Political Whores Come in All Shapes and Sizes

It’s Monday and the Senate is preparing to take up discussion on the healthcare bill so it’s time, once again, to remind everyone about our new, favorite political prostitute, Mary Landrieu. I do have to issue a correction. Last week I said that Ms. Landrieu had whored her vote out for a measly $100 million dollars in Medicaid reimbursements. Mary Landrieu stood her ground on Capital Hill last week and announced the “bribe” was $300 million, not the $100 million previously reported as if that makes the sale of her vote suddenly honorable. Following that logic, the amount she received from Reid for her state was three times higher than initially reported so I suppose I am duty bound to call her an escort as opposed to a common whore. However, Ms. Landrieu, if you held out a little longer and squeezed your pimp for a cool half a billion, I might have been persuaded to refer to you as a Courtesan which is at least on par with the Senate seat you currently hold.

Of course Mary isn’t alone in the sale of support for Reid’s healthcare scam. The AARP announced support for the legislation only days before the vote, giving opponents little time to react to their betrayal of American seniors. If you recall, the President had claimed the support of the AARP prematurely and the AARP responded with an announcement that they had neither endorsed nor opposed the President’s healthcare plan; leaving me to wonder what caused the reversal last week. At first I thought that the AARP looked at this bill as an opportunity to expand their supplemental insurance market. After all, the AARP is the largest broker for Medicare supplement insurance, the insurance that fills the gap between what the insured is billed and the 80% that the government covers.

It was only recently that we found out that the AARP received over $18 million dollars in stimulus money that they claim was used for “training”. Silly me….I thought the stimulus money was earmarked for job creation. Training people might make them better employees but that is not a “job created”. Since this was training for existing employees, it can’t even be called a “job saved” as the White House loves to claim credit for these days. So why did the Government hand out stimulus money to an organozation that had no intention of using it to create jobs or to expand the economy? More importantly, why did the AARP announced their support for Reid’s plan even though hundreds of billions are to be cut from programs that their membership relies on? It looks to me like they had $18 million reasons.

The AARP, like Mary Landrieu, will suffer for their arrogance. The blood money they received is already causing a backlash resulting in a decline in membership. Seniors are finding that an advocacy group that does not act in the interest of its members is hardly worth belonging to. I resigned my membership to the AARP and have already contacted their insurance underwriters and business partners to inform them that I have no intention of doing business with any company that is associated with the AARP. There are already other senior advocacy groups that were created to fill the gap left vacant when the AARP became too big to care for its membership and those groups are on now on the rise. If they are smart, they will construct their board so that they can respond to the wishes of the members or invariably, they will suffer the same fate that is now befalling the AARP.

One more note: I do not want to lose sight of who is driving this train. Obama campaigned on healthcare reform and lied all through the debates over what it would and would not be. There are a myriad of films still circulating that show Obama giving one speech and interview after another where he states quite clearly that his ultimate goal is the collapse of the private insurance industry in favor of a government run, universal healthcare system. Pelosi, Baucus and Reid are nothing but mindless foot soldiers in his quest to nationalize healthcare. Obama has been curiously quiet on this front over the past few weeks as the nation is slowly coming to the realization that he has no plan for correcting the economy and that his foreign policy is weak and ineffectual. He would love nothing more than to lead the charge on healthcare but since the poll numbers do not support this plan, he would rather leave the “scarecrow”, the “tin man” and the “cowardly lion” to do his dirty work and fall on their swords, if need be, while he tries to convince the country that he cares about the things that they care about.

Americans are understandably annoyed that he has taken nearly four months to “think about” General McChrystal’s request for reinforcements while our brave soldiers are dying in the field. American’s are frightened over Obama’s handling of foreign policy; the images of him bowing to kings and emperors disgust those of us that still believe in the power of the Presidency. While the Nobel committee is obviously impressed by his demeanor, it does not mitigate the fact that Obama’s policies have placed our nation in jeopardy.

Despite months of meaningless “negotiations” with Iran, Ahmadinejad announced this past weekend that Iran will build ten new nuclear enrichment plants and will fund militant groups that oppose the west. The White House has not commented on this threat as of yet even though an immediate response is more than warranted. This is not a matter of the sovereignty of Iran. Does anyone truly believe that if Iran became the newest member of the nuclear armed family that this deadly power would not become the newest weapon in the terrorist’s arsenal? Does anyone not believe that cargo ships with a carefully concealed nuclear device buried in the hold would not arrive at “infidel” ports around the word? They are barbaric but they have also learned their lesson. They have one shot at this game and just like 9/11, the ships would probably detonate their deadly cargo simultaneously in New York, San Francisco, Haifa, Liverpool, etc, etc.

This is a game with deadly consequences and not to be played by a President that has no stomach for the brutality of the rules. While Obama has been fixated on fulfilling his socialist promises to his union and radical friends, the protection of the United States has been woefully ignored. The Healthcare bill and the Climate bill must be defeated because of what they really are and the United States must be allowed to return to a place and time where we have the financial ability and the iron clad resolve to insure the safety of our homeland against all enemies, foreign and domestic. That was your pledge Mr. President; just when do you intend to keep it?

Paul

Political Correctness - I'll just stick with correct, thank you.

The earliest mention of something that is not politically correct is found in the U.S. Supreme Court decision Chisholm v. Georgia (1793). In 1792 in South Carolina, Alexander Chisholm, the executor of the estate of Robert Farquhar, attempted to sue the state of Georgia in the Supreme Court over payments due him for goods that Farquhar had supplied Georgia during the American Revolutionary War. United States Attorney General Edmund Randolph argued the case for the plaintiff before the Court. The defendant, Georgia, refused to appear, claiming that as a "sovereign" a state did not have to appear in court to hear a suit against it to which it did not consent.

The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Chisholm but the particular phrase in the argument we are interested in today is:” The states, rather than the People, for whose sakes the States exist, are frequently the objects which attract and arrest our principal attention. . . . Sentiments and expressions of this inaccurate kind prevail in our common, even in our convivial, language. Is a toast asked? [To] ‘The United States’, instead of [to] the ‘People of the United States’, is the toast given. This is not politically correct.”

In this case, the reference to political correctness involved a point of law. The States often forget that they exist for the sake of the people and while a sovereign entity within the United States, that sovereignty does not insulate them from their responsibility to the people they serve. It is obvious that in the 18th century, political correctness meant exactly what it sounded like; a political stance that was legally correct under the generally accepted interpretation of law.

Marxism would pervert the meaning of “correctness”, much as it does everything else it touches. According to Marxist ideology, “correct” is anything that is in keeping with the will of the central party. The notion that the State would conform to a set standard of law for the good of the people had been lost as the central party became a new class of ruling elite. The set standard of law was replaced with a notion of dynamic law that would allow the laws to adapt as the party’s needs changed. In the end, the party, not the people could only prevail since the party was responsible for issuing the newest interpretation of law as often as was needed.

Political correctness didn’t begin to take the form we know today until the counter culture emerged in 1960’s America and began to describe a manner of thought consistent with liberal ideology as “politically correct”. Much as today, the radical left had so overused the notion of political correctness that even moderate liberals found it laughable and a cause for ridicule. It wasn’t until the 1990’s until the term political correctness became a pejorative used by the right to describe the extremes in liberal thought.

Most of what we know about political correctness today is the idiotic fear of offending anyone. The enlightened wordsmiths of our more liberal Universities constantly regurgitate a stream of new “non-offensive” descriptions for nearly everything that is human or has been affected by human behavior. Indians are now “Native Americans” even though anthropologists can trace their roots all across Asia and eventually into the African continent. Anyone that has a modest degree of education in modern man knows that “Native Americans” are as native to North America as the Europeans are.

Every known human malady or frailty is now considered a “challenge”. Despite accurate clinical descriptions that gauge mental ability based on medical criteria, anyone that falls below the norm is “mentally challenged” because the clinical names for each degree of disability is considered by the “enlightened”, to be demeaning.

Other human descriptors are expected to display compassion, tolerance and acceptance. Then there is the whole arena of “people first” language issues. No matter who or what you are, it is now considered important to recognize that you are a person first as if that somehow makes a difference. Short people are now “people of small stature”; minorities are “people of color” and the disabled are now “people with disabilities” of course. I suppose the only exception to that rule is being fat. Apparently every attempt to find a kinder, gentler way of saying fat didn’t meet with the approval of the afflicted so they are taking a completely different route.

1968, the NAAFA or The National Association to Aid Fat Americans was founded by William Fabrey to provide social activities for the large. As the group shifted to political activism, it changed names in the 1980’s and became The NAAFA (The National Association to Advance Fat Acceptance). The NAAFA works to eliminate discrimination based on body size and provide fat people with the tools for self-empowerment through public education, advocacy, and member support. In short, their membership is fat and you had just better accept it.

Truthfully, I really don’t care what people want to call themselves. If dropping one name for another allows people to embrace help for a particular condition or it just plain makes them feel better about themselves, then more power to them. My argument with political correctness is a deeper and more dangerous manifestation.

As a nation, political correctness is in its fiftieth year of its mission to completely disable the American people from being to state with conviction that something is right or wrong. We are being forced to accept the unacceptable in the name of tolerance and now under the threat of “hate crimes”. Slowly the definition of a hate crime is being changed from protection against violent acts perpetrated in the name of bigotry to a whole host of new crimes based on…you guessed it…the spoken word. Regardless of your convictions, the right to be a freak has taken precedence over the rights of society to establish a standard of normality and those that speak out on moral grounds or on the grounds of conservative ideology are being methodically attacked as spewing hate speech.

