Liberalism Equals the Love of Tyranny

By Tom Rhodes, 12/3/2013

Those who embrace liberalism, liberal fascism, progressivism, socialism, communism, or any of the other leftist -isms suffer from the delusion that the ruling elite know better how every person should live. This is a fantasy or more rationally a logical fallacy of category error. They actually believe that the state "loves" you and should be the parent, god, tribal elder, city council, uncle, teacher, and provider for every person in society. What's worse is they believe that the state can be all things to all people. They believe that because some people don't make the life choices that they think are best, the state should have the authority to force people to do what's "right" for their own good. C.S. Lewis described this phenomenon.

"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive." -- C.S. Lewis

For your own good liberals want to:

Control where you go to school

Regulate your work

Regulate your play

Control what doctor you can see

Control what treatments your doctor can prescribe

Decide when you retire

Decide how much money you can keep when you retire

Decide how you must save and invest for retirement

Decide if when you've made enough money

Decide what ideas can be taught in school

Decide what religious beliefs you must tolerate

Decide what religious beliefs you must reject

Control Charities

Control your choice of transportation

Control you where you live

Dictate what you can and can't eat

For the state to provide for the people, and to protect the people, and to control people from making bad choices takes money. The reality of TANSTAAFL means that the state must have massive amounts of money. They embrace the idea that has served foundational for the last centuries most brutal regimes; the idea that one person should be forcibly used to serve the purposes of another.

They believe they know what's best for you and know how other people should life. The issue isn't that they live how they want to live, they want to force everybody to live how they want to live.

They like gay marriage therefore everyone must be forced to like gay marriage.

They hate guns, therefore nobody should be allowed to own guns.

They like Sesame Street, therefore everybody should pay for Sesame Street.

They prefer vertical urban life styles therefore in the name of "sustainability" everybody should be forced to live in more urban areas.

They hate the rich, therefore nobody should be rich.

They like NPR, therefore everybody should pay for NPR.

They like abortion, therefore everybody should pay for their abortions.

The problem with leftists, liberals, progressives, socialists, or whatever left leaning -ists you want to name, they firmly believe that because what they want is good, you shouldn't have the choice not do what they believe is good. They believe that if you don't believe like them then you are either too stupid to understand the "goodness" of their beliefs or you are evil. In either case, your stupidity or evil nature justifies them forcing you to do as they believe "for your own good" or "for the good of society." They literally hunger to control those who they believe are evil, or not smart enough to understand the goodness of their beliefs.

Because liberals with all their hart want what's best for everybody, want nobody to ever suffer, and have the best of intentions, they hate the free market. The free market allows people to choose what they want, not what progressives think is best for them. Emotionally at a deep caring and loving level, they know that "if only" people would do as they think is right everybody would be better. Liberal thinking works on some magical "utopian" level, devoid of reality or understanding of human nature. They actually believe that because some people are too stupid or are evil they don't always make "good" choices, therefore they, the ruling elite, who know better how everybody should live, should have the authority to force "good" choices on everybody.

Liberals also believe that if somebody makes a mistake, to avoid acute suffering that everybody should pay for that mistake that way the consequences of a mistake are shared and nobody suffers too much. If an individual chooses not to make the best of the education offered, and chooses to have children without a means of support, rather than see that person or the children suffer, everybody should have to pay to house, feed, clothe, and care for them. If a city, raises its taxes to a point most businesses, and virtually all of the middle and upper class of people move to less onerous parts of the country, while giving huge extensive pay and retirement packages to city workers, resulting in bankruptcy, like Detroit, rather than the people of that city and its creditors suffering the consequences of those mistakes in leadership, liberals believe EVERYBODY must pay to bail them out. If a state does the same thing and goes billions into debt, and creates an environment where there are more people on welfare than working, like California, liberals believe that rather than let the people of California suffer the consequences of their elected leaders mistakes, the people of Florida, Texas, Colorado, North Dakota, and all the other states where the people have forced state governments to have balanced budgets must help pay for California, Illinois, and New York's mistakes.

