave the country until the investigation is completed. He faces from three to five years in prison if convicted of making false statements."

Dot 3.

On the Correct Handling of Contradictions Among the People, by Mao Tse-tung

"In their political activities, how should our people judge whether a person's words and deeds are right or wrong? On the basis of the principles of our Constitution, the will of the overwhelming majority of our people and the common political positions which have been proclaimed on various occasions by our political parties, we consider that, broadly speaking, the criteria should be as follows:

Words and deeds should help to unite, and not divide, the people of all our nationalities.
They should be beneficial, and not harmful, to socialist transformation and socialist construction.
They should help to consolidate, and not undermine or weaken, the people's democratic dictatorship.
They should help to consolidate, and not undermine or weaken, democratic centralism.
They should help to strengthen, and not shake off or weaken, the leadership of the Communist Party.
They should be beneficial, and not harmful, to international socialist unity and the unity of the peace-loving people of the world.

"Of these six criteria, the most important are the two about the socialist path and the leadership of the Party. These criteria are put forward not to hinder but to foster the free discussion of questions among the people.

" . . . these six political criteria are applicable to all activities in the arts and sciences. In a socialist country like ours, can there possibly be any useful scientific or artistic activity which runs counter to these political criteria?"
[From the Selected Works of Mao Tse-tung, Foreign Languages Press: Peking, 1977, First Edition 1977, Vol. V, p. 388.]

Picture that is beginning to emerge:

1.
"The Revolutionary Tribunal (French: Tribunal révolutionnaire) was a court which was instituted in Paris by the Convention during the French Revolution for the trial of political offenders, and eventually became one of the most powerful engines of the Reign of Terror."

"The term show trial is a pejorative description of a type of highly public trial. The term was first recorded in the 1930s. There is a strong connotation that the judicial authorities have already determined the guilt of the defendant and that the actual trial has as its only goal to present the accusation and the verdict to the public as an impressive example and as a warning. Show trials tend to be retributive rather than correctional justice."

"A struggle session (Chinese) was a unique method used by the Mao era Communist Party of China to shape public opinion and to humiliate, to persecute and/or execute political rivals, or so-called class enemies."

"The term perp walk is an American slang term which refers to the police practice of intentionally parading an arrested suspect (or "perp", short for "perpetrator") through a public place so that the media may observe and record the event. The suspect is typically handcuffed or otherwise restrained, and is often dressed in prison garb."

2.
"In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people."
[from: The United States Declaration of Independence, July 4, 1776]

Robespierre, The Fool as Revolutionary: Inside the French Revolution

The future of reform

noreply@blogger.com (AmericanReader) — Sun, 28 Mar 2010 02:03:00 +0000

Commerce Secretary Gary Locke puts American business on notice: Play along with the President or expect to be "invited" to a struggle session.

The ObamaCare Writedowns: The corporate damage rolls in, and Democrats are shocked! (Wall Street Journal, MARCH 27, 2010): "Commerce Secretary Gary Locke took to the White House blog to write that while ObamaCare is great for business, 'In the last few days, though, we have seen a couple of companies imply that reform will raise costs for them.'. . .

". . . Meanwhile, Henry Waxman and House Democrats announced yesterday that they will haul these companies in for an April 21 hearing because their judgment 'appears to conflict with independent analyses, which show that the new law will expand coverage and bring down costs.'. . . Democrats don't like what their bill is doing in the real world, so they now want to intimidate CEOs into keeping quiet."

"A Struggle session [struggle meeting] was a unique method used by the Mao era Communist Party of China to shape public opinion and to humiliate, to persecute and/or execute political rivals, or so-called class enemies . . . The term refers to class struggle; ostensibly, the session is held ostensibly to benefit the target, by eliminating all traces of counterrevolutionary, reactionary thinking."

What is the future of reform?

Will it come as a surprise when the bad elements of society who will not "confess" (as Toyota executives did, February 2010) become the target of a government-media campaign demanding some form of Community Service or "Rehabilitation Through Labor"?

Rehabilitation through labor means: "To put it in plain language, this method calls for the state to provide bad elements with shelter, make arrangements for them, and provide them with appropriate conditions for labor . . . Thus, rehabilitation through labor involves their supporting themselves through their own labor while at the same time reforming themselves through labor. This indicates the concern and the spirit of responsibility of our socialist state for the live, labor, and future of these people. The state's handling of and arrangements for them are also designed to safeguard against damaging the free, happy, and prosperous lives of the great majority of the laboring people and the socialist order." [page 255, The criminal process in the People's Republic of China, 1949-1963: an introduction, by Jerome Alan Cohen (Harvard University Press, 1968)]

" . . . But because of the thickness of their exploiting class ideological consciousness and their deeply rooted reactionary standpoint, we must also educate them [i.e., the bad elements] in political ideology. We must explain the truth to them and show them the future of reform. We must organize them to conduct self-examination, self-criticism, mutual analysis, and censure, to develop the two-road struggle in politics and ideology, to admit their guilt and their errors, and to wipe out their reactionary ideology. In the practice of productive labor they gradually establish the determination to reform themselves, to walk the socialist road [as opposed to the capitalist road], and to be laborers in socialist society." [page 256, The criminal process in the People's Republic of China, 1949-1963: an introduction, by Jerome Alan Cohen (Harvard University Press, 1968). From Meng Chao-liang, "Preliminary Accomplishments of the Work of Rehabilitation Through Labor," FCYC, 3:47, 48-49 (1959).]

Organized Crime and ObamaCare

noreply@blogger.com (AmericanReader) — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 04:15:00 +0000

Who is connecting the dots between Organized Crime and ObamaCare?

1. ". . . it is important to note that medical identity theft is an 'insider' crime more often than not, and frequently involves health professionals at some level. One Medicaire/Medicaid fraud investigator interviewed for this report went so far as to say that the crimes she saw always had a component of a medical professional being involved. Sometimes, even the doctors are victims of identity theft; one of the mechanisms of medical identity theft in organized crime is to use a legitimate and innocent doctors’ identity to steal patient identities. . . . Organized, complex schemes have been discovered in California, Florida, and New York. In the hands of organized crime, false claims are spread out across multiple patients, and the claim amounts are small . . .(to avoid arousing suspicion.). Organized patterns of this crime tend to involve what is called “clinic takeover.” This is where a group purchases a small clinic, operates the scam out it for a few months to a year, then shuts the operation down and disappears. The clinic may or may not be staffed with real doctors. Clinic takeover is particularly insidious because patients get taken into a slick scam and may have no idea that there was every a problem. Victims of clinic takeovers may in some cases be visiting clinics where each person they see there is involved in some way with the crime." [MEDICAL IDENTITY THEFT: The Information Crime that Can Kill You, by Pam Dixon, Executive Director, World Privacy Forum (Spring 2006)]

2. "McAllen [Texas]is in Hidalgo County, which has the lowest household income in the country . . . McAllen has another distinction, too: it is one of the most expensive health-care markets in the country. Only Miami—which has much higher labor and living costs—spends more per person on health care. In 2006, Medicare spent fifteen thousand dollars per enrollee here, almost twice the national average. The income per capita is twelve thousand dollars. In other words, Medicare spends three thousand dollars more per person here than the average person earns. . . .The decision is whether we are going to reward the leaders who are trying to build a new generation of Mayos and Grand Junctions. If we don’t, McAllen won’t be an outlier. It will be our future." [The Cost Conundrum: What a Texas town can teach us about health care, by Atul Gawande (June 1, 2009)]

3. CALLER [Rob in Glen Cove, Long Island]: ". . . you can't offer these third-party system with these dollar-one benefits and expect any kind of crunching of the cost curve. I spent the first eight years of my career inside a TPA where before they linked with networks where you paid copayments, you paid cash. And as soon as they contracted with these networks where suddenly the employee could just say, well, you know, I'll just pay $15, we saw some of the stupidest claims that if you had to pay some money out of your pocket, you know they wouldn't have been done . . . when US health care and Oxford came to New York in 1993 the promise was we're going to give you physicals, we're going to keep the rates low and everyone's going to stay healthy because we're going to find the cancers ahead of time. The total opposite happened. Rates went up 600%."