To me, there is a big difference between saying “This is wrong” and expressing an idea that promotes violent action. However, the left now has the new monopoly on morality and the conventional ideals that this country was founded on have now been replaced with their “superior mantra” of acceptance and tolerance. Do not forget that Aristotle once said that “Tolerance and apathy are the last virtues of a dying society.” Once a society has lost the ability to speak openly against dangerous and perverted acts, it is not long before demoralization dissolves the last threads that bind its peoples together.

Of course, even the champions of tolerance need an enemy to coalesce their power base. After all, how could you possibly bring attention to your cause if there wasn’t someone to rally against? The tolerant left has no tolerance for Judeo-Christian religions, pro-life beliefs, conservative ideals or American patriotism. Religion has openly been the target for the so-called tolerant in America since the 1950’s when the ACLU backed every half-witted law suit to drive religion from any and all, public venues. The same suspects fight every battle against pro-life groups and protect those that burn flags as a legitimate form of protest.

This is the most dangerous path that the left have taken us down. We are at a critical juncture in our history as our very existence is challenged by crippling debt and a failing economy. We provide fertility services to the poor but cannot guarantee the right to be born once conceived. We protect the rights of Muslims against “dangerous speech” but not the rights of Catholic churches to refuse gay marriages based on clear edicts within their holiest book. We protect the habitat of a Spotted Owl while private homes are being seized by the state under manifest destiny; not for public use, but to provide an incentive for corporations to build new facilities.

If you ask me, the mass shootings at Columbine and Virginia Tech had little to do with gun control and were caused entirely by the elimination of traditional morals in our schools and society. What is there to stop disturbed or depressed individuals from committing these heinous crimes if there is no belief in a life beyond this one especially if we are no longer allowed the ability to guide people into a socially acceptable model of human behavior because we can no longer say…”This is wrong”.

Paul

A Thanksgiving Message from Our President

I must say I was surprised when I received a Holiday Greeting from President Barack Obama. I've sent a number of communiques to the White House regarding my concerns and they were not very complimentary but I guess that automatically earns you a place on the Holiday e-mail list.

Considering his e-mail contained requests for my continued support and hard work to help him bring "change" to America, it is painfully apparent that my original messages for him were either never read or grossly misunderstood.

Still, I could not miss the opportunity to respond to this as much of his message was lacking any sense of reality. Considering what we all know this man has and has not done; I decided to post both letters to the blog today to bring some attention to the dream state our President obviously lives in...

Paul --

Tomorrow, Thanksgiving Day, Americans across the country will sit down together, count our blessings, and give thanks for our families and our loved ones.

American families reflect the diversity of this great nation. No two are exactly alike, but there is a common thread they each share.

Our families are bound together through times of joy and times of grief. They shape us, support us, instill the values that guide us as individuals, and make possible all that we achieve.

So tomorrow, I'll be giving thanks for my family -- for all the wisdom, support, and love they have brought into my life.

But tomorrow is also a day to remember those who cannot sit down to break bread with those they love.

The soldier overseas holding down a lonely post and missing his kids. The sailor who left her home to serve a higher calling. The folks who must spend tomorrow apart from their families to work a second job, so they can keep food on the table or send a child to school.

We are grateful beyond words for the service and hard work of so many Americans who make our country great through their sacrifice. And this year, we know that far too many face a daily struggle that puts the comfort and security we all deserve painfully out of reach.

So when we gather tomorrow, let us also use the occasion to renew our commitment to building a more peaceful and prosperous future that every American family can enjoy.

It seems like a lifetime ago that a crowd met on a frigid February morning in Springfield, Illinois to set out on an improbable course to change our nation.

In the years since, Michelle and I have been blessed with the support and friendship of the millions of Americans who have come together to form this ongoing movement for change.

You have been there through victories and setbacks. You have given of yourselves beyond measure. You have enabled all that we have accomplished -- and you have had the courage to dream yet bigger dreams for what we can still achieve.

So in this season of thanks giving, I want to take a moment to express my gratitude to you, and my anticipation of the brighter future we are creating together.

With warmest wishes for a happy holiday season from my family to yours,

President Barack Obama

And now for the official reply....

My Dear President Obama,

My family and I will also spend Thanksgiving Day humbly giving thanks for all the blessings that God has bestowed upon us. The treasure of family and the shared ideals of our religious and moral beliefs are the glue that binds us together. Among the things that we give thanks for are the selfless acts of our military that sacrifice more than comfort and a holiday meal to insure the safety and security of our Nation. These brave soldiers risk all for us and while they remain constantly in our prayers what they truly need is a Commander in Chief that has the courage to provide them with the means to fulfill their mission safely and successfully. Vacuous platitudes will not shield them from the jeopardy that they face in the absence of meaningful leadership.

Sadly many Americans work two jobs to put food on the table and educate their children but many more wish for the opportunity to work at one job; an opportunity that has been denied to them because despite your every assurance and belief, government cannot create wealth or employment. In fact, government is the antithesis to economic development; much as any parasite, government consumes, it does not create. The best thing government can do to create jobs is to withdraw from its oppressive interference in the free market and allow business to do what it does best.

Yes, I recall that cold winter day in Springfield when you launched you campaign for the Presidency; from Bill Ayers living room I believe. However, it does not seem like a lifetime ago, it has been more like an eternity in Dante’s seventh level of hell. Fortunately, I can claim at least some level of participation in all you have accomplished which Saturday Night Live succinctly pointed out, has been absolutely nothing. I intend to continue my mission to educate as many Americans as I can reach to keep them informed as to the true intent of your “fundamental change” for America. Your socialist doctrines are doomed to failure because they require two things you do not have. First is the courage to do anything that is not hidden behind closed doors or the cover of night. The second and most important is the faith of the American people. We do not believe you and we have no faith in your word. I've got a much better idea...let us keep our money and you can keep the "change".

Sincerely,

Paul M. Magel Sr.

P.S. Have you ever contacted Hawaii about getting that birth certificate issue cleared up? You know….the one that actually has a seal and signature on it.


I thought you might like a look at the messages that are possible when only one person takes the time to read them. I have not forgotten the Holiday and our reasons to be thankful. My description of my family's celebration of Thanksgiving was from the heart and I know that if you are reading this, you understand what I mean and are enjoyng the same revenence for the day that we are.

Please accept my hopes and prayers for a blessed Thanksgiving for all of you and your families. As much fear as we may have for the future of this nation, we also have much to give thanks and praise for. God Bless you all and have Happy Thanksgiving.

Paul

Orwell and Obama, Four Plus Four Equal Five

George Orwell
“1984”

O'Brien held up his left hand, its back towards Winston, with the thumb hidden and the four fingers extended.

'How many fingers am I holding up, Winston?'

'Four.'

'And if the party says that it is not four but five--then how many?'

'Four.'

The word ended in a gasp of pain. The needle of the dial had shot up to fifty-five. The sweat had sprung out all over Winston's body. The air tore into his lungs and issued again in deep groans which even by clenching his teeth he could not stop. O'Brien watched him, the four fingers still extended. He drew back the lever. This time the pain was only slightly eased.

'How many fingers, Winston?'

'Four.'

The needle went up to sixty.

'How many fingers, Winston?'

'Four! Four! What else can I say? Four!'

The needle must have risen again, but he did not look at it. The heavy, stern face and the four fingers filled his vision. The fingers stood up before his eyes like pillars, enormous, blurry, and seeming to vibrate, but unmistakably four.

'How many fingers, Winston?'

'Four! Stop it, stop it! How can you go on? Four! Four!'

'How many fingers, Winston?'

'Five! Five! Five!'

'No, Winston, that is no use. You are lying. You still think there are four. How many fingers, please?'

'Four! five! Four! Anything you like. Only stop it, stop the pain!'

Abruptly he was sitting up with O'Brien's arm round his shoulders. He had perhaps lost consciousness for a few seconds. The bonds that had held his body down were loosened. He felt very cold, he was shaking uncontrollably, his teeth were chattering, the tears were rolling down his cheeks. For a moment he clung to O'Brien like a baby, curiously comforted by the heavy arm round his shoulders. He had the feeling that O'Brien was his protector, that the pain was something that came from outside, from some other source, and that it was O'Brien who would save him from it.

'You are a slow learner, Winston,' said O'Brien gently.

Apparently, we are all slow learners. The Democrats in Congress and the Obama administration has been engaged in a war against free thought. Opponents of the healthcare bill are summarily dismissed as “wrong” and those that would dare take to the streets in protest are labeled as manufactured anger, “Astroturf” and angry mobs. After all, no one in their right minds would argue against the wisdom of government control of healthcare.

For years we have been on the path to allowing our Constitution to be diluted to allow for government control of our very thoughts. Fox news dared to report news items that were contradictory to the administration’s positions and the White House retaliated by dismissing them as an opinion market similar to talk radio and even went as far as suggesting that other media organs ignore the work of Fox with the implication that if they dared to “follow the leader” that they would suffer the same fate.

Of course, this is nothing new. It is the next logical step in the demoralization of America that began decades ago. Political correctness had infiltrated our culture and slowly began the work of eliminating the ability of Americans to state with certainty what is right and what is wrong. Thirty years ago, the education system starting dabbling with “outcome based education” on the premise that self esteem was far more important that the actual school work and students were, for the first time in history, graded for their effort and not for actually getting the right answer. In essence, two plus two could equal five and still gain an “A” rather than bruise the fragile ego of our young scholars.

What did that get us? An entire generation of students that failed miserably when compared with foreign students and an emerging work force of new graduates that were unprepared for the reality that is the meritocracy of corporate America. Productivity waned as these new “worker bees” infiltrated the workplace bringing with them everything they learned in school. On Monday morning, many lounged about discussing what they did over the weekend until Wednesday afternoon when the conversation shifted to what they were planning for the upcoming weekend. Work remained half completed and that half was poorly done. When time for review came, the dreamers felt ill used when the money wasn’t available for substantial raises even though their own absence of drive contributed to the lack of revenue.