Liberalism, and the oppressive tyranny it imposes forces one-size-fits-all actions in a world where the people have more and more choices every day. Let's face it, Amazon.com completes more transactions with a vaster variety of products every minute, than the recently upgraded and "fixed" one-size-fits-all Healthcare.gov has ever been able to complete in a day. Healthcare.gov is a massive mistake created for "your own good" that everybody must pay for. It is tyranny in action for your own good.

The very idea that because some people if given the freedom to make life choices might not make the wisest choices, the state should have the authority to force people to accept limits on those choices is the underlying premise of modern liberals. Once accepting that premise, they extrapolate that to put the responsibility for the consequences on the state, and as such it has the authority to force those who exercise what freedom it allows profitably to pay for the unwise life choices of everyone else. Liberalism, liberal fascism, progressivism, socialism, communism, or any of the other leftist -isms are a non-functional, authoritative, overbearing philosophy that depends on tyranny to implement and is completely out of step with the modern world and the very idea of liberty.

Liberal ideas cannot be implemented without force, as such most are immoral. Simply put Liberalism Equals the Love of Tyranny

Legendary Columnist, Thomas Sowell, Finally Agrees with Me.

By Tom Rhodes, 6/12/2012

Thomas Sowell explains why the "president seeks scapegoats for all his failed policies" noting that Obama's actions clearly make him a Fascist. In his column, Is Obama a socialist or a fascist? Thomas Sowell notes the fact that Fascism was associated and considered a leftist position until Hitler and Mussolini gave it a bad name in the 30's. and the left without justification successfully shifted fascism to be considered from the right.

Sowell a far more learned and better columnist than I in a few short paragraphs clearly sums up several of my previous articles.

What socialism, fascism and other ideologies of the left have in common is an assumption that some very wise people - like themselves - need to take decisions out of the hands of lesser people, like the rest of us, and impose those decisions by government fiat.

The left's vision is not only a vision of the world, but also a vision of themselves as superior beings pursuing superior ends. In the United States, however, this vision conflicts with a Constitution that begins, "We the People ..."

That is why the left has for more than a century been trying to get the Constitution's limitations on government loosened or evaded by judges' new interpretations, based on notions of "a living Constitution" that will take decisions out of the hands of "We the People," and transfer those decisions to our betters.

At least it is good to know that he's come around to my way of thinking. Here are a few articles from the past where I've pointed out Obama's Marxist/Fascist actions.

Ask a question Get Arrested

More evidence Obama is a Fascist

Democrats are pushing for Fascism, but don't call it that

Similarities between 1930's Germany and the USA today

Yet Again It looks like 1930's Germany

The Sleeping Giant

Is the US Govt. A Fascist State?

Yet again, more evidence Obama is a Marxist.

Please note the satire in my thinking Thomas Sowell has finally come around to my way of thinking. I've been reading his columns for as long as I can remember, and they have obviously influenced my writing and been inspirational. Thomas Sowell is a true broker of wisdom in our age, and his writings are worth your time, even if you don't agree with him.

The Tree of Liberty

The below is reposted in it's entirety, repeated here hoping to get as many people to read it as possible, because it is meaningful to our republic.

---

The tree of liberty
Posted: January 17, 2011
By VoxDay © 2011

In the aftermath of the lethal Arizona shootings by Jared Loughner, the media have been caught up in an emotional orgy of sanctimonious worship of the state and its representatives. We have seen the ritual calls for more gun bans, the requisite quotes from the freedom-hating Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, and Republican Rep. Peter King has even announced plans for new legislation creating an anointed class of legal aristocrats, in whose presence no weapons shall be tolerated.

Or presumably, as we have already seen in the arrest of Ms. Theresa Cao, verbal dissent.

It seems Rep. King is still debating whether the full Byzantine proskynesis will be required when American plebs are so honored as to find themselves in the vicinity of the sacred patrician presence or whether a mere kowtow in the Chinese imperial fashion will be sufficient.

King is the modern personification of the ancient Greek political tradition, which believes that morality resides in the polis rather than the person and that the individual is therefore subservient in all respects to the state. As a representative of the state and its honor rather than of the people who elected him to office, King views himself and his colleagues as elite guardians whose primary responsibility is to keep the unruly people from unduly exercising their will in any manner that might contradict the greater glory of their government.