RUSH: "Why?"

CALLER: "Because people had no invitation to want to be consumer oriented and the doctors realized, hey, my business has now morphed into a volume practice. . . ."

RUSH: ". . . . this is what's primarily wrong with our health care system and that is the patient and the provider and the service have no financial relationship to each other at all. The patient's ability to pay is not a factor in the pricing . . ."

4. "President Obama's attempts to ram health-care reform through an increasingly reluctant Congress are starting to resemble a really eventful episode of 'The Sopranos' . . . the Obama administration and its congressional allies are willing to use every trick in the book to get this bill passed. [Dirty tricks include: buying votes with pork and special deals; re-writing Massachusetts election laws; attempting to hold up Scott Brown's Senate seating; and an "unprecedented willingness to ignore congressional rules."] . . . Those who support the president can expect favors. . . .Those who oppose the president can expect the political equivalent of a horse head between their sheets." [Final 'reform' push: twisting arms, by MICHAEL TANNER (March 10, 2010)]

Gangster government is turning our healthcare system into a monopolistic, fraudulent medical claims racket:
Organized crime has taken over the auto industry, via the unions and the US government. Competing automakers are now subject to nationally televised Congressional hearings. These hearings are struggle meetings*. What's next?

It is becoming clear that organized crime is taking over the US healthcare industry -- the temptation to own the third-party payer cash cow is overwhelming.

* Struggle Meeting: "The most common way to kill during the [Communist Chinese] land reform was known as the struggle meeting. The CCP fabricated crimes and charged the landowners or rich farmers. The public was asked how they should be punished. Some CCP members or activists were already planted in the crowd to shout 'We should kill them!' and the landowners and rich peasants were then executed on the spot. At that time, whoever owned land in the villages was classified as a 'bully' [enemy of the people]." [Epoch Times Commentaries on the Communist Party - Part 7 (Dec 23, 2004)]

What if we ration school funds the way we will ration healthcare funds?

noreply@blogger.com (AmericanReader) — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 03:36:00 +0000

Government-funded anything creates economic inequities

1. Government-run healthcare creates economic inequities.

Taxpayer-funded healthcare creates a limited pool of money to spend. Under a government-run system, it doesn't make sense to divert a disproportionate amount of money to any one segment of the population. The elderly, especially in the last year of life, consume a disproportionate share of the government-provided healthcare dollars. Some people say this is justifies rationing.

Aged-Based Health Care Rationing: "The projected demands from a growing elderly population on a health care system that is already taxed to the breaking point, together with continual advances and availability of expensive life-extending technology, have led to troubling questions about society's ability to meet future health care demands, and to the increased tolerance of proposals for rationing. . . . In short, the costs that are incurred to prolong the life of one elderly person might be more productively directed toward the treatment of a far greater number of younger persons whose health can be ensured by less costly measures. . . . Furthermore, the advocates of rationing argue, society benefits from the increase in economic productivity that results when medical resources are diverted from an elderly, retired population to those younger members of society who are more likely to be working."

2. Government-run education creates economic inequities.

There is plenty of evidence of systemic economic inequities in the public education system.

High school sports spending grows as budgets get tighter in New Jersey, by DIANE D’AMICO, Education Writer (October 26, 2009): ". . . sports are an emotional issue for parents, who are very vocal if they believe their children's programs are threatened. But there is a larger public policy issue to address about what constitutes publicly-funded education. . . The annual athletic budgets do not include stadiums or other facilities, which are funded as capital projects."

Millions of dollars pour into high school football, by Steve Wieberg, USA TODAY (10/6/2004): [USA Today cited examples of high school districts pouring millions of dollars into new stadiums, sports facilities, and sports programs] ". . . two Texas high school districts [spent] . . . more than $20 million — apiece. . .
"Georgia power Valdosta High School just finished a $7.5 million face lift of its 10,300-seat stadium . . .
"Lafayette Jefferson High drew up a privately financed, $8 million building project that already has delivered a 6,000-seat football stadium, complete with a high-end video scoreboard . . . A 22,000-square-foot athletic complex will house locker, weight and training rooms . . ."

We cannot measure the inequity in terms of dollars, because school district budgets are not that transparent.

PRESS RELEASE: Slaughter Bill Will Force High Schools to Disclose Spending on Girls Sports: Promote Equal Athletic Opportunities for Girls [Rep. Louise M. Slaughter, Chairwoman, House Committee on Rules, Representing New York’s 28th District, Tuesday, June 16, 2009]: "The High School Athletics Accountability Act of 2009 will require that high schools report basic data on the number of female and male students in their athletic programs as well as the expenditures made for their sports teams. . . . Recent studies have shown that there is still great disparity in high school athletics programs between the opportunities given to boys and that given to girls.'"

Why not carry Rep. Slaughter's proposal to the next level?

Why not require reporting on exactly how much is spent per year on an average first grade girl, and compare that number with how much is spent per year on the high school football quarterback? On the high school basketball star? It just seems to make sense that [to paraphrase] society would benefit from the increase in economic productivity that results when education resources are diverted from an elite, athletic population to the larger population of non-athletic students who are more likely to one day be working.

State education budgets are being cut back. Few people seem to question where all that money is being spent in the first place. If we had a clear accounting, would the pragmatists who advocate age-based healthcare rationing apply the same logic to the way we divert public school funding?

I don't count my time because I'm the President

noreply@blogger.com (AmericanReader) — Fri, 26 Feb 2010 03:34:00 +0000

Comments on today's Healthcare Summit:
Human Events: "When our forefathers set forth to create a free and democratic republic, they wanted to make sure that they created checks and balances within our government to prevent one party or one body of government from having absolute power over the people. Our leaders would be wise to remember this."

Another Great Healthcare Charade by Rep. Ted Poe (02/25/2010): "As legislators are being summoned by the executive body this week, one cannot help but recognize the irony. The laws in our country originate in the legislative body, not the executive. While the president certainly has the authority to propose ideas for legislation, it is far beyond his constitutional power to create it."

The Blair House Witch Project, by George Neumayr (2.25.1): "Barack Obama . . . is the self-appointed custodian of "common ground" while not moving an inch towards it . . . Whenever Obama is forced to describe in detail what he is actually proposing, it becomes clear that his goal is not expanded coverage but expanded control."

CNN: "Jon Kyl, the Senate Republican Whip, pointed out that a major philosophical difference between the two sides is who should be in charge of the health care system -- the government or private industry."

CNN: Senate Republican Whip Jon Kyl: 'There's so much in the bills you [President Obama] have supported that puts so much control in Washington."

CNN: House Republican Whip Eric Cantor(see video): "There is a reason we voted no. It does have to do with the philosophical differences you [President Obama] pointed out. It also has to do with our fear that Washington can define what are essential health benefits."

Sick of partisan bickering?

noreply@blogger.com (AmericanReader) — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 02:06:00 +0000

People who claim to be "sick of partisan bickering" have only a superficial understanding of the lines of thought that led our Founding Fathers to sacrifice their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor. Our Founding Fathers did not think in lock-step. As our nation took shape, it became clear that there were differing ideas about how our Constitutional framework should be applied to concrete situations. Two lines of thought, like Jacob and Esau, struggled in the womb.

Then and now, "partisan bickering" is an accompaniment to the necessary struggle between those who advocate limiting government and those who advocate expanding government. It is a struggle that is at the heart of American political life, for it is a struggle between the champions of the self-reliant individual and the advocates of command and control.

During President George Washington's first term, a number of legislative proposals were brought forward. There also arose situations requiring military action. As Congress began to function, factions formed along the lines of how to interpret the Constitution: either a strict interpretation or an acceptance of implied powers.

And was there "bickering?"