The worst display of Orwellian behavior comes from the government itself. Mark Lloyd, who was appointed by Obama to the newly created position of “Chief Diversity Officer” within the FCC, is unapologetic about his disdain for the First Amendment. He feels that tragically, a free press nearly collapsed Hugo Chavez’s socialist revolution in Venezuela and that the First Amendment in this country stands in the way of crucial reform that would benefit the minority community. He has proposed fining private media the equivalent of 100% of their annual operating budget if they fail to meet his idea of diversity and to use that money to fund public broadcasting run by minority interests. The fact is that private media can never meet his idea of diversity unless they relinquish control of the station to a qualified minority and changed their programming, abandoning conservative values in lieu of something more reflective of progressive ideals. As is turns out, Mr. Lloyd’s idea of diversity is strictly race based and lacks an awareness of the gains our nation has made in the elimination of race as a reason for exclusion. It seems that the only place that determination based on race is still permissible is within the Federal Government.

Tomorrow we will delve into the dark chasm of political correctness and the damage that has wrought on our nation.

Paul

Was Orwell's 1984 a prophetic look at the Obama Administration?

Originally published in 1949, George Orwell’s dystopian novel “1984” described what life under a totalitarian oligarchy would look like. Through his many books, Orwell warned us about government controls that would seek out and punish those who were not in line with the edicts of that government. Many thought that “1984” was Orwell’s indictment of the British Labor Party and Oceania, the country profiled in this book, was meant to be the future of England if the socialist movements in Great Britain remained unchecked. Mr. Orwell dismissed that rumor and hinted that the book was in fact, reflective of his disdain and deep distrust of Stalinist Russia.

Oceania's four government ministries are in pyramids the façades of which display the Party's three slogans, the names of which are diametrically opposed to their true functions: "The Ministry of Peace concerns itself with war, the Ministry of Truth with lies, the Ministry of Love with torture and the Ministry of Plenty with starvation. Through his work, he warned us about the heavy hand of unchecked government and the inherent corruption that is inevitable when government officials become a small core group of powerful elites.

The Ministry of Peace reported daily on the heroic advances in Oceania’s perpetual war. Of course there were periodic “mini crisis’s conjured up to keep the cause for war alive and well but Oceania would always prevail in the end, at least in the news. Oceania’s world was the remnant countries that survived the atomic war that Orwell largely believed was unavoidable. It is comprised of the three coalesced “superpowers” of Oceania, Eurasia, and Eastasia.

While the three powers remained in a constant state of war, the war was never fought within the borders of any one country but rather, only in a disputed area. Each superpower was strong enough that it could not be beaten by the combined strength of the other two “nations”. Alliances were made and broken constantly but the Ministry of Truth would simply revise history so that the Party could claim the “new alliance” always will and always had existed.

The Ministry of Truth, similar to Russia’s Pravda, was responsible for the news, entertainment, education and the arts. This Ministry of Truth was also charged with monitoring the statements of the Party and if needed, re-writing history to insure that whatever the Party said would be true.

The Ministry of Love would identify, monitor, arrest, and convert, real and imagined dissidents because the only valid and therefore, permissible love, was love of the Party.

The Ministry of Plenty rationed and controlled food, goods, and domestic production; every fiscal quarter, the Ministry published false claims of having raised the standard of living, when it has, in fact, reduced rations, availability, and production. Of course the “war” was always cited as the need for rationing and the need for Oceania to demand patriotic increases in productivity.

There seems to be an awful lot of parallels to “1984” in modern America, so much so, that I think that Orwell may have been more of a prophet than a novelist. Anyone that has read a newspaper or watched network news lately can only find it hard to ignore that the mains stream media has routinely disregarded anything that would detract from Obama’s image or impair his mission to “fundamentally transform America”.

When the Tea Parties converged on Washington to protest against healthcare reform the press, or should we say “The Ministry of Truth”, re-wrote History and underreported the numbers by a factor of ten. They scoured the crowd to find that one out of a thousand that held signs that were a bit bolder than the rest and crafted stories about the “angry mobs”, negating the peaceful nature of the gathering. Independent estimates placed the crowd size at between one and two million people and the National Park Service confirmed that not only were there no arrests for disorderly conduct, but that the crowd actually cleaned up after themselves as they left leaving nothing behind that would detract from their message.

In comparison, a group of only five thousand socialist activists gathered in Pittsburgh to protest against capitalism during this years G-20 summit. Trash bins were set ablaze and rolled through the streets at the line of police officers guarding the conference. In one night of protests, the police had to resort to firing tear gas grenades and “bean-bag” non-lethal bullets into the mob and reported over two hundred arrests. Of course, reports covering these protests were hard to find and where they appeared at all, were soft-peddled rather than risk showing that anyone would protest against President Obama.

I suppose the Ministry of Plenty would have to be the White House itself. Only the White House could claim victory for the Stimulus Bill as unemployment climbed from 7.6% before the bill’s passage in February of 2009, to over 10.2% in October of that year. The “Ministry” created a web site to extol the virtues of the Governments actions and that web site has been rife with misinformation and fictitious claims and exaggerations of created and saved jobs. Even a peripheral examination of the figures claimed on recovery.gov show a web of deceit with jobs created figures inflated up to ten times the actual amount and outright lies regarding jobs figures from Congressional districts that simply do not exist.

The White House cannot show any success in the economy in general so it has taken the next best step. People are still losing jobs in record numbers as the economy sags even deeper into recession so the numbers people within the White House are quick to point out that even though 466,000 people lost their jobs last week; the job loss figures for the previous week were over 500,000 so the stimulus bill and the White House “in essence, saved over 35,000 jobs. Only government could be so bold. If the government were a corporation and the same people used this logic in reporting the profit and loss statement to the board of directors, they would all be at home working on their resume’s now.

The Ministry of Love? Well, that is evenly divided between Congress and the White House. Promises to address gay rights issues such as same sex marriage and the exclusion of openly gay individuals from serving in the military are on the opposite end of the scale that Democrats used to craft the Healthcare bill. The healthcare bill, like many other provisions of the tax code contain a marriage penalty that levies higher taxes on married couples than it does on individuals. I suppose if there was any good reason to support gay marriage it would be to eliminate the marriage penalties from the tax code. After all, Democrats wouldn’t dare use the same antiquated tax structure that punishes married couples once those couples include such a vocal portion of their core constituency.

I believe the biggest travesty in this administration is the Ministry of Peace and that is Obama himself. Part of the responsibility of the Presidency is the role as Commander in Chief of the United States Military. Under this administration the military has taken a back seat to the image of the President. American troops are still fighting and dying in Afghanistan while the President “considers” what to do about his theater commander’s request for an additional 40,000 troops reinforce the troop levels or face the real possibility that our mission in Afghanistan will fail. Ignoring the treat to the troops that are already in the field does not promote peace but only displays the vacuous policies of a weak an ineffective President. While I am sure he has a sincere desire for peace, the reality is that this poor showing bolsters the will of those that would do us harm and that has historically led this nation into war.

Tomorrow we will discuss another parallel to Orwell’s book, the thought police. Have we finally reached the point where mere thoughts are judged and punished?

Paul

Mary Landrieu - Political Prostitute

Prostitute
Pronunciation [pros-ti-toot, -tyoot] verb, -tut⋅ed, -tut⋅ing.

–noun
1- A woman who engages in sexual intercourse for money; whore; harlot.
2- A man who engages in sexual acts for money.
3- A person who willingly uses his or her talent or ability in a base and unworthy way, usually for money.

In another Saturday night, special session of Congress (there seems to be a lot of those these days), the Senate voted to allow Harry Reid’s version of the healthcare bill to proceed to debate. For a President and Congress that promised unparalleled “transparency” in government, there have been far more closed door meetings and midnight votes than during any previous administration; essential requisites for “ladies and gentlemen of the evening”. That coupled with the fact that the healthcare bill is a staggering 2000 page document that the senate was given a mere 72 hours to digest before a vote was taken spells a total disconnect between the actions of government and the expectations of the governed.

By comparison, Tolstoy’s “War and Peace” is a mere 1275 pages, in hardcover, containing a total of more than 560,000 words. We are now being asked to believe that every one of our elected Congressmen possess the unique ability to be able to read the equivalent of “War and Peace” twice in a 72 hour period. In Senator Mary Landrieu’s speech, she made mention of the time she was granted to do just that. She applauded the work of Senator Blanche Lincoln in assuring that the Senate received the time required to read the legislation and to “attend the necessary meetings”.

We can now surmise that at least one of those meetings was with Harry Reid and the subject of that meeting was just how much taxpayer money it was going to take to purchase her vote to proceed. On page 432 of the Reid bill, there is a section increasing federal Medicaid subsidies for “certain states recovering from a major disaster.” The section spends two pages defining which “states” would qualify, saying, among other things, that it would be states that “during the preceding seven fiscal years” have been declared a “major disaster area.”

This section applies to exactly one state: Louisiana, the home of Democrat Mary Landrieu, who has been playing hard to get on the health care bill. In other words, the bill spends two pages describing what could be written with a single phrase: In exchange for Mary Landrieu’s vote, Louisiana will receive the equivalent of one-hundred million dollars in increased Medicaid subsidies. While she will claim this settlement is “doing the good work” for her home state, it is clear to us that this is only intended to strengthen her position in the 2010 election. Since hurricane Katrina devastated Louisiana in 2005, the payoff will expire in five years leaving her state, by 2015, to contend with the same increased financial mandates that the healthcare bill will impose on all other states.