This is very different than the Roman and medieval traditions of individual morality, which the Founding Fathers preferred to the Greek one. It is also unwise, for as even the pro-Optimate Cicero recognized, "It is not easy to oppose the power of the people if you give them little or nothing in the way of legal rights." The Founding Fathers further expanded upon the Roman tradition and asserted that sovereignty was vested in the people and their rights were endowed by their Creator God. The people gave the power to the government. The government did not give power to the people.

Rep. King has forgotten this basic fact of American history. If his claims of widespread Republican support for his mobile gun-free zones are true, so have many of his colleagues. It appears that many common Americans have forgotten it as well. CBS News announced a poll last week in which "three in four Americans say violence against the government is never justified, 16 percent say it can be justified – the same percentage that said as much in April."

The tone of the report suggested that CBS was disturbed that 16 percent of Americans say that violence against the government can be justified, but what is actually disturbing is that 84 percent of Americans say that it never can be. This is a belief that is absolutely antithetical to the letter, the spirit and the actions of the men who founded the nation. It was, after all, the author of the Declaration of Independence who wrote the following:

"[W]hat country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon & pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants."

Now, it is important to note that this should not be interpreted as an assertion that Jared Loughner was a patriot or that Rep. Giffords was a tyrant, much less as a defense of Loughner's attack on innocent Americans, most of whom did not belong to Rep. King's proposed legal aristocracy and had nothing to do with any level of government. As even the hyper-reactive left is beginning to understand to its dismay, the shootings at the Arizona Safeway were the act of a seriously disturbed young man with mental health problems. They were not the act of a political revolutionary. Loughner's lethal actions had far more in common with Klebold and Harris at Columbine than John Wilkes Booth at the Ford Theater.

But it is even more vital to point out that Rep. King and others are attempting to use the tragedy in Arizona to increase the power of the state at the expense of the citizenry and to deny their efforts to attack the liberties of the American people. Violence against government is not always justified, but it is always justifiable in certain specific circumstances. To insist otherwise is not only a contemptible insult to the American revolutionaries who founded the nation and its government, it is an insult to the brave American soldiers who committed vast quantities of violence against the royal government of England, the National Socialist government of Germany, the military government of Imperial Japan and the murderous Baathist government of Saddam Hussein, among others.

It is impossible to assert that violence against the government can never be justified and still legitimately call oneself an American. For America is founded upon ideas, not geography, and one of those core ideas is that the healthy fear of violent retribution from the people forces governments to respect their rights and prevents them from descending into tyranny. This idea has been a quintessential and foundational principle of America from its very beginning as a violent revolution, and it is one that no genuine American can ever reject or forget.

---

About the Author:
Vox Day is a Christian libertarian opinion columnist and author of "The Return of the Great Depression." He is a member of the SFWA, Mensa and IGDA, and has been down with Madden since 1992. Visit his blog, Vox Popoli, for daily commentary and spirited discussions open to all.

Arbitrary Power, Dictatorship, and Health Care

Arbitrary Power, Dictatorship, and Health Care

Posted By John David Lewis On December 22, 2009 at Pajamasmedia.com


The essence of a dictator's method is not to write harsh laws and enforce them rigidly. The world's most destructive thugs have wanted something different. They have wanted to impose their wills on a compliant populace using arbitrary power -- power not limited by laws or constitution, but power that was open-ended, ill-defined, and could be expanded based on the whims of the moment.

Well-written laws are the enemy of the dictator. As philosopher Ayn Rand put it, “When men are united by ideas, i.e., by explicit principles, there is no room for favors, whims, or arbitrary power: the principles serve as an objective criterion for determining actions and for judging men, whether leaders or members.” Laws, properly formulated, are based on principles, and serve to translate those principles into firm criteria for judging particular cases. What a dictator wants is to be free of such principles and to use his power as he wishes.

This provides a good basis for judging legislation today. Does a law or a bill constrain the power of officials -- both elected and appointed -- by the principles of the law? Or does it empower the officials to define the meaning of the law as they wish, to apply it in an open-ended manner, and to write regulations in order to expand their power?