According to biographer James Flexner, when President Washington went to "the Senate chamber to be present at the debate concerning a proposed treaty . . . So much time was wasted . . . by what he considered inconsequential bickering that, as he left the chamber, he was overheard to say that he would 'be damned if he ever went there again!'" [Washington: The Indispensable Man, James Flexner (1969), page 221]

In addition to allowing for open conflict of ideas and all of the frailties of human emotion that go along with it, our system of government requires a continual effort to strike a balance of power between the executive, legislative, and judicial branch of government.

It is interesting to note [again I refer to Flexner's biography, page 221] that George Washington did not attempt to influence Congressional legislative debates. He did this out of respect for the separation of powers and because he did not want to establish a Monarch-Presidency [This brings to mind the actions of Charles I of England ,who dissolved Parlaiment and imprisoned his critics].

Contrast the respect George Washington had for the separation of powers with the overweening presumption Barak Obama has for command and control.*

This month, the partisan media organ CNN tells us: "Two-thirds of Americans think that the Republicans in Congress are not doing enough to cooperate with President Obama . . . According to CNN poll numbers released Sunday, Americans overwhelmingly think that the government in this country is broken, but the public overwhelmingly holds out hope that what's broken can be fixed." [Tingle: the audacity of hope . . . .]

The partisan bickering is not America's problem.

America's problem is a President who would be King.

*see six snippets below from: "Obama calls for end to partisan bickering on jobs, health care" (ASSOCIATED PRESS: February 9, 2010)

President Obama is: "Appealing for bipartisanship."
“'The people who sent us here expect a seriousness of purpose that transcends petty politics,' Obama said"
“'We can’t afford grandstanding at the expense of actually getting something done,' Obama said. 'What I won’t consider is doing nothing.'”[see snippet 6]
“'I won’t hesitate to embrace a good idea from my friends in the minority party, but I also won’t hesitate to condemn ... what I consider to be obstinacy,' Obama said."
"He also threatened to act unilaterally to install his choices for several government vacancies that normally would require Senate confirmation, if his nominees continue to be held up."[did President Bush do this when the Senate held up his confirmations?]
On the infamous health care bill: "Obama said he’s willing to start from scratch but that both sides must give ground. He also said that the final bill must meet his goals, such as ending abusive insurance industry practices, reducing costs and expanding the affordability of and access to coverage."

Abortion Clinic Tricks of the Trade: ground-breaking hidden-camera investigation

noreply@blogger.com (AmericanReader) — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 19:38:00 +0000

The media celebs love to dish it out . . .
TRICKS OF THE TRADE: TRANSCRIPT, By Chris Hansen, Correspondent, NBC News updated 11:03 a.m. ET, Wed., April 23, 2008 This story originally aired Dateline NBC on April 13, 2008.
Hansen: "Dateline is about to show how some insurance agents can take advantage of you. Join us in a ground-breaking hidden-camera investigation, as we go behind the scenes to uncover the techniques they use:
inside sales meetings -- where we catch the questionable pitches;
inside training sessions -- where we discover agents being taught to scare seniors; and, finally,
inside senior's homes to reveal the tricks some agents use to puff their credentials to make a sale.
You're about to see what happens when we catch them in the act."

But they can't take it.
You're about to see what happens when WE catch THEM in the act . . .

See: Daily Media Bias Reports

See: NewsBusters

Climate Change Policy - Time for a Change, We Hope

noreply@blogger.com (AmericanReader) — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 03:59:00 +0000

Global Warming hoax unraveling in time for Copenhagen 2009   "In 2012 the Kyoto Protocol to prevent climate changes and global warming runs out. . . This is a 'crisis' claim many of the leading scientists and proponents including Al Gore and Barrack Obama, of global warming, and climate change. . . . Senator Jim Inhofe of Oklahoma is planning on calling an investigation into the e-mails and collusion between global warming researchers. [Inhofe said,] 'Cause this thing is serious, you think about the literally millions of dollars that have been thrown away on some of this stuff that they came out with.'"

The old Piltdown man routine - works every time . . .

Piltdown Man   "The Piltdown hoax is perhaps the most famous paleontological hoax in history. It has been prominent for two reasons: the attention paid to the issue of human evolution, and the length of time (more than 40 years) that elapsed from its discovery to its full exposure as a forgery."

Who Was Responsible for the Hoax?   "One notable suspect is author Arthur Conan Doyle, who lived near Dawson. 'Some still believe that, as an ardent spiritualist, Doyle wanted to discredit the science profession by faking the evidence of something they wanted to believe in to prove they knew less than they claimed,' writes the BBC, provides a list of the main suspects."

Gun control means people control

noreply@blogger.com (AmericanReader) — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 12:44:00 +0000

"And I on the opposite shore will be,
Ready to ride and spread the alarm
Through every Middlesex village and farm,
For the country folk to be up and to arm."

Paul Revere's Ride by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow

Bloomington, Indiana Herald-Times

Treats Law-Abiding Gun Owners like Registered Sex Offenders!

Please Contact the Bloomington Herald-Times!

On November 30, 2009, the Bloomington Herald-Times made the following announcement:

“This week, HeraldTimesOnline.com will launch its new gun permit database. You’ll be able to search gun permit records by county, city or town and street.”

The Herald-Times has begun receiving calls and emails, and their response is a defiant defense of their online gun permit database.

Anyone who visits the newspaper website will be able to search the number of permits on a given street or neighborhood. Although at this point the names and house numbers are not listed, the newspaper’s website treats law-abiding Indiana gun owners like sex offenders on a searchable database.

It is NRA's firm belief that there is no public good served by the publishing or cataloguing private citizens’ gun ownership information, and that more harm is done by such an action. Law-abiding Hoosiers should not be subjected to the same treatment as sex offenders, and if the newspaper won’t listen to their constituents and customers, then NRA Members and Indiana gun owners should send a financial message by cancelling their subscriptions to the Bloomington Herald-Times.

Please contact the Bloomington Herald-Times to respectfully voice your displeasure at the irresponsible action the newspaper has made.

Scott Schurz, Sunday Hoosier Times/Editor-in-Chief
(812) 331-4250
Sschurz@heraldt.com
E. Mayer Maloney Jr., Publisher
(812) 331-4251
Mmaloney@heraldt.com
Bob Zaltsberg, Editor
(812) 331-4364
rzaltsberg@heraldt.com

From www.NRAILA.org National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action

Battling Tanks and Troops with Small Arms

A compilation of various clips from the UPI and Warner Pathé newsreels regarding the 1956 Hungarian Revolution. This film was shown by the Oregon Magyar Baráti Közösség http://www.mbk.org in Portland, Oregon during the commemoration of the 50th anniversary of the 1956 Hungarian Revolution.

For, borne on the night-wind of the Past,
Through all our history, to the last,
In the hour of darkness and peril and need,
The people will waken and listen to hear
The hurrying hoof-beats of that steed,
And the midnight message of Paul Revere.

Paul Revere's Ride by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow

Why Europeans hate US

noreply@blogger.com (AmericanReader) — Sun, 29 Nov 2009 00:37:00 +0000

"Big dreams are mobilizers of the human spirit. Think of the ancestors who left their homelands penniless, scorned, victimized, or persecuted for their faith or ideas. Some of them had to marshal the courage to cross an unknown sea to a new land. They had to start over. They heard people saying, "You'll never make it." But they did anyway. And many of those who arrived on our shores endured harrowing times beyond imagining.
"Through darkness and uncertainty, what kept many of them alive and carried them through were big dreams: lss of riches than of freedom for themselves and their loved ones. In their own unique ways and through the most trying circumstances, they held to great goals, and in so doing they discovered a central source of human capacity." [page 137]
The Other 90% by Robert K. Cooper

"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she with silent lips.
"Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
The New Colossus by Emma Lazarus (1883)

AmericanReader:
The dependent-minded peoples of this planet
hate US because of who we are:

We are those who want to take responsibility
for our lives and to live free.

"They said, 'You'll never make it.' But we did anyway."

We are the worst their civilizations had to offer.

And we did anyway.
How could we?
How dare we?
That's something they will never understand.

The culture of dependency

created by government spending

can never fully compensate

for the wealth and personal initiative

that are destroyed by the taxes and controls

imposed to pay for that spending.