There is no doubt that Mary Landrieu will deny that she personally gains from this “provision” and since the bribe was crafted in general language that provides relief to any state that has been declared a major disaster area, Harry Reid can and will deny that it had anything to do with Louisiana specifically, but words are words and deeds are deeds. The facts are that Mary Landrieu withheld her support of the healthcare bill knowing that her bid for re-election would be in jeopardy if she voted for the bill. The estimated one-hundred million dollars Louisiana will receive from the bill will go along way in mitigating the negative effects the rest of the states will suffer if this monstrosity passes, in effect, anesthetizing the voters in her state from the pain of the full effects of this bill until the elections are well over.

Mark my words; knowing the way that politics works in Washington, she will distance herself from this bill later. Reid needed 60 votes to bring the bill to the floor for debate but if he uses reconciliation, as has been threatened; he will only need 51 votes to pass the final version. All the Democratic Senators that are facing election difficulties in 2010 including Mary Landrieu, will be allowed to vote no on the final vote and it will squeak by with the minimum number of required votes just as it did in the House of Representatives.

John Kerry looked ridiculous when he made his famous “I voted for it before I voted against it” statement referencing the $87 billion dollar appropriation for the Iraq war. No one believed John Kerry and no one will believe Mary Landrieu either. It is obvious that the Democrats need some new strategists because they keep using the same idiotic plays over and over. We’ve seen this before and no one is buying it. Congress is at its lowest approval rating in decades and these deceitful tricks only serve to deepen our distrust and distain for career politicians. Mary Landrieu, Blanche Lincoln, George Voinovich, etc. can try the “Kerry Play” but who will believe them now?

What Mary Landrieu failed to anticipate was the degree of attention this “bribe” for her vote would receive. I’m sure she was aghast after she finally left the chamber and saw her name plastered all over the news. To the American people and to her constituency, she has been singled out in the press as the one Senator who prostituted herself by placing her vote on the auction block. That tells anyone that follows politics that she has no foundation; no fundamental beliefs. Even though I oppose this hideous government takeover of the American healthcare system, I wouldn’t have blamed her if she voted her conscience, stood proud of what she had done and could tell us why. The fact is you cannot publically place your vote up for sale and not be accused of being a political whore.

The funny part is that she believed the Senate “pimp” (Harry Reid) and signed her soul away for something that will probably not make it into the final bill anyway. If the Medicaid savings for Louisiana represents $100 million over the next five years, what costs will be forced on more populace states as this bill shifts more of the burden for Medicaid to them? Does Mary Landrieu not realize that her “spiff” will probably disappear in the final version as other Senators demand similar provisions because of the equally catastrophic fiscal disasters in their own states? Since the government cannot provide that relief for all states, it is doubtful they can honor the agreement to do it for only one.

Not possible? Well the House version only passed the vote because of the last minute passage of the Stupak amendment, eliminating any possible use of public funding for abortion. Nancy Pelosi agreed to allow that amendment to come to a vote to gain the support of pro-life Democrats. As a resolute pro-choice advocate, she only agreed to the Stupak Amendment because she knew the Reid bill would strip that protection and the final version will invariably not provide the iron clad prohibitions that the pro-life Democrats sought. In their haste to pass “something”, they missed the one opportunity they would get to stop this lousy bill in favor of legislation that guaranteed the prohibitions against public funding for abortion could not be removed at a later date.

I am making the prediction now that if the healthcare bill fails, Mary Landrieu only has a 50/50 chance of being re-elected in 2010 because of the publicity associated with selling her vote. Let’s face it. If she were actually representing the will of her constituents, their voices would have guided her vote and not what her pimp promised her. If the healthcare bill passes, her political career will go down in flames and she can spend the next couple of years trying to rebuild her law career in a nation that won’t have the money to hire her services. I intend to use this forum regularly so that we do not forget those members of Congress that are so blatantly corrupt that they would sell their vote for another shot at being reelected. On the bright side, Mary won’t be homeless…ACORN still offers some fantastic housing options for “Ladies of the Evening”.

Paul

Another Nail in the Coffin

So here we are. Another nail-biter as Harry Reid prepares to see if he can “pull a Pelosi” and force a vote on healthcare in yet another Saturday session. We have all seen the crazy things in this legislation and outside of the Democratic Party, there are few good things to be said about it. The National Debt has just topped twelve trillion dollars and the CBO estimates on the debt say it will double to twenty-four trillion by 2019. The sad part is their estimates do not include anything from the Healthcare or Cap and Trade/Climate bills.

Oh yes, Reid says it is “budget neutral” but the House already passed a separate contingency bill to cover the so-called “doctor fix”. That is an additional $270 billion dollars that should have been part of the healthcare bill but they decided to peel that off and pass it separately. If it were included, the healthcare bill wouldn’t be budget neutral anymore and that wouldn’t do. In just another slight of hand from the criminals in Congress, they just snuck that through while you weren’t looking so the CBO could give healthcare a favorable projection. That doesn’t change the fact that the CBO has been historically wrong on everything they score and the miscalculations end up costing the taxpayers seven to ten times more than the legislation was originally scored at.

So if this is such a bad bill, the “worst bill ever written” according to the Wall Street Journal, then why are the Democrats still pushing for this? Don’t forget that this is not the Democratic Party your father knew. That was the party of the blue collar American; the Party of JFK and Truman. The Democratic Party is now the home of the left of the left; the political radicals. All eighty-three members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus are Democrats and the progressive agenda is a verse and chapter copy of the socialist movement.

Universal healthcare is one of the master links in the chains of socialist control. Many progressives in Congress have openly admitted that a “public option” is the best way to achieve a single payer, universal healthcare system because at the heart of the public option is a subsidized payment structure designed to drive private insurance out of business. The elimination of private insurance is critical to their plan because the goal is not really your care but rather, the nationalization of a huge segment of the United States economy. The next target is the energy industry through cap and trade.

Cap and Trade, otherwise known as the Climate bill, will decimate the coal and oil industries in this nation leaving the technological drive to clean energy in the hands of the government. The Climate bill will create a gap in energy production that will force the government to curb your personal usage as yet another government created crisis befalls the American people. If cap and trade become law, the effect on American industry will be catastrophic and then it will be a short step for the government to step in and take over entire industries for the “good of the nation” and this ties right in with our new Presidents fundamental ideas.

If you recall, Obama isn’t just the President of the United States. He is the first President that understands our global obligations. He reaches out to terrorists and dictators so we can finally have a dialogue with them. He is (in his own words) the first “Pacific” President, kowtowing to Asian interests. He is the first President that admitted in his own memoirs that he gravitated towards Marxist professors in college and that obviously proved helpful to him as he taught the strategies of Saul Alinsky when he became a professor himself. He has surrounded himself with left leaning radicals that share the common goal of a global socialist system of government and economics.

As he prepared for his run for the Presidency, Obama was asked if he believes in reparations for slavery. I have to at least say he was honest when he replied “No, I don’t believe in reparations because reparations don’t go far enough.” He is a man of his word because the agenda his administration is championing is a single-minded drive for the largest redistribution of wealth in American history. That redistribution is not the old Robin Hood principals of LBJ that stole from the rich and gave to the poor right here in America. Obama’s plan reaches far beyond that and cap and trade is ultimately a tool to redistribute large portions of America’s wealth and industrial capabilities to foreign countries. Of course our largest corporations (and Obama contributors) like GE don’t mind because they are multi-nationals and American money flowing into nations with no existing infrastructure would mean huge opportunities for them no matter what happens to the folks at home.

Just ask yourself one question….if Obama was not a global Marxist at heart would he have appointed so many blatantly radical Marxists to positions of power within his administration? We’ve already talked about Carol Browner, Climate Czar and former member of Socialist International and John Holdren, Science Czar and author of books that espoused forced sterilization and forced abortion to limit population growth but who have we forgotten?

Ron Bloom, Obama administration, Manufacturing Czar:
“Generally speaking, we get the joke. We know that the free market is nonsense. We know that the whole point is to game the system, to beat the market or at least find someone who will pay you a lot of money, 'cause they're convinced that there is a free lunch. We know this is largely about power, that it's an adults only no limit game. We kind of agree with Mao that political power comes largely from the barrel of a gun. And we get it that if you want a friend you should get a dog.”

Anita Dunn, Obama administration, White House Communications Director:
"... two of my favorite political philosophers, Mao Zedong and Mother Teresa, not often coupled with each other, but the two people that I turn to most to basically deliver a simple point...”

Van Jones, Obama administration, Former Green Jobs Czar:
“This movement is deeper than a solar panel! Deeper than a solar panel! Don't stop there! Don't stop there! We're gonna change the whole system! We're gonna change the whole thing. We want a new system. We want a new system!”

Mark Lloyd, Obama Administration, FCC Chief Diversity Officer:
"In Venezuela, with Chavez, is really an incredible revolution - a democratic revolution. To begin to put in place things that are going to have an impact on the people of Venezuela….The property owners and the folks who then controlled the media in Venezuela rebelled - worked, frankly, with folks here in the U.S. government - worked to oust him. But he came back with another revolution, and then Chavez began to take very seriously the media in his country. “

"It should be clear by now that my focus here is not freedom of speech or the press. This freedom is all too often an exaggeration. At the very least, blind references to freedom of speech or the press serve as a distraction from the critical examination of other communications policies.”

Lloyd is in fact a Saul Alinsky disciple. In his 2006 book entitled “Prologue to a Farce: Communication and Democracy in America”, he calls for an all-out "confrontational movement" against private media. He wants leftist activists - through incessant political pressure - and the government - through the creation of a totally untenable operating environment of fees, fines and regulations - to work together to force the commercial broadcasters out, to be replaced by public broadcasters.