Consider one example today: H.R. 3962, the ‘‘Affordable Health Care for America Act” recently passed by the House of Representatives. Even a summary perusal of its 1,990 pages shows an enormous scope for arbitrary definitions, applications, and regulations according to the decisions of unelected administrators. Here are a few passages to illustrate:

To determine what constitutes the “satisfaction of health care coverage participation requirements” under the 1974 ERISA rules, “the secretary may promulgate any interim final rules as the secretary determines are appropriate to carry out this part-- (Sec. 421). Readers of the bill who try to discover what constitutes an “interim final rule” will find that this is up to the secretary -- i.e., the bureaucrats -- to determine.

With respect to the so-called “temporary high-risk pool program,” a program to be run until the so-called health care exchanges are established: “If the secretary estimates for any fiscal year that the aggregate amounts available for payment of expenses of the high-risk pool will be less than the amount of the expenses, the secretary shall make such adjustments as are necessary to eliminate such deficit, including reducing benefits, increasing premiums, or establishing waiting lists” (Sec. 101). Who gets care, and what it will cost, will be up to the secretary.

Officials may gather whatever taxpayer information they decide is necessary. “The secretary shall collect such data as may be required to establish premiums and payment rates for the public health insurance option and for other purposes under this subtitle -- (Sec. 321). Section 412 requires employers to submit “such information as the commissioner may require” to multiple federal agencies.

The bill institutionalizes such coercions by establishing over one hundred new commissioners, boards, committees, and programs, each with its own area of control. (For a list, see here.)

America is not a dictatorship. These bills are available for us to read, and we are able to discuss them openly, to agree or to disagree, and to speak and write about them in forums both public and private. But we will not be free to escape either the regulations which a faceless bureaucracy will write in order to enforce its edicts, or the decisions made by such bureaucrats over our lives.

If you are an employer, you will not escape punishment if a bureaucrat decides that your health plan is not “acceptable” and that you must be fined for your failure to meet his decision. If you are an individual who does not want to purchase full-coverage health insurance, but would rather buy catastrophic insurance that covers hospitalization only, your decision will not be “acceptable” and you may face a government audit and a new tax.

Do you have a serious disease? Does your doctor wish to readmit you to the hospital? A bureaucrat will decide whether or not you get treatment, based on a statistical analysis of the number of such readmissions by the bureaucrats: “excess readmissions shall not include readmissions for an applicable condition for which there are fewer than a minimum number (as determined by the secretary) of discharges for such applicable condition for the applicable period and such hospital” (Sec. 1151).

The scope of power here extends to the very definitions of terms within the law. This leaves the meaning of the law fluid and subject to the will of the bureaucrats. Section 1151 continues: “The term ‘applicable condition’ means, subject to subparagraph (B), a condition or procedure selected by the secretary among conditions and procedures for which (i) readmissions (as defined in subparagraph (E)) that represent conditions or procedures that are high volume or high expenditures under this title (or other criteria specified by the secretary).”

No, America is not yet a dictatorship. But we can ask ourselves whether the essence of such a dictatorship -- and its institutional foundations -- are not being built into federal law now. The scope of action available to federal administrators is widening today at a blinding speed. No proper reform of health care -- or any other area of life -- can be accomplished by the progressive, open-ended empowerment of government officials against defenseless American citizens.

Dr. John David Lewis is Visiting Associate Professor in the Philosophy, Politics and Economics Program at Duke University. His most recent book is Nothing Less than Victory: Decisive Wars and the Lessons of History (Princeton, 2010). His website is johndavidlewis.com

[Blogger's Note] Interesting way to look at it.

Yet again, more evidence Obama is a Marxist.

I may have been wrong in previous articles, calling Obama a fascist. It appears as though he is using fascist methods to achieve communist goals.

In and August town hall meeting Obama noted that the Constitution was a "problem" in implementing big changes. It's that pesky bill of rights, and limited specifically delineated federal powers keeps getting in his way.

Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom the press. So unlike Mao, Lenin, Stalin, Castro and Chavez he cannot eliminate media that he doesn't like. Fox news isn't on the Obama cheerleading team unlike the majority of OldSchool media, so he's declared them not to be a "news network".

It seemed as though the media were the adversaries of government, it leaned left but didn't overtly try to promote and protect any specific political party or movement. Now NPR, CBS, ABC, NBC, NYT, and the rest of the alpabet media are now just the mouth piece of Obama.