Republicans - stop pandering to the RINO Fifth Column

noreply@blogger.com (AmericanReader) — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 17:26:00 +0000

A fifth column is a group of people who clandestinely undermine a larger group, such as a nation, from within, to the aid of an external enemy.

The stupid party by Doctor Zero (November 2, 2009) ". . . . the obvious truth: voting for actual conservatives is the only way to clear away the Obama malaise. . . . Every district presents different political challenges, and there are places where both parties are compelled to run candidates who deviate from their core philosophy. The degree of deviance is the issue… particularly for the Republicans, whose core philosophy runs counter to the collectivist momentum of the past century. . . .

"Meanwhile, the Republicans keep running “moderates” [i.e., useful idiots] who prove to be very useful to the Democrats… Too much of the Republicans’ “Stupid Party” strategy is based on the mechanics of getting people with little elephants on their campaign signs elected. . . . A successful Republican Party doesn’t have to be ideologically rigid, but it should insist on candidates who possess an intellectual foundation of conservative theory, and the ability to explain it . . ."

RINO: Republican In Name Only - The label is usually acquired because a politician's political actions, policies, positions on certain issues or voting records are considered to be at variance with core Republican beliefs or Republican partisanship.

-------------------------------------------------

Hold Republican candidates accountable:

Republican Party - WHAT WE BELIEVE:

We're fortunate to live in America

The Republican Party believes that the United States has been blessed with a unique set of individual rights and freedoms available to all.

You can be what you are, and become what you are capable of becoming

The Republican Party is inspired by the power and ingenuity of the individual to succeed through hard work, family support and self-discipline.

Helping those around you is worthwhile

The Republican Party believes in the value of voluntary giving and community support over taxation and forced redistribution.

Small government is a better government for the people

The Republican Party, like our nation's founders, believes that government must be limited so that it never becomes powerful enough to infringe on the rights of individuals.

You know what to do with your money better than government

The Republican Party supports low taxes because individuals know best how to make their own economic and charitable choices.

Free markets keep people free

The Republican Party is supportive of logical business regulations that encourage entrepreneurs to start more businesses so more individuals can enjoy the satisfaction and fruits of self-made success.

Our Armed Forces defend and protect our democracy

The Republican Party is committed to preserving our national strength while working to extend peace, freedom and human rights throughout the world.

The Republican Party is guided by these principles as it develops solutions to the challenges facing America.

Why are you a Republican?

Make your voice heard.

Source: official GOP website

-------------------------------------------------

Memo to Republican Leaders - from local to national:
Stop Pandering to the RINO Fifth Column.
It's time for a change.
Identify and support candidates who understand and can explain conservative beliefs. See these websites:

Republican Study Committee - Caucus of House Conservatives

2010 Races - Save the GOP

Senate Conservatives Fund - Electing Conservatives to the United States Senate

Bloodshed and jihad required to establish Imam Mahdi's world-wide rule

noreply@blogger.com (AmericanReader) — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 05:08:00 +0000

CAIR speaker to Muslims: OK to attack Fort Bragg. Exhorts Islamic faithful to target planes carrying '82nd Airborne' (on WorldNetDaily, November 11, 2009)

Radical Islamic cleric Zaid Shakir, a frequent guest speaker at CAIR [Council on American-Islamic Relations] events, tells his Muslim audiences: "Jihad is physically fighting the enemies of Islam to protect and advance the religion of Islam. This is jihad." Longtime CAIR advisory board member and chief fundraiser Siraj Wahhaj echoes his friend Shakir's interpretation of jihad. "If we go to war, brothers and sisters – and one day we will, believe me – that's why you're commanded [to fight in] jihad," the imam has told his flock in Brooklyn. "When Allah demands us to fight, we're not stopping and nobody's stopping us."

Imam Mahdi

According to the Shia and Sunni versions of the Islamic eschatology the Mahdi ("Guided One") is the prophesied redeemer of Islam who will stay on earth . . . before the coming of the . . . "Day of the Resurrection" or "Day of the Standing".

Said Larijani: "The time of the supremacy of one religion over another is not over, and Islam is promised final victory. The Islamic Republic and other Islamic governments need to prepare for the Mahdi's governance by promoting justice and development and, although we have long-distance missiles, we are not war-like." Larijani clearly believes that history is not over. And in a clear rebuke to those adherents of Mahdism who see it as purely peaceful, Larijani quoted Imam Muhammad Baqir, a famous scholar from early Islamic history, who said that "there must be bloodshed and jihad to establish Imam Mahdi's rule." (from The Importance of Being Mahdist: Among Iran's Twelvers, by Timothy R. Furnish, 09/08/2008)

The enemy of my enemy is my friend

noreply@blogger.com (AmericanReader) — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 15:25:00 +0000

Media 'Cringe' That Mass Killer a Muslim Since It 'Inflames' Right Wing, 'That Makes It Much Worse'

Newsweek's Evan Thomas: I cringe that he's a Muslim. I mean, because it inflames all the fears. I think he's probably just a nut case. But with that label attached to him, it will get the right wing going and it just -- I mean these things are tragic, but that makes it much worse. (from Media Cringe, by Brent Baker November 7, 2009)

A Radical Islamist named Smith

Good Morning America’s Diane Sawyer repeated a concern from Thursday’s World News: "...We heard Martha Raddatz say last night that the wife of a soldier said ‘I wish his name had been Smith,’ so no one would have a reflexive question about [a religious motive]." (from ABC’s Diane Sawyer Repeats by Scott Whitlock, November 6, 2009)

Barak Smith Obama cautions against drawing quick conclusions

Barack Obama cautioned a stunned public on Friday against drawing quick conclusions on a shooting rampage by an officer at a Texas military base that killed 13 people. . . . Major Nidal Malik Hasan, shouted the Muslim declaration “Allahu Akbar” – God is great – as he opened fire. (from Call for calm by Sheila McNulty and Harvey Morris, November 6, 2009)

Calm Down. Use proper post-terrorist attack etiquette
THEME: In the Age of Obama (as opposed to those Bush years), American can be expected to behave after terrorist attacks and not overreact. From USA Today: "‘We haven't heard of anything violent, which is a good thing,’ said Ibrahim Hooper, spokesman for the Council on American-Islamic Relations, a Muslim advocacy group. ‘It shows our society has matured in how it responds to these incidents.’" (from Bozell Column: Fort Hood Horror, by Brent Bozell, November 10, 2009)

In June 2001, [Ibrahim "Doug"] Hooper helped organize a “sit-in” where a dozen leaders of various American Muslim groups demonstrated outside the U.S. State Department. American Muslim Council Director Ali Ramadan Abu Zakouk used the occasion to declare that suicide-bombing attacks on civilian targets were a “God-given right” for Muslims. When Hooper later was asked whether Zakouk's assertion could be interpreted as a defense of terrorism, he claimed that he “did not hear” the statement. Videotape footage chronicling the event, however, clearly showed Hooper standing only a few feet away from Zakouk as he made the comments.

The enemy of my enemy is my friend

The phrase the enemy of my enemy is my friend is a proverb that advances the concept that someone who is the enemy of your enemy is therefore your friend. It further means that because two parties have a common enemy, one can use the other to advance their goals. . . . In foreign policy, it's a doctrine commonly used to interact with a significant enemy through an intermediary rather than through direct confrontation.