It is clear through his own statements that he admires socialist dictator Hugo Chavez and intends to “tweak” our First Amendment to insure that those pesky journalists, radio personalities and yes, even bloggers won’t interfere in Obama’s own “incredible revolution”. If threatening the First Amendment isn’t enough to scare you, did you notice that little dig about the “private land owners” in Venezuela that tried to oust Chavez? I have learned the hard way that nothing these people say is an accident and if he felt the need to refer to private land owners in a passing comment, you can be damned sure that personal property rights are just as much in question now as private healthcare insurance is.

According to Columnist Paul R. Hollrah, "After arriving at Occidental College (in Los Angeles), Obama chose his friends carefully. He tells us in his memoir that, among his friends he included "the more politically active black students, foreign students, Chicanos, Marxist professors, feminists, and punk rock performance poets."

"Then, after transferring to Columbia University two years later, he found that "political discussions, the kind that at Occidental had once seemed so intense and purposeful," took on the flavor of the "socialist conferences" he sometimes attended at New York's Coopers Union.""As Obama was preparing to graduate from Columbia he wasn't sure what he wanted to do with the rest of his life. Finally, in 1983, he decided to follow in the footsteps of one of his heroes, radical leftist and communist fellow traveler, Saul Alinsky.

Andy Stern, another believer in Alinsky and President of SEIU, has visited the White House twenty-two times since Obama was sworn in. This is the same Andy Stern that was recently quoted as saying “Workers of the world unite is no longer just a saying.” Hmmm? I wonder what he meant by that?

Paul

The Trial of Khalid Sheikh Momhammed

On November 13, 2009, the U.S. Justice Department announced that it will be transferring five of the Guantanamo Bay detainees to New York to face trial for their involvement in the September 11, 2001 attacks involving the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

Despite a public outcry against this strategy, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Ramzi Bin al-Shibh, Walid bin Attash, Ali Abdul Aziz Ali and Mustafa Ahmed al-Hawsawi are to be tried in Federal Court literally blocks from the scarred hole in the ground where the Twin Towers once stood. Recent polls show that Americans oppose trying terror suspects in the Federal court system by a margin of two to one but that has not deterred Obama administration Attorney General, Eric Holder, who claims that the day has finally arrived for these men to face justice.

After a brief statement, Eric Holder faced harsh questioning in the Senate yesterday and was visibly unprepared for the direction the questioning had taken. Senator Lindsay Graham asked Holder “Can you give me a case in United States history when an enemy combatant caught on a battlefield was tried in civilian court?” As Mr. Holder struggled to find an appropriate answer he finally uttered that he would have to research the issue at which time, Senator Graham interrupted and answered the question for him. “The answer is never” Graham said, adding “We are making bad history”’.

Senator Graham was not being deliberately argumentative; he was stating a point of law that could spell doom for the prosecution of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his four coconspirators. If you try these individuals in Federal Court you must bestow the full protection of the American legal system on the defendants; protections that would thwart the ability of the United States to gather intelligence from captured terrorists crucial to the efforts of this nation protect itself against future attacks. Mr. Holder could not answer the question of whether or not these defendants were advised of their Miranda rights or if they had ever been offered legal council, both of which are fundamental to any civil prosecution.

If Mohammed had not been advised of his rights or given the opportunity to seek counsel, the statements he made regarding his involvement in the attacks would be inadmissible in civilian court. The detainees were captured by the military in a foreign country during the prosecution of a war so reasonably, they had not been “Mirandized” when taken into custody nor had they been offered an attorney prior to questioning, both of which are required by our system of justice. We already know that the CIA engaged in water-boarding the detainees to obtain additional intelligence and whether you agree with that practice or not, the information it yielded has kept us from feeling the sting of additional civilian attacks on American soil since 9/11. As beneficial as that information was, the methods simply will not fly in a civilian court.

The primary question that any first year law student would present in the defense of these individuals would revolve around the Constitutional protections against torture, self incrimination, the right to legal counsel and since he was captured in 2003, the right to a speedy trial. They would not be wrong, that is how our system of justice protects American’s from potential abuses of the authorities. Unfortunately, we do not have a separate set of rules for the prosecution of foreign combatants or extremist terrorists. If we intend to prosecute them in the United States criminal justice system then those same protections would have to be afforded to the terrorists. There are already recorded statutory cases where the Supreme Court have overturned convictions and freed known criminals because their civil rights had been violated. The Supreme Court did not free these individuals because the violation of their rights brought the evidence against them into question, they were guilty men freed in essence, only because their constitutional rights had been violated.

Knowing what we know, can anyone argue that even if the courts were to ignore these facts and allow the trial to proceed at all, that the Supreme Court would have to review the conviction on appeal and would most likely free these men because their civil rights had been violated during their apprehension and incarceration? That is the law and that is why we do not try these cases in civil court. These are foreign combatants that launched an attack against the United States in effect, declaring war on America. Their trial is a military matter and does not belong in the civilian courts nor do they deserve to be afforded the same constitutional rights guaranteed by an America they are pledged to destroy.

One of the most disturbing things about this is the number of stories I have seen coming from the press calling the transfer of these prisoners to New York “foolish” or indicative of the administration’s inexperience. As usual, I have a very different take on this. Eric Holder is an exceptionally bright individual. He had begun working for the Justice Department upon completion of law school before serving as a judge for the Superior Court of the District of Columbia. In 1993, Holder was appointed to the post of U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia and eventually became the Deputy Attorney General under Bill Clinton. This man knows the law and I am sure he knows the precedents of Supreme Court decisions regarding prisoners whose civil rights had been violated. If he doesn’t, you can be certain his staff does. In light of his experience and knowledge of the law, why would Eric Holder attempt to prosecute Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in civilian courts if he knows that a conviction cannot stand a Supreme Court challenge?

This administration has been locked in battle to advance their radical agenda ever since Barack Obama has taken the oath of office. They had counted on the complacency if the American people but the recession had turned the spotlight on and the people have been waiting for some sign from this President that he is going to take meaningful steps to restore the vitality of the economy. The President pressed for immediate passage of a $787 billion dollar stimulus bill claiming that passage of this bill would stem the recession and reduce unemployment. We watched as the administration spoke glowingly of how well the stimulus plan was working while each month an additional 200,000 plus people lost their jobs.

Instead of focusing on the economy, we watched the administration campaign for an energy bill (cap and trade) that promises to further cripple business in this country and to hobble the economy. After Cap and Trade was passed through the House of Representatives, Healthcare reform became the priority for Obama and we watched the House churn out a massive one-thousand page bill and press for a vote before the members of Congress had even had an opportunity to read it. As the details of healthcare bill were revealed, people took to the streets and attended town hall meetings to protest against this crazy jumble of taxes and mandates in an attempt to bring attention to what American’s really want…jobs and a stable economy. People recognize that America can not survive if we continue the growth of the Federal Debt but the government keeps writing massive spending bills.

Now we are faced with the sad fact that the Government has absolutely no idea where hundreds of billions in stimulus money has been spent. The eighteen-million dollar website dedicated to tracking the stimulus money and the jobs it has created has been an unqualified disaster. The site shows jobs created through millions spent in Congressional districts that do not exist. The media’s examination of the figures shows not just a trend, but a systematic exaggeration of the jobs that have been attributed to stimulus money. Despite this expose’, the administration is still applauding the success of the stimulus bill even as unemployment topped 10.2%.

The President is also struggling with an image he has created of an inexperienced Commander in Chief that is unable to take decisive action even when his hand-picked theater commander in Afghanistan tells him he needs to reinforce the troop levels in the Afghan war or face the failure of the mission. The request made by General McChrystal in mid-September is still under consideration and that does not bode well with the people that heard Candidate Obama say that he would heed the advice of his generals and give them the materials and support they need to succeed in their mission.

Anyone that has ever been on stage know that spotlights can get awfully hot; heat this President didn’t expect. When faced with the possible loss of both healthcare and cap and trade they had only one course left….blame Bush. The public trials of Mohammed and his friends are meant to shift the spotlight from this administration and on to the so-called “atrocities” committed against the people detained in Guantanamo Bay. After all, what would bring Bush’s name back into focus better than months of testimony about the poor treatment these people received at the hands of the Army and the CIA? Well, that was another miscalculation on the part of Obama and his crew.

Americans have not forgotten the burning buildings or the innocent Americans leaping to their deaths to escape the flames. They have not forgotten that the “accused” was not only responsible for the 2001 attacks on the Twin Towers and the Pentagon but also the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center, the attempted airliner “shoe bombing” by Richard Reid, the bombing of nightclubs in Bali where Americans frequently relaxed and Mohammed has even admitted that he was in fact, the individual that beheaded American Journalist, Daniel Pearl.

We are a compassionate nation but we have no stomach for barbarians that practice the slaughter of innocent people. This is not an enemy that is really seeking retribution for perceived ills. This is an enemy that hates us for who we are. His actions are not meant to convert people to his religion but rather to eliminate them entirely. Even the Spanish Inquisition’s ultimate goal was to secure the salvation of man and to spread the word of God, not to indiscriminately kill anyone that did not already possess a bible.

If the Justice Department insists that these men are tried in civilian courts and they are freed on a technicality, the spirits of the people murdered by this fanatic will scream aloud and their voices will be heard every remaining day of Obama’s single and inglorious term as President.

Paul

Reid pushes for early passage of healthcare bill

Here we go again! Harry Reid is waiting for the CBO score on the new, new, new healthcare bill so he can force this matter to the floor before the Christmas break. I know, Congress calls it the Holiday break but here on the Vigilance Project, Christmas is still Christmas. Mr. Reid’s fear is that not proceeding with the bill now would allow the Senators to face their constituents in a repeat of the summer town hall meetings and that is something he cannot allow.