Healthcare Reform is a Tax Issue at heart

noreply@blogger.com (AmericanReader) — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 13:08:00 +0000

The power to tax is the power to enslave

"A slave is a person who does not own his own labor. . . An income tax is different from other taxes. An income tax gives government a claim to your labor, just as a slave owner had a claim to the slave's labor. A slave who withheld his labor was likely to be punished. He would be put on short rations or whipped. If one of us today withholds from the IRS, the punishment is more severe -- several years in prison."
"Tax Slaves Existing for Government", by Paul Craig Roberts (January 2, 2001)

This Health-Care Reform Might Tax Us to Death Investors are going to get taxed. You are going to get taxed. It's that simple. The people without health insurance -- the very people whom this is supposed to help -- are going to get taxed too. And millions of them will be left without insurance (even though they have to pay higher taxes). . . . According to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, the top marginal federal-income tax rate will be 45%. If you take state taxes into account, it's off the charts. According to the nonpartisan Tax Foundation, if you include state income taxes, people in 39 out of 50 states will be above the 50% tax rate. ("Ahead of the Curve" by Donald Luskin, July 17, 2009)

Writs-of-asistance case, 1671
"Jeremiah Gridley . . . was acting as the king's attorney, and he opened the case with the king's arguments. . . .Which was more important, protecting the liberty of an individual or collecting the taxes effeciently? Gathering public money must take precedence." [page 21]

[James Otis represented the Boston merchants opposing the writs-of-assistance] "To John Adams, [James] Otis rose in the hall like a flame of fire . . . What was Otis' argument? He claimed to be doing nothing more than applying a lesson from the [legal] textbooks. Coke's compilation of English law in the previous century had often challenged the king's power and called upon judges to nullify any act that went against an Englishman's common rights, or against reason, or was repugnant or impossible to enforce. Otis took Coke as his authority and made a strong case that any law was void if it voilated England's constitution." [page 22]

"No other creature on earth [Otis argued] could legitimately challenge a man's right to his life, his liberty, and his property. That principle, that unalterable law, took precedence--here Otis was answering Gridley directly--even over the survival of the state." [page 23]
Patriots: the men who started the American Revolution, by A.J. Langguth (1988)

Repeal of the Stamp Act, 1766

[William Pitt, speaking on the House of Commons floor] "Today's debate over [the repeal of the Stamp Act] was more important than anything the House had faced since it confirmed the Bill of Rights nearly a hundred years ago. In this present case, said Pitt, the colonists shared the natural rights of mankind and the peculiar privileges of Englishmen. . . . America's assemblies had always possessed a constitutional right to give and to grant their own money. 'They would have been slaves if they had not enjoyed it.' Pitt said. He would never admit to the justice of taxing America internally, he added, until she enjoyed representation." [page 84-85] [Note: the colonists were NOT seeking representation.]

"'I have been charged,' [Pitt] began, 'with giving birth to sedition in America. I rejoice that America has resisted. . . . The gentleman asks, When were the colonies emancipated? But I desire to know when they were made slaves. . . . The Americans have . . . been driven to madness by injustice. Will you punish them for the madness you have occasioned?'" [page 85]

"During the debate over the repeal, Benjamin Franklin, Pennsylvania's agent in London, had gone to the Commons to answer any questions about the mood in the colonies. . . . A member asked whether British soldiers could enforce the Stamp Act. Franklin replied that they could not. 'What are they to do? They cannot force a man to take stamps who chooses to do without them. They will not find a rebellion. They may indeed make one.'" [page 86]
Patriots: the men who started the American Revolution, by A.J. Langguth (1988)

Foolish Foxy Fawning Newt Gingrich

noreply@blogger.com (AmericanReader) — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 22:14:00 +0000

Foolish Newt Gingrich
Michelle Malkin: "Newt Gingrich, who foolishly stood with Scozzafava until she threw herself under the bus over the weekend, piously invoked Reagan and condemned the extreme 'purism' of unruly conservatives who wouldn’t keep quiet about Scozzafava’s radical Left agenda.

"But conservatives are not demanding 'purity.' They are simply abiding by Reagan’s own wise counsel in 1975: 'A political party cannot be all things to all people. It must represent certain fundamental beliefs which must not be compromised to political expediency, or simply to swell its numbers.'”

Foxy Newt Gingrich

Newt Gingrich hints at Third Party by 2012: "He predicted the rise of a third party by 2012 if Republicans don’t get their act together." On Fox News (March 11, 2009)

Newt Gingrich said: "Look, I think there are a lot of Republicans who've bought into the system. I've said for a long time the two parties in America aren't Republican and Democrat, the two parties in America are a party of big government and political elites and a party of the American people, which is very different.

It's the Ronald Reagan party. And sadly, a number of Republicans belong to the right wing of the party of big government. They're quite happy to be taken care of. They don't mind getting all the pork they can. And they've become, frankly, part of the problem, not part of the solution."

Fawning Newt Gingrich

Newt: "Republican leaders in New York must recognize that Mike Long and the Conservative Party in that state have to be consulted before decisions are made. The national conservative movement is a force that has to be recognized and respected.

"I certainly heard from enough friends to know that my decision to support the unanimous vote of the 11 New York county chairs was very unpopular with conservative activists.

"In New York, after two failed special elections, it is clear the state party has to fight to change the election law so there are primaries in special elections. The insider nominating process is simply unacceptable to grassroots populists and guarantees a sense of illegitimacy.

"However, all of us who oppose the Left need to realize that civil war within the GOP will reelect Barack Obama and make Nancy Pelosi speaker for life."

"A Bad Day for the Obama White House A Good Day for the American People" by Newt Gingrich (11/04/2009)

Reforming the Re-election Machine

noreply@blogger.com (AmericanReader) — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 19:39:00 +0000

He was for Extending Term Limits

after he was against them.

Excerpts from Bloomberg wins 3rd term as NYC Mayor: . . . And New Yorkers were angry that Bloomberg reversed his long-held support for term limits last year and persuaded the City Council, in a matter of weeks, to extend the law so he could run for a third term.

Thompson [Bloomberg's opponent] sought to stoke that resentment, but it was not enough. He did not make a strong, separate case for why he should be elected.

Many Thompson supporters said Tuesday that term limits was the single reason why they voted for him.
Jason Gerald supported Bloomberg in 2005 but voted for the Democrat this year.

"I didn't like the way he overturned term limits," said Gerald, a retired police officer. "He thinks he's the only person who can lead this city."

When Bloomberg announced last year his intention to change the law and run again, he said it was because the city needed his financial expertise to get through the economic meltdown.

An aristocracy of money

Excerpts from Bloomberg wins 3rd term as NYC Mayor: The mayor was able to target each voter with unique messages using a database managed by Ken Strasma, who was President Barack Obama's national targeting director in 2008.

The data was crucial not only in shaping the campaign's messages, but also for Election Day operations as the campaign tracked voter turnout in every election district. Field workers were rerouted to different areas in Queens to knock on doors and get voters to the polls . . ."

= = =

The god that failed (Richard Crossman, ed.). As written by Andre Gide: [page 165] Man cannot be reformed from the outside--a change of heart is necessary--and I feel anxious when I observe all the . . . old layers of society forming again--if not precisely social classes, in at least a new kind of aristocracy, and not an aristocracy of intellect or ability, but an aristocracy of right-thinkers and conformists. In the next generation it may well be an aristocracy of money.

"Real Term Limits: Now More Than Ever", by Doug Bandow (Cato Institute)
"The nation's Founders strongly believed in rotation in office. They left term limits out of the Constitution because they did not foresee that politics would become a career for so many people. Short term limits would remedy that mistake. Nothing is more important today than reversing the pernicious rise of a professional political class."

Reform Congress NOW!

Socialist policy is abhorrent to the ideas of freedom

noreply@blogger.com (AmericanReader) — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 13:05:00 +0000

We face an Irrepressible Conflict between Bureaucratic Rule and Self-governance

These are "two radically different political systems; the one resting on the basis of servile or slave labor, the other on the basis of voluntary labor of freemen."

1.

“ . . . a socialist policy is abhorrent to the British ideas of freedom. Socialism is inseparably interwoven with totalitarianism and the abject worship of the state. It will prescribe for every one where they are to work, what they are to work at, where they may go and what they may say. Socialism is an attack on the right to breathe freely. No socialist system can be established without a political police. They would have to fall back on some form of Gestapo, no doubt very humanely directed in the first instance."

Winston Churchill, in an electoral broadcast prior to the British general election of 1945

"Horace Greeley, editor of the New York Tribune, later remarked that the Kansas-Nebraska Act created more abolitionists in two months than William Lloyd Garrison had in twenty years. Anti-Nebraska political organizations spontaneously emerged all over the North. Eventually picking the label 'Republican Party,' the new antislavery coalition dwarfed from the outset its two precursors, the Free Soil and Liberty Parties.

Some Republican leaders, like William Seward, were former Whigs. Others, like [Salmon P.] Chase, had been Democrats or Libertymen. When the 1854 congressional elections returned to office only seven of the fifty-four northern Democrats who had voted for Douglas's [Nebraska-Kansas] act, the overwhelming Democratic control of the House was overthrown. It was one of the most astonishing political turnabouts in American history." [page 107]

"One year prior to [John] Brown's raid, Seward had delivered a speech in upstate New York spelling out the Republican Party's ideology, with its veneration of free labor and denigration of slave labor. 'Our country is a theater, which exhibits, in full operation, two radically different political systems; the one resting on the basis of servile or slave labor, the other on the basis of voluntary labor of freemen. . . Hitherto, the two systems have existed in different states, but side by side within the American Union."

The Union was moving, however, from a loose confederation of states to a consolidated nation. "Thus, these antagonistic systems are continually coming into closer contact, and collision results.'

"This speech branded the phrase 'irrepressible conflict' onto the public consciousness, as the widening sectional estrangement now imparted a chillingly literal interpretation to the New York Senator [William Seward]'s words. 'Shall I tell you what this collision means? They who think that it is accidental, unnecessary, the work of interested or fanatical agitators, and therefore ephemeral, mistake the case altogether. It is an irrepressible conflict between opposing and enduring forces, and it means that the United States must and will, sooner or later, become either entirely a slaveholding nation, or entirely a free-labor nation.'" [page 122]

Emancipating Slaves, Enslaving Free Men: A History of the American Civil War

by Jeffrey Rogers Hummel (1996)

Socialism In socialism, Max Weber saw acceleration of the rationalisation started in capitalism. As a critic of socialism, he warned that placing the economy entirely in the state's bureaucratic control would result in an "iron cage of future bondage".

"It may also be difficult for our own age to appreciate the degree to which dynastic rulers in earlier times [and the collectivist-minded rulers for our own time] acted in accordance with the belief that their sovereign authority, which might well be exercised without much in the way of modification through processes of popular representation, was actually divinely ordained and hence of unquestionable legitimacy." [The European Revolution of 1848]

"THERE is nothing new in planned and controlled economy. Human beings have lived under various forms of that social security for six thousand years. The new thing is the anarchy of individualism, which has been operating freely only in this country for a century and a half."
Give Me Liberty
by Rose Wilder Lane (1954)

Reform Congress NOW

noreply@blogger.com (AmericanReader) — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 12:46:00 +0000

Congressional Reform

"Limiting terms, limiting the length of Congress' yearly sessions, and limiting the number (and the tenure as well) of staffers are all parts of the package [of reforming Congress]. Any one of the three can be implemented with success, but for the legislature to be wrested from the ruling class [of career politicians] and returned to the hands of the citizenry [that would be YOU], all three must be in effect." [page 81]
The Ruling Class: Inside the Imperial Congress (Abridged)
by Eric Felten (The Heritage Foundation, 1993)

Prescription for Congressional Reform
1. Limit Terms
2. Limit Sessions
3. Cut Staff
4. Limit Spending and Balance the Budget
5. Enhance the President's Role in Setting the Budget
6. Allow a Line-Item Veto
7. Make Congress Obey the Laws
8. Apply Freedom of Information
9. End the Constituent Service Racket

10. Establish Fair and Open Procedures

11. Cut Committees

The Ruling Class: Inside the Imperial Congress (Abridged)
[This list of eleven reforms is taken from Chapter 6.]
by Eric Felten (The Heritage Foundation, 1993)

Three more resources to help us Reform Congress NOW:

An Imperial Congress
Liberty, Order, and Justice: An Introduction to the Constitutional Principles of American Government
by James McClellan [1989] Online Library of Liberty

Obama Peace Prize Win Has Americans Asking Why?

noreply@blogger.com (AmericanReader) — Sat, 10 Oct 2009 18:19:00 +0000

Rather than recognizing Obama for
"not being George W. Bush",

the 2009 Nobel Peace prize appears intended

to support initiatives that have yet to bear

OIL . . .

Don't look here:
A Wicked and Ignorant Award: How Barack Obama could help redeem the Norwegian Nobel Committee's grievous mistake. by PEGGY NOONAN (October 9, 2009) This is an award for not being George W. Bush.

What Are They Smoking In Oslo? A prize for not being George W. Bush. by JOHN FUND (OCTOBER 9, 2009)

Most Embarrassing Moment: The Norwegian Nobel Committee makes President Obama look ridiculous. by JAMES TARANTO (October 9, 2009) . . . that seems a direct rebuke to now-former president George W. Bush

Look HERE:

Oil-for-Norway
The Government Pension Fund - Global (Norwegian: Statens pensjonsfond - Utland) is a fund into which the surplus wealth produced by Norwegian petroleum income is deposited. . . . It is currently the largest pension fund in Europe . . . . the Government Pension Fund - Norway is a key stock owner in many large Norwegian companies. [The fund supports the Norwegian Welfare State--and every one of the cronies who benefit from management of the fund.]

The economy of Norway is a developed Mixed economy with heavy state-ownership in strategic areas of the economy.

Oil Production of Norway: historical figures (brown squares) compared with a Hubbert curve calculated with a total production of 32 billion barrels, peak in the year 2000 and 1/b parameter = 6.5 (his parameter describe initial growth / final decline rate). Norway knew a fast, intensive oil exploration, fields were produced as fast as possible after their discovery and nothing came to disrupt production. These three factors explain the good superposition between historical data and model. According to the model, 11 billion barrels are still to be produced. The reserves announced by Norway, which has a single quality of information in the world, are 10 billion barrels. The future collapse of the production appears inescapable, except if a new province (thus not included in this curve) is found.

A Wicked and Ignorant Award: by Peggy Noonan (October 9, 2009) "This is an award for sharing the basic political sentiments and assumptions of the members of the [Norwegian Nobel Prize] committee."

Obama: Nobel Peace Prize is "call to action"

noreply@blogger.com (AmericanReader) — Sat, 10 Oct 2009 01:42:00 +0000

Obama said he viewed the decision less as a recognition of his own accomplishments and more as "a call to action."

Nobel Committee Pulls Oil Plug on Democracy by Dr. Walid Phares (09 Oct 2009)   What is the strategy behind the decision to grant this particular trophy to the sitting American president? . . . To answer this, we simply can connect the dots between the statements made by the grantor and the grantee. . . . The alternative choices are arguable, but this particular gesture isn't about past achievements, as the committee and the recipient have ccurred. It is about supporting a specific policy, which has been enunciated firmly during 2009 and is now being grounded in layers of moral recognition. . . . This honored policy is to ensure that there will be no more American intervention overseas to provoke democratic change, let alone revolutions, particularly in the so-called "Muslim world." . . . . The real message of the prize's grantors is deeper than what it shyly states: You will be honored if you keep your hands off our regimes and ideologies. Thus this recognition is not really about abstract notions or about climate change. It is a message from the authoritarians in the greater Middle East, via their economic partners in the West, to the United States, to quit pushing for democracy and intervening for human rights; as the previous administration said it would, but in fact failed to deliver. . . . The Nobel Peace Prize Committee is based in Norway, which cooperates with OPEC and often has joint ventures with its members. The latter is obviously controlled by the hard-core authoritarian members of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) and the Arab League. These regimes, regardless of their bilateral disputes (such as Wahabis and Khomeinists), have one common ground: Oppose the rise of democracy, their worst enemy, in their own midst. . . . . So, between the lines, no future U.S. actions will be in favor of oppressed peoples if they happen to be living in Dar el Islam. The war in Iraq will be ended, regardless of Iran, Syria, and the Jihadists' future interventions there. And there will be no escalation in the battlefield of Afghanistan, if only somehow the "ruthless adversary would stop threatening the United States." . . . Here we go: The "other side" announced its agenda for America, and the latter accepted. Surely it is nice to receive a prominent prize, but it is important to see beyond our own nose. The hope is that the price for such an honor won't be a human rights catastrophe for the underdogs in the "Muslim world." [Dr. Walid Phares is a senior fellow at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies ]

Will Obama go after Iran's oil revenue? by Callum James (09/29/09) In response to Iran's recent display of contempt towards the West by releasing video footage of missiles being launched in the desert, Washington have expressed real intent on curbing Iran's continued disobedience. President Obama has told Iran that if it does not comply with international demands to come clean about its nuclear program, he will push for new sanctions targeting its energy, financial and telecommunications sectors.. . . Going after Iran's ability to profit from its vast energy reserves is the key aspect to the expected new sanctions - as Iran "is not yet a nuclear power, but an oil power", according to CBS News' national security correspondent David Martin. This is the only real way to hurt Iran, by cutting its ability to export oil at substantial levels you are taking the life blood of Iran's future.