If this healthcare bill is so damaging to the nation, why then would Reid and Pelosi want it to pass so badly that they would risk what little of their political capital that have left to move it forward? It is still a matter of power. As it stands now, 47% of Americans pay no taxes and some of that 47% actually receive tax money in the form of earned income credits and other public assistance programs. We are dangerously close to tipping that balance and once a minor majority of Americans move from the taxpayer column to the recipient column, there will never be another fair election in this country.

Outspoken Congressional progressives have already admitted that they intend to use the public option to move healthcare from the private sector into a universal government run system much like we see in Canada and England. A victory for the healthcare bill would be a devastating blow to personal freedoms and to the health of the Republic. Universal care will, for the first time in our history, make a majority of Americans dependents of the State and insure the electability of those candidates that promise to keep public money flowing into the Federal entitlement machine.

Medicare was suppose to provide basic health services for those senior citizens that found themselves without care and without the means to pay for care after retirement. Who could argue with that? It was a reasonable plan supported by a compassionate nation. Over the years it became an entitlement program available to anyone over the age of 65, whether you actually needed it or not. Estimates at the time of passage were that Medicare would cost the taxpayers $9 billion dollars a year by 1990 when the actual figure would swell to $65 billion dollars, a 700% miscalculation. Now Medicare has become a sacred cow and any discussion of cuts or means testing the recipients is met with angry mobs of seniors and their advocacy groups.

Social Security was enacted during FDR’s early years in office and promised to offer a safety net to seniors that never had the opportunity to provide for their own retirement. When Social Security was enacted, it was a trust fund. People would contribute to the fund and be able to withdraw an annuity upon retirement. A great idea right? Well, after only three years, Medicare and Medicaid were in serous trouble and the Federal government raided that trust fund to offset the shortages in those programs. Social Security was added as a new line to the Federal budget as another liability for the American taxpayer. In the biggest “double dip” in history, we now have the privilege of continuing our mandatory “contributions” to the Social Security system as well as paying ever-increasing taxes to cover the government’s budget problems wrought by exploding entitlement disbursements.

Social Security has changed too. 40% of recipients are not of retirement age and recent disclosures have shown that even illegal immigrants are drawing from this fund through one abuse or another. The entitlement programs of Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security are rife with fraud and abuse, so much so that even organized crime has found it much easier to defraud the federal government than it is to defraud banks and credit card companies. In fact, the President claims that he can pay for a large part of the healthcare bill by eliminating fraud and abuse. Unfortunately, President Clinton said the same thing back in 1993 during his push for universal healthcare.

In the sixteen years since President Clinton made his healthcare speech identifying the fraud and abuse in the healthcare system, not one bill has passed through Congress to attempt to eliminate the billions of taxpayer dollars lost to Medicare and Medicaid fraud. That leaves two possibilities. Either the Federal government is incapable of combating the fraud in which case, the cost of this legislation is going to balloon the federal deficit and explode the National Debt or the proponents of universal care needed that fraud as a tool to pass a healthcare bill when the power in congress had shifted in which case, those that willingly turned a blind eye to allow the fraud to continue for political purposes should be charged as co-conspirators. No matter what the truth is…are these the people you want to trust with your healthcare?

Curiously enough, members of Congress have no skin in the game. They have the best healthcare plan in history of man. It is free to them and they get to keep it for as long as they live no matter how long they have served in Congress. They will not add language to any of the bills going through Congress that would force them to participate in the same plan that they will force you to take and since their care is provided for them at no charge, they will not be subject to that nasty little 40% tax on “Cadillac” plans proposed in the Baucus bill. If that doesn’t insult you, I don’t know what will.

The bill that is currently under consideration does not lower your healthcare costs. In fact, independent estimates say that premiums for private healthcare insurance will triple under this bill. The same studies say that more than five million jobs will be lost as small business attempts to cope with the new taxes and mandates. Medicare will be cut by five-hundred billion dollars and even though the CBO scored the bill at $1.2 trillion dollars, their past cost evaluations of other spending bills has been historically wrong and has cost taxpayers seven to ten times that amount.

This bill doesn’t do any of the things that experts say would actually result in the healthcare cost savings that is one of the President’s highest goals. Even his primary goal of providing care for the uninsured is not met as this bill still leaves twenty five million people uninsured and they will continue to test the financial stability of our hospitals and clinics.

Over all, this is not a bad bill; it is a rotten bill and the notion that it might not be great but “we have to do something” is an idiotic statement worthy of ridicule. Throwing buckets if gasoline at a burning building is “doing something”…it just doesn’t help the goal of putting the fire out.

Paul

SAY NO TO OBAMACARE

The Vigilance Project is taking the day to communicate with Senators to voice our opposition to the healthcare bill. We urge you to do the same. This is far too important to leave to a handful of people behind closed doors and the idea that the Senate will be forced to vote on a massive 2000 page bill without having been given sufficient time to read it is not the will of the American people.

Congress must read and understand legislation before a vote or we have no representation. Please contact your Senators and tell them to do their job. Read the bill and vote no on any proposal that does not serve the interests and will of the American people.

The Vigilance Project will continue tomorrow as usual.

Paul

Follow the Money

The healthcare bill is once again, being shaped and molded behind closed doors. There is really only one truth in Washington; large bills hide large lies. The bigger the bill, the bigger the lies and unfortunately, big lies in Congress usually come with an equally big price tag too. The healthcare bill, at nearly 2000 pages, is among the largest bills ever to worm its way through Congress and it is already known to be extremely costly. This bill is being shaped behind closed doors, we have not seen the “manager’s amendment” that was added at the last minute before the House vote and there are widespread rumors that there are at least attempts to hide the real cost of this monstrosity by shifting some of the costs to other bills or by using deceptive language in the amended copy.

Let’s see…the President said he will not sign a bill that is budget neutral. Well, budget neutral is Washington speak that simply means there will be enough tax increases and service cuts to pay for the proposal. Since it has an “adjusted” price tag of $1.2 trillion dollars, that equals an admission by Congress that this bill has $1.2 trillion dollars in tax increases and spending cuts; all taking place while the nation is in a deep recession. The truth is that independent analysis says that $1.2 trillion dollars is a laughable assessment and the actual cost over the first ten years will be closer to $3 trillion dollars.

At $3 trillion dollars, it will still be “budget neutral” because one of the big lies hidden in that 1900 pages is a tiny little provision that give Congress the authority to raise whatever funds are needed. What would happen to an economy that is already dangerously unstable if the Federal Government added another $2 trillion dollars in tax burdens? Washington is not totally crazy. They realize that raising taxes again would spell disaster in the next election so they will take the path of least resistance. More cuts to Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement rates which will shift the burden where it does now; to the State’s budgets and to the privately insured.

Why would Congress blatantly raise taxes when they can force the States to raise their own taxes to cover the shortfall created by federal reimbursement cuts? Why would Congress blatantly raise taxes when they can allow doctors and hospitals to raise their prices and shift the shortages to private insurance? Why jeopardize your own political future when you can jeopardize someone else’s?

Sometimes I think the indoctrination into the ranks of Congress began way back in grade school. The “spit-ball” assailant that watches in silence while another student is dragged out of the room to answer for a crime he did not commit. The stick ball player that breaks a window and hands the bat to the kid he wouldn’t even let play the game, then runs away before the grown ups show up. If you watched the old movies like “Mr. Smith goes to Washington” or “Meet John Doe”, the idea that there is honor in the halls of Capitol Hill is laughable. Congress has always been portrayed as a hive of villains that create law after law; not to benefit the American people but to handsomely reward that small circle of people that keep the politicians firmly ensconced as members of Congress for decades and decades.

This bill has hidden provisions that reward the latest generation of power brokers. Community organizers are suddenly transformed into part of our national healthcare system by providing funds to them for community outreach programs. A recent story taking place in Chicago showed public housing units, funded by Congress and run by these same community organizations. The units were neglected and maintenance personnel working for the property said that they didn’t even have the funds to buy steel wool to stuff in the rat holes that laced the property. Of course those same community groups had plenty of funds when it came to voter registration drives and to organize rallies to support the healthcare bill but somehow, the budget to care for the properties they acquired with Federal funds for the needy, is curiously empty.

The Unions get their rewards too; particularly, SEIU. A provision in the bill would provide funds to hospitals for nurse training provided that the hospital seeking the funds is a union hospital. Isn’t it funny that the SEIU covers healthcare workers and that SEIU’s Andy Stern is the most frequent visitor to the White House according to the recently released visitors list?

So let’s see if I have this right? The bill cuts $500 billion out of Medicare and raises taxes on people with good healthcare insurance plans, the wealthy, medical device manufacturers and through additional employer mandates in the name of healthcare reform but then provides cash subsidies to support the interests of SEIU and for programs administrated through the incredibly large number of ACORN affiliate organizations? The same SEIU whose members proudly wore their SEIU shirts while they viciously attacked a man in Ohio for attending a Tea Party Rally? The same ACORN that has just had their records and computers seized as part of an investigation by the Attorney General in Louisiana? The Same ACORN that has been labeled a criminal organization by a Congressional Committee?

Something is very wrong here and to be honest, I think that is what really needs investigation. Everyone is jumping on ACORN for their actions but I am a firm believer that fish stink from the head down. We have a healthy portion of the stimulus money that has not been spent yet. I honestly believe that the best place that money could be spent; the most effective action we could take to stimulate our economy and restore balance would be to use those funds for a complete and independent audit of every penny that has come out of Congress in the past ten years.

The Federal government only has the money that is has collected from us and with the way it is being spent; I will just go ahead and say “stolen” from us. It is a disgrace that billions are passed through for programs that average Americans easily recognize as ridiculous. Even though our economy is in serious trouble, the United States is still the largest stake holder in the United Nations, The International Monetary Fund, The World Bank plus a myriad of other international programs to create infrastructure and transportation systems in other nations around the globe. All of this is being spent without the knowledge of the American people or at least, without a complete understanding of what it does for the interest of America.

As the largest stake holder in the UN, we still have only one vote. As the largest stakeholder in the IMF and the Word Bank, all we get is an international bureaucracy to tell us what our financial obligations and policies should be. Infrastructure and transportation systems for foreign countries while our own infrastructure and transportation systems are crumbling? Why??? For all of the money this nation has spent in foreign and humanitarian aid, we have never bought a friend. In fact, all we have done is to create an ever growing population of those that wish us harm.

Paul

Don't Read the Bill....Trust Us!

Now that the healthcare bill has cleared the house (barely), I have been receiving a number of messages from the Democratic National Committee trying to drum up support for the bill in the Senate. On Tuesday, Tim Kaine sent a request for letters to be written to local newspapers and today I received a call to action from Jen O’Malley encouraging phone calls to Republican Senators to demand that they vote in favor of the legislation.

That’s strange? I thought it was the Republican Party and corporate America that were secretly manufacturing opposition to Healthcare. Nancy Pelosi actually referred to Tea Party opposition to the bill as inconsequential because it was not a legitimate grass roots movement but merely “Astroturf”, which was bought and paid for by Republicans and special interest. I’ve never heard from the Republicans on this but the Democrats have been shamefully trying to stack the deck in favor of this bill from the start.

I have received a lot of information on the healthcare debate from a myriad of sources and it’s true that most of it was very negative. What I find curious is that the opposition to this bill printed their objections and then did something odd. They actually provided a location where one could download the bill in PDF format and then provided the page and section numbers associated with their claims so that anyone could look up the information for themselves. That is hardly a strategy you would expect from them if what they were saying were not true.

The Democratic National Committee, the House and Senate leadership and even the President have only refuted these claims by saying they are lies. In all of the ads, comments and appearances by those in favor of this measure have you seen even one of them offer proof of their claims in black and white? Have they provided links to the bill and page numbers that prove the opposition is lying to us? No they haven’t and the reason is, because they can’t. The only thing they have done is to try to silence the opposition when what we are really asking them to do is answer the damned questions.

Democrats continue to play a game of semantics. They claim the bill will not cover illegal immigrants because you can not find one reference to coverage for illegal’s in the bill. What they do not tell you is that since the bill says “all Americans”, by law that includes anyone that is here. Without definitive language excluding illegal immigrants, it would be unlawful for them to deny coverage to anyone under this legislation. Democrats have refused to put that language in the bill since this debate began.

They claim that if you like your existing insurance plan you can keep it. Again, there is nothing written into the bill that eliminates private insurance. Of course, what they do not tell you is that every major analysis of this bill (excluding the ones funded by the DNC and Congress) say that private insurance cannot compete against a federally subsidized “public option”. In fact, the bill as written provides every incentive for businesses to eliminate their employee’s private insurance benefits as a matter of fiscal policy.

The tax imposed on businesses with more than 100 employees under this bill, is far less than the cost of providing care. That offers a quick boost to the bottom line for employers that dump private insurance and what business owner wouldn’t take that? Under this bill, businesses with less than 100 employees face no penalties for not providing care so those that do not, have no compelling reason to do so now. Those small businesses that do offer benefits will most likely drop that coverage now that their employees have a public option to turn to. Why would they continue to provide care benefits when they can eliminate the expensive premiums of small group health insurance plans and perhaps offer to pay a portion of the public option premium at a fraction of what it cost them to provide coverage in the past?

A better question is how many medium sized companies with 110 or 120 employees will downsize to eliminate the mandate and tax penalty to provide insurance, especially if they do not provide insurance now? Medium sized companies whose specialty is in labor intensive manufacturing ordinarily do not provide healthcare insurance. Not because they are evil but because they cannot afford to. Independent analysis reports this bill will cost the American economy more than 5 million jobs as medium sized companies struggle with the new taxes placed on them.

They say there are no death panels in the bill and that is also true. There is nothing written in the bill that explicitly says that bureaucrats will ration care or determine benefits based on age or health condition. Many of the opponents have also gotten this one wrong by citing the provisions for end of life counseling for people age 65 and over. The end of life counseling is merely meant to offer advice on things like how to construct a living will and how to appoint family members or others to act on your behalf if you are incapacitated.

The real death panel is hidden in the Health Benefits board created by the bill. The board is comprised of a total of twenty-seven appointees that will determine the benefit levels offered under the plan. It’s amazing that actual health benefits or the criteria for delivering that care is not already spelled out but instead, is being left up to a board that will determine that later so in essence, we are being asked to trust them again.

Don’t forget that it wasn’t all that long ago in Oregon, where they have both a state run public option healthcare plan and have allowed doctor assisted suicide, that death panels became a reality. A cancer patient in Oregon received a letter from the state run health plan stating that they would not cover the cancer drugs prescribed by her doctor but would instead cover “comfort care” and “doctor aid-in-dying”. If you want to know the purpose of a heath benefits board and the compassion of a government run health system you would be wise to look to Oregon for the example. Oregon has both and they are doing now what a national system will do later if this bill ever becomes law. By the way, despite distribution of that infamous letter to the media, Oregon heath plan officials still deny the existence of “death panels” in their health system.

Just as Oregon denies what is painfully obvious to anyone that investigates what they will and will not cover, Democrats continue to deny the most disturbing provisions in their own plan for healthcare overhaul. There are few progressive Democrats that have not been caught on film at one time or another calling the public option an important first step on the road to a single payer, government run system. Even the President admitted in an interview filmed as recently as 2007 that they will not be able to eliminate private healthcare insurance immediately and there would necessarily be a “transition” period to achieve universal care. Even though so many Democrats have said that universal care is their ultimate goal, they still publically deny that this bill is a Trojan horse to bring us to that reality.

I’m sorry. I just don’t trust them. Not because I am a cynic at heart (I am) but rather, I do not trust them for very tangible reasons. They have never offered black and white guarantees in the legislation that would prevent these things from becoming reality. Instead they say, “Trust us”. They have never offered the page numbers and excerpts from the actual bill that would refute their critic’s charges. Instead they say, “Trust us”. In fact, they didn’t even want to put the bill on line for us to see. Dripping with condescendence, they insisted that the legal language in the bill would be too complicated insinuating that the average American peasant is far too ignorant to make sense of it and that we would be far better off just trusting the people we sent to Congress to do what is best for us.

Well, all the trust we placed in Congress in the past has brought us to a twelve-trillion dollar national debt, one-hundred trillion dollars in unfunded liabilities for our current social programs, more than ten percent unemployment and the loss of not just jobs, but entire industries because of bad treaties and confiscatory taxation. This is not only a bad bill; it is in fact damaging to the economic future of this nation and will jeopardize the quality of the healthcare we currently receive.

Paul

The Tragedy at Fort Hood

The official count at Fort Hood Texas is thirteen dead and thirty wounded but is that really all? There are people that will never recover from this. Families pray daily for the safe return of their loved ones from Iraq and Afghanistan, never considering that there was a monster in their midst right here; never imagining that something like this could ever happen on a United States Military base.

The killing and wounding of our brave soldiers is a tragedy only made worse by the flow of insults that followed the shootings. Main stream press has gone out of their way to paint a picture of a disturbed man that snapped once he learned he was being deployed. The press further sickened us by insinuating that Americans may take matters into their own hands and exact bigoted and hateful retribution against innocent Muslims. Not one of them would dare call this what it is…an act of terror perpetrated not by some poor troubled man, but by an Islamic extremist. Not one of them would stop to think that Americans are mostly law abiding citizens and do not take revenge of innocent people for the actions of a few.

Insult number two came shortly after the shootings when it became crystal clear that this was 100% preventable. The FBI had already been aware of Hasan’s emails to a radical cleric in Yemen and investigations are beginning to show that they declined to investigate Hasan for fear of being accused of violating his first amendment rights. In fact, they didn’t even bother to notify military authorities that Maj. Hasan had attempted to contact this cleric with reported ties to Al Qaida. Just to put that in perspective, we arrested hundreds during the cold war for being suspected of contacting Soviet interests and agents. We even rounded up thousands of people of Japanese descent during World War II and relocated them to internment camps for fear they might “try” to contact Japanese agents.

It is a mere eight years after Islamic extremists attacked the United States, killing thousands, and we are still uncovering plot after plot to inflict further damage to America. We are engaged in two wars to weed out those that are responsible but we have to be cautious about offending someone serving in our military that is known to have made statements in defense of Islamic militants taking up arms against American soldiers? Army Chief of Staff General George Casey, when questioned why a Muslim with Hasan’s behavior was retained in the military, went as far as to say that the loss of diversity in the Army would be a greater tragedy than what had occurred at Fort Hood. I have no words to display my anger at something so mindless. This man’s statement was as hurtful to the injured and the families of the dead as anything Nidal Hasan has done to them. Insult number three.

For insult number four, the President approached the microphone on the day of the shooting to give a press briefing on the tragedy. Before he actually got around to speaking to the nation about this horrific terror attack he made sure he said hello to all of his friends in the audience. He then spoke about the conference his staff had with the Native American community and the “extraordinary” work his staff did to make that conference a success. “This is a top priority for us” he added. Only after he stated that he has further remarks about the progress made during the conference that he will add later but “as some of you may have heard, there has been a terrible shooting at Fort Hood Texas”.