Norwegian Firm Says Will Boost Recovery Rates in Iran Oilfields By 28 Per Cent (5 November 2005)
Elsewhere in [the vice president of Norway's Norsk Hydro Oil Company] comments he pointed to the Norsk Hydro Oil Company's 170m dollars investment in Iran's oil sector and stated that if the exploratory project in Iran's Anaran Oilfield leads to the development and operational phases the Norwegian company will invest about one billion dollars in the project, Iranian Students News Agency (ISNA) reported.

Iran and Norway to boost oil and gas trade   Iran and Norway inked a Memorandum of Understanding in Tehran on 27th May [2003]. The MOU is setting the framework for a bilateral oil and gas cooperation between the two states. . . . Addressing the signing ceremony, Iranian Petroleum Minister Bijan Zangeneh said that the MOU is the second of its kind inked by the two countries over the past 2½ years. The move, he added, shows progress in Tehran-Oslo bilateral cooperation. . . . Describing his talks with the visiting Norwegian Minister of Petroleum and Energy, Enra Steensnaes as “fruitful and constructive,”. He urged Norwegian companies to avail of the ample opportunities for cooperation with the Iranian petroleum sector. . . . Statoil, Norway's national oil corporation, has been participating in Iran's oil and gas exploration and research projects in recent years.
Q and A with Norwegian Oil Minster, HE Einar Steensnes:
A: We are very satisfied with the opportunity that statoil’s got in, South Pars 6, 7 and 8 Projects. As I understand there are further possibilities and opportunities for Statoil because this is a very big gas field, one of the worlds largest. I have learned today that there are possible also to have a future activity for Statoil in the field and that is very satisfying for me.
Q: How do you see the prospect of future cooperation between Norway and Iran in oil and gas sector?
A: In oil and gas sector I am convinced that there will be a closer cooperation, because Iran is now opening for more international cooperation and we have very interesting competence and experience by Norwegian supply industry as well as Norwegian companies. I know that Iranian authorities and the ministry are very interested in investments. And the NIOC also stated that they were very much interested in participating with Norwegian enterprises in the Iranian oil and gas sector. On the other side I very much want to invite Iranian companies to be active in Norway. They are welcomed, if they are living up to some pre-qualification of course along with the other companies. But I am confident that they should also have enough opportunity in Norway. So, the extent of cooperation in the oil and gas sector I think will be substantial in the years to come.
Q: You know that U.S. has warned against cooperation with Iran. Aren’t you worried about cooperation with Iran?
A: No, I am not. Because I think there are different attitudes, different practices and policies on this. But Norway favours cooperation as a prerequisite for better understanding and we think trade and economic development are positive steps to a better understanding between countries. So we don’t favour embargo or sanctions. We favour open channels in the economic field as well as in culture. And we hope this will lead to a better understanding between our two countries.

Avoiding the Oil CurseWhat Norway can teach Iraq. by Daniel Gross (Oct. 29, 2004)   When it comes to oil—and investing—it's easy to overlook Norway. While political and social upheavals in major oil producers—Venezuela, Nigeria, Russia, the Persian Gulf—dominate headlines, Norway since 1971 has quietly been pumping massive quantities of crude from the icy waters of the North Sea. Today, Norway is the world's third-largest oil exporter, behind only Saudi Arabia and Russia, and the seventh-largest oil producer. The Norwegians have proven that oil doesn't have to be an obstacle to stability and long-term growth. . . . .Cash flow from the government's petroleum activities—the state owns 81 percent of the aptly named Statoil—is funneled into the [Petroleum Fund of Norway]. . . . But the huge balances mean Norway can happily continue to be heavily socialist without confronting the problems that its Euro-neighbors to the south face—unemployment, high inflation, and huge national debts.. . . .In Norway, the sudden increase in oil prices has meant larger inflows to the fund and enhanced long-term welfare for its citizens. That's not how it goes down in other big oil producing countries. . . . The Norwegian economy remains heavily dependent on oil (though much less than the Saudi economy): Petroleum industries account for about 17 percent of Norwegian GDP and a hefty 45 percent of exports.

Norway's Oil Industry and the Partitioning of Iraq by Reidar Visser (7 December 2005) On 29 November 2005, the tiny Norwegian oil company DNO announced the start-up of drilling activities near Zakho in northern Iraq, under a deal signed with Kurdish regional authorities in the summer of 2004. . . . because of DNO’s actions, Kurdish politicians will feel encouraged in their ongoing efforts to secure bilateral deals with foreign investors – a strategy they have been pursuing ever since 2003. . . There will be claims that the proceedings of the Kurds and DNO testify to the growing impotence of Baghdad, and that developments show how the very idea of an Iraqi national community is on the wane. Comments along these lines, directed specifically at DNO’s activities in Iraq, are already to be found in Iraqi discussion groups on the internet. . . . Why should a Norwegian company have taken the lead among those intervening in an already complex Iraqi political process? . . . Whatever the reason, it surely is a great disappointment that Norway’s first venture off the beaten track in Iraq has been undertaken in a manner that will do nothing but muddle the complicated ongoing process of transition.

Let's get our economy back on track: Work harder, live frugally

noreply@blogger.com (AmericanReader) — Sat, 03 Oct 2009 05:18:00 +0000

Sometimes on the slope leading to the top of the quarry, when [Boxer] braced his muscles against the weight of some vast boulder, it seemed that nothing kept him on his feet except the will to continue. At such times his lips were seen to form the words, "I will work harder"; he had no voice left.
Animal Farm, by George Orwell (1944)

I will work harder. . .
But the luxuries of which Snowball had once taught the animals to dream, the stalls with electric light and hot and cold water, and the three-day week, were no longer talked about. Napoleon had denounced such ideas as contrary to the spirit of Animalism. The truest happiness, he said, lay in working hard and living frugally.
Somehow it seemed as though the farm had grown richer without making the animals themselves any richer-except, of course, for the pigs and the dogs. Perhaps this was partly because there were so many pigs and so many dogs. It was not that these creatures did not work, after their fashion.
There was, as Squealer was never tired of explaining, endless work in the supervision and organisation of the farm. Much of this work was of a kind that the other animals were too ignorant to understand . . . This was of the highest importance for the welfare of the farm, Squealer said. But still, neither pigs nor dogs produced any food by their own labour; and there were very many of them, and their appetites were always good. . . .
And yet the animals never gave up hope. More, they never lost, even for an instant, their sense of honour and privilege in being members of Animal Farm. . . . None of the old dreams had been abandoned. The Republic of the Animals which Major had foretold, when the green fields of England should be untrodden by human feet, was still believed in. Some day it was coming . . .
Animal Farm, by George Orwell (1944)

I will live frugally. . .
A Frugal United States President: What better way to start out the new year, but with the swearing in of a frugal United States President! President Elect Barack Obama has only one car for his family: a Ford Escape Hybrid. Rumor has it that he dislikes shopping and waits until he wears holes in his shoes before replacing them. His wife, Michelle, enjoys shopping for clothing at a discount, including at The Gap. She proudly boasts of her $30 dresses. Designer dresses are a rarity. Setting a good frugal example for the world is an excellent way to start this new administration on a smart note. We all look forward to Obama’s wise and thrifty changes that will help get our economy back on track.