As some of you may have heard? The nation was glued to their TV’s and radios in shock over this attack, everything on the screen said that this was a press briefing by the President on the shootings and he begins with waving hello to his friends and telling his staff what a great job they are doing? General McChrystal, Obama’s hand picked theater commander, requested additional troops or warned that they would lose the war in Afghanistan. That request was made in the middle of September and despite Obama’s campaign promise that he would listen to his Generals and give them the support and materials they need to accomplish their mission, President Obama is still “mulling it over”. Is this just inexperience or does he actually have disdain for the military? The idea that he would shout out to his friends and mention his “top priority” of Indian affairs before addressing the nation about the thirteen soldiers that were brutally murdered and the thirty that had suffered injuries, some of them life threatening, only gives that question deeper meaning.

This President seems to have his own idea of priorities and remains dangerously focused on them, even when events demand flexibility. He does not appear to possess the dynamic ability to shift his attention very easily when a crisis looms on the horizon. As President, if you are incapable of making a command decision at a moments notice, then you better have the people around you that can and be willing to let them do their jobs. Still, I don’t believe that is really the issue. I believe that the President remains focused on his agenda because it is his agenda. The push for healthcare is a driving issue for him and like any elitist, he believes he knows what we need better than we do. As this is his focus, the healthcare bill remains his highest priority to the exclusion of the economy and the soldiers that remain in jeopardy waiting for the Commander in Chief to make a decision.

Curiously, Obama took time from his push on healthcare to lobby on the behalf of Chicago for the 2016 Olympics. After all, that was for his friends up there. Hmm….maybe that is what this is all about. Who are his friends? Well, ACORN and a host of their affiliates are for sure. ACORN et al, has a lot of property in the Chicago area, much of which is decrepit and neglected. Gee, an Olympic village would have been a great way to sell all of that property at market value even if it were on the verge of being declared condemned as unfit for habitation. Don’t forget that there are also many provisions in the healthcare bill to allow community organizations like ACORN to administer neighborhood wellness programs.

The unions are clearly friends of Obama and in large part were responsible for his election so he owes them too. The President found time in the middle of the banking crisis to issue (some would say sneak in) an executive order that would give union contractors preference in Federal projects of $25 million dollars or more. Also, what would strengthen union bargaining power if they didn’t have to have healthcare benefits weighing down the package that was in negotiations? As companies find that the fine for not having insurance is substantially less that actually providing for insurance, many will drop their benefits and let their employees shift to the public option. Of course, as long as there is a government plan, unions will agree to the loss of health benefits if there is a wage increase in trade.

Oh yes, and since union contractors now have preference for Federal projects, guess who will see the lion share of projects to revamp that power grid if cap and trade passes? General Electric’s Jeff Imelt, another friend and advisor to Obama, will benefit from cap and trade as well as GE supplies the smart meters and hardware for the grid updates. There is a manufactured home “cash for clunkers” program in the cap and trade bill which means even more work for those lucky union contractors and of course, community based organizations will be there too to help all of those poor people get out of their old inefficient homes and in to brand new ones courtesy of the taxpayer.

Oh this is an awfully good time to be a friend of Obama. It seems like none of them have been left out of the cash grab as we embark on the largest redistribution of wealth this nation has ever seen. Obama is not inexperienced but rather, his experience is just the latest manifestation of corrupt Chicago politics. He appears not to care for the military because he hasn’t found a way to make anything he would do for them another cash cow for his circle of friends and that is the biggest insult of them all.

Paul

Al Gore - Eco-activist or Idiot?

As if Al Gore hasn’t done enough to damage his credibility through the discrepancies and exaggerations found in his film, “An Inconvenient Truth”, his latest rants have taken him from inconsequential to irresponsible. Recently, he equated those that disagree with his dismal outlook on the future of planet earth with the “birther” movement that does not believe that President Obama is a natural born citizen of the United States. Now, I do agree that there is a connection between both groups because of the common reasoning behind their beliefs, or rather, refusal to believe.

President Obama spent $900,000 in legal fees during his campaign for the sole purpose of sealing every scrap of personal information about his life. From school transcripts to law firm client lists, everything has been methodically and deliberately hidden. Neither Obama nor his staff will address the questions surrounding the inconsistencies in the information contained on the birth certificate he provided to the election board. The President could have quickly put this issue to rest by obtaining and releasing an official copy of the document but instead, has chosen to ignore this while his staff dutifully attacks anyone that dares ask the question. While several legal actions had been filed by active duty military personnel regarding his legitimacy as the Commander in Chief, every one of the pending cases were eventually dismissed, yielding to pressure from the Federal Justice Department.

Similarly, Al Gore refuses to answer questions about the inconsistencies and outright exaggerations found in his film. Irish filmmaker Phelim McAleer is director and producer of “Not Evil, Just Wrong”, a film which debunks global warming, sea level rise and draws attention to the errors in Gore’s film. Mr. McAleer attended a conference at which Al Gore was promoting his agenda on climate change. During the conference’s question and answer segment, Mr. McAleer questioned Gore on the flaws in “An Inconvenient Truth”. Rather than answer Mr. McAleer’s questions, Al Gore simply instructed his staff to turn off the microphone McAleer was using.

IPCC has been caught manipulating tree ring data to obtain their famous “hockey stick” graph which they used to show the world that there was a rapid and unusual spike in global temperatures over the past 50 years; a graph that other scientists have never been able to duplicate. NASA’s James Hanson also released a report widely used by Gore as his empirical proof of global warning but this report too, has been criticized by scientific researchers that have been unable to reach the same conclusions that Mr. Hanson did. Repeated attempts have been made to secure the data that Hanson used to construct his theories but in each case, Hanson has refused to release his data to anyone, further adding to the questions surrounding his report’s scientific accuracy.

People have even questioned Al Gore’s motives in his push for climate legislation. Since he has made heavy investments in the tracking technology that would be required under these proposals, he is now uniquely positioned to capitalize on the Copenhagen accords and the Climate bill. Many arguments have been made that Mr. Gore is “putting his money where his mouth is” and he is simply investing in green technologies as would anyone that believes this is necessary to promote a healthy eco-society but those arguments fall short when Mr. Gore’s lifestyle is examined.

Mr. Gore travels frequently by private plane, which according to his own beliefs is the largest possible carbon footprint any individual could stamp on this “fragile planet”. His home energy consumption is also reported to be ten times higher than that of the average American household. Even the ultra liberal organization PETA has questioned his sincerity since his consumption of meat is tied to the domestic production of animals that are widely known for their emissions of huge quantities of methane, a gas that is twenty times more potent as a greenhouse agent than carbon Dioxide.

Additionally, if Mr. Gore truly believed that climate change is a critical threat to the planet he would have really “put his money where his mouth is” and aired his film on PBS and network channels but immediately after the films theater run it went to cable television as a PPV (pay per view) product. Three years later, DVD’s are still being sold and the only televised airings have been on pay channels like HBO and Cinemax.

In all fairness, fifty-thousand free copies of the film were offered to National Science Teachers Association (NSTA) here in the United States, who to their credit, refused to accept the film. Regardless of the published reasons for refusing the videos, I am sure the NTSA recognized the legal ramifications of airing a film that had already been found flawed by the UK courts. The Courts in Britain eventually required that educators wishing to show the film in the UK would also have to distribute disclaimers to the students regarding the flaws in the films assertions. Parents in America have also been vigilant and vocally angry over the recent attempts by liberal factions to “indoctrinate” our youth into any agenda, political, green or otherwise and I am sure that played a part in the NSTA decision as well.

In the face of these “Al-egations” and setbacks, Mr. Gore remains insistent that the crisis is real. Of course he does, he stands to lose millions if the Climate bill fails and that is enough to make it a real crisis for him. The mounting evidence against global warming has not been publically or scientifically refuted beyond the incessant reiteration of the original fraudulent studies and global warming proponents have recently dropped the name “global warming” altogether, now calling the threat “climate change” rather than try to explain earths recent cooling trends.

Just as in the election recount of 2000, Mr. Gore is stamping his feet and crying foul as public support for the theory of global warming, climate change or whatever they will call it next, evaporates. Instead of answering the questions of critics or bringing new and honest scientific data that supports the need for immediate action, Al has decided to act like a child and encourage the youth of this nation to join him in an “environmental tantrum”.

Mr. Gore spoke before a gathering of the Clinton Global Initiative in New York last week. In his speech, he urged young people to engage in civil disobedience on behalf of the planet. It is his claim that "the world has lost ground to the climate crisis." adding "if you're a young person looking at the future of this planet and looking at what is being done right now, and not done, I believe we have reached the stage where it is time for civil disobedience to prevent the construction of new coal plants that do not have carbon capture and sequestration,"

As a man that served as Vice President for eight years and very nearly became President, one would think that Gore would have a better opinion of the democratic process not to mention a higher regard for the rule of law. Mr. Gore, before you encourage the youth of this nation to break the law to save your own investments, you need to look at the reasons that your claims are not being taken seriously. The scientific reports that you staked your reputation on, were based on criminally manipulated data and cartoon science. Face it; you got a D on your homework because you copied the homework from the books of cheaters and rather than answer serious questions, you attack the people asking the questions.

You had the opportunity to sway opinion but you lost that chance when your staff started turning off microphones and labeling critics as crazy because they wouldn’t “drink the Kool-Aid” that the rest of your devoted followers guzzle by the gallon. Let’s face it; it is your own fault that most people don’t believe you anymore. The truth is, I don’t think I would matter if you answered the questions now because you have damaged your credibility so baldy that very few people would even bother to wonder what you think. I would hope that even though you never actually became President that you might grow up and find some of the dignity that former Presidents usually display. Write your memoirs, now that your film has made you millions you can even build a library, but for heaven’s sake, leave us alone and stop encouraging our children and young adults to break the law because your feelings are hurt.

Paul