Michelle Obama is So Fab and So Frugal! . . . what won the hearts of most Americans was her wearing more affordable fashions. A while back she was sported rocking this ultra cute frock from Talbot's that is $38.99. Talbot's isn't always on my shopping list but once I saw this stunner along with the budget friendly price I screamed. To top it off, the dress also comes in summer sexy turquoise. You have to love a woman who looks great on a dime.

The ideal of the common purse and the inevitability of corruption

noreply@blogger.com (AmericanReader) — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 16:45:00 +0000

Throw in your lot with us, and we will share a common purse.

Proverbs 1:14

Imagine no possessions
I wonder if you can
No need for greed or hunger
A brotherhood of man
Imagine all the people
Sharing all the world
Imagine by John Lennon (1971)

60 years in the PRC: From Mao to now, the corruption of power, by Bernardo Cervellera. ". . . The great successes of China are obvious to the eyes of all, but also the great failures of China: a society where the state controls more than 70% of the economy, curbing creativity and handing out promotions and favours to those without any merit, rampant corruption results in up to 3% of gross domestic product being stolen from the state, lack of social support for the poor, pensioners, unemployed, a lack of access to health and education facilities for a fall, parents who sell their organs to pay for college for children, pollution, harassment, seizures of land and houses by members of the party. Because of this, now the party is seen as synonymous with 'corruption.'"

Code of Nature by Morelly (1755) [Source: Albert Fried and Ronald Sanders, ed., Socialist Thought: A Documentary History, New York: Columbia University Press, 1964), pp. 18-31.]. "I believe that no one will contest the justness of this proposition: that where no property exists, none of its pernicious consequences could exist. . . . I say that the grounds for all these defects [of human nature] can be seen in the general tenancy of legislators to allow the primary link to all of all sociability to be broken by the usurpation of the resources that should belong in common to all humanity . . . ."

Pilgrims of a common life: Christian community of goods through the centuries, By Trevor John Saxby (1987)
[page 152] While the Christian who lived with all things in common said out of love, "I have more than you, so I will share it with you," the communist said, out of frustration and revenge: "You have more than I, so I will seize it."

[page 165] Many have realized with shock that the mere pooling of possessions, though apparently so costly a sacrifice, is not the recipe for instant success. The twelfth-century monastic reformer, Guerric of Igny, put it well: " . . . I still want to impress upon you that truly blessed poverty of spirit is to be found more in humility of heart than in mere privation of everyday possessions, and consists more in the renunciation of pride than in mere contempt for property."

Exploring Proverbs: An Expository Commentary, Volume 1, By John Phillips (1995)
Proverbs 1:14 highlights another feature of gangsterism: "Cast in thy lot among us; let us all have one purse." Today we would say, "Share and share alike." It is an invitation to exploitation.
. . . Proverbs warns against a common purse. Human nature being what it is, there will always be a victim. . . . The philosophy of communism . . . is based on the idea of a common purse: "To each according to his
[page 38] need; from each according to his ability" is the essence of the communist creed. Or as a cynic summed up the way the theory worked out in practice, "What's yours is mine, and what's mine is mine."

A house divided against itself: half collectivist and half free

noreply@blogger.com (AmericanReader) — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 00:19:00 +0000

The Tyranny of Controls
[page 54-55] "Wherever we find any large element of individual freedom, some measure of progress in the material comforts at the disposal of ordinary citizens, and widespread hope of further progress in the future, there we also find that economic activity is organized mainly through the free market. Wherever the state undertakes to control in detail the economic activities of its citizens, wherever, that is, detailed central economic planning reigns, there ordinary citizens are in political fetters, have a low standard of living, and have little power to control their own destiny. The state may prosper and produce impressive monuments. Privileged classes may enjoy a full measure of material comforts. But ordinary citizens are instruments to be used for the state's purposes, receiving no more than is necessary to keep them docile and reasonably productive.
"The most obvious example is the contrast between East and West Germany . . . One hour in East Berlin is enough to understand why the authorities put up the wall."

[page 64] "The United States remains a predominantly free country--one of the freest major countries in the world. However, in the words of Abraham Lincoln's famous 'House Divided' speech, 'A house divided against itself cannot stand . . . I do not expect the house to fall, but I do expect it will cease to be divided. It will become all one thing or all the other.' He was talking about human slavery. His prophetic words apply equally to government intervention into the economy. Were it to go much further, our divided house would fall on the collectivist side. . . . "
Free to Choose: a personal statement
by Milton and Rose Friedman (1980, 1979)

A House Divided

If we could first know where we are, and whither we are tending, we could better judge what to do and how to do it.
We are now far into the ninth decade, since socialist policies were initiated, with the avowed object, and confident promise, of putting an end to our system of free enterprise.
In spite of the operation of those policies, that free enterprise has not only not ceased, but has constantly augmented.

In my opinion, it will not cease, until a crisis shall have been reached, and passed--
"A house divided against itself cannot stand."

I believe this government cannot endure, permanently half collectivist and half free.

I do not expect the Union, or the Constitution, to be dissolved--I do not expect the house to fall--but I do expect it will cease to be divided. It will become all one thing, or all the other.
Either the opponents of collectivism, will arrest the further spread of it, and place it where the public mind shall rest in the belief that it is in course of ultimate extinction; or its advocates will push it forward, till it shall become alike lawful in all the States .. . .
Have we no tendency to the latter condition?

Let anyone who doubts, carefully contemplate that now almost complete legal combination--piece of machinery so to speak--compounded of the urge to nationalize one industry after another and the recent list of Bailout, Stimulus, and Reform bills.

Let him consider not only what work the machinery is adapted to do, and how well adapted; but also, let him study the history of its construction, and trace, if he can, or rather fail, if he can, to trace the evidences of design, and concert of action, among its chief bosses, from the beginning.

The incumbent Republican legislators hold that they may rightfully be wiser to-day than they were yesterday--that they may rightfully change when they find themselves wrong.

But can we run ahead, and infer that they will make any particular change, of which they, themselves, have given no intimation?

Can we safely base our action upon any of their vague inferences?

Now, as ever, I do not wish to misrepresent their position, question their motives, or do aught that can be personally offensive to them.
Whenever, if ever, they and we can come together on principle so that our great cause may have assistance from their great ability, I hope to have interposed no adventitious obstacle.

But clearly, they are not now with us--they do not pretend to be--they do not promise to ever be.

Our cause then, must be intrusted to, and conducted by its own undoubted friends--those whose hands are free, whose hearts are in the work--and who do care for the result.
In 1980, the Conservatives of the nation turned out Jimmy Carter and again in 1994 we turned out the liberal Democrats in Congress.
We did this under the single impulse of resistance to a common danger, with every external circumstance and media outlet against us.
Of strange, discordant, and even, hostile elements, we gathered from the four winds, and formed and fought the battle through, under the constant hot fire of a disciplined, proud, and pampered enemy.
Did we brave all then to falter now? --now--when that same enemy is wavering, dissevered, and belligerent?
The result is not doubtful. We shall not fail--if we stand firm, we shall not fail.
Wise counsels may accelerate or mistakes delay it, but sooner or later the victory is sure to come.

[adapted by the American Reader from A House Divided: speech delivered at Springfield, Illinois, at the close of the Republican State Convention, June 16, 1858, by Abraham Lincoln. With this speech, Lincoln accepted the nomination of his party for the U.S. Senate seat, then held by Stephen A. Douglas.]

Yes We Can!

"Just how President Roosevelt and his advisers hope to lift the exploited and oppressed out of the mire by increasing profits and raising the cost of living is too deep for me. If they believe employers will increase wages as their profits increase, then they believe the leopard can change his spots. They should know that increased profits only increase the appetite for profits. The desire for the accumulation of great wealth seems like a disease, and disease has never been cured by increasing its virulence. . . . [T]he one lasting solution is the end of the profit system."
It Can Be Done,
by James H. Maurer (1938)