The Media used to be watch dogs of government. Only after being foced did the alphabet media cover:

the Green Czar is a self proclaimed communist.

ACORN (where BHO got started) has been aiding and abetting child prostitution

White House Communications Director Anita Dunn, who told graduating high school seniors that one of her "favorite philosophers" is the mass murderer Mao.

Dunn boasted that during the campaign that the Obama people "controlled" the news media.
There is a lot more to list but you get the point, it's not a failure to vet if a significant portion of your advisors are communist, or idolize communist leaders.

Fox news is doing the job the broadcast networks and big newspapers should be doing if they weren't deeply in the pockets of this president. Because of this they are treated the way dictators who desire control over the flow of information treat the press in communist countries.

Obviously there are topics and information that the Obama administration doesn't want the public to be talking about or know about. I can only surmise that if Fox news was not effective at exposing the Obama administration, bringing to the people topics and facts the Obama administration wishes the public wasn't talking about or even aware, the Obama administration wouldn’t be attacking them. If it weren't for that pesky constitution which is a "problem" to making big changes in society, the Fox news network would probably be gone. It worked for Castro.

None of the other networks have commentators that actually talk about the constitutionality of Obama policies and ideas. None of the other networks challenge Obama on anything. Maybe that's why Fox news is flat out kicking the other networks collective asses in ratings and viewership.

Obama is acting very much like communist dictators trying to control the media so that the people only hear what the governments wants them to hear. Attacks on Fox and any media that don't support Obama are examples of the communist attitudes and beliefs of the Obama administration. Notice that the Obama administration is attacking the messenger, and not addressing the issues brought by Fox and the non cheerleading media.

I think the problem is that if they told the truth, the people would be up in arms, and when they lie they get caught. So if you can't tell the truth, and you can't lie, you attack the messenger to avoid the discussion. Or better yet take over the media, internet, etc. and keep from having your actions and ideology exposed, and the discussion from ever happening.

Is the US Govt. A Fascist State?

Current actions of our Obama lead government:

The US government is trying to take over the private and personal health-care decisions of the people and establish bureaucracies to make life-and-death decisions and banning unapproved transactions between doctors and patients.

The US government characterizes honest and open expressions of dissent as the expressions of "angry mobs".

The US government has turned the Census into a weapon designed to spy on the most personal aspects of the life of citizens.

The US government is asking its supporters to "snitch" on opponents of its policies.

The US government wants to monitor broadcasts and establish itself as the guardian of "fairness" on the airwaves.

The US government hires and fires the top executives of major corporations and redirects their corporate policies.

The US government becomes the sole arbiter of whether you can keep some of any of the wealth you accumulated legally.

The US government ignores the laws of the land and replaces them with the arbitrary whims of men. (how else would you explain ignoring bankruptcy law and giving unions unsecured debt higher preference to secured debt in the Chrysler and GM bailouts regardless of US bankruptcy laws)

The US government metes out punishment not just for criminal actions, but for "criminal thoughts".

The US government created the current unemployment crisis and now uses it promote policies of government control.

Considering what fascism is, it may be too late and the US has already become a Fascist state.

The Sleeping Giant

I’m a libertarian, which means I want to live peaceably with my neighbor and be left alone. I want the government to enforce and follow rule of law to protect me and my neighbors’ individual liberties from people (either criminals, businesses, or the government) who would infringe upon them. Libertarians believe that individuals not groups have rights. Being the type who want to be left alone to fend for themselves and enjoy the fruits of their labor, in general we ignore the government hoping it will leave us alone, mostly because were too busy living our lives. In this aspect most people are libertarian and don’t know it.

Under the Fascist tendencies of the Obama administration, in a mere 6 months he has awakened a sleeping giant. Again his actions repeat pre-WWII history, the Japanese admiral had it right, his fear that all the attack on Pearl Harbor did was awaken a sleeping giant. The result was the most independent and productive people in the world kicked Japans Ass.

The Obama administration and the "ruling elite" have awakened a sleeping giant. The Government is telling him, "You’re too stupid to know what’s good for yourself; therefore we will take care of you. We will determine your health care." Around two thirds of the US is happy with their health care. Some details of the multi thousand page document has gotten out before it could be rammed down the giant’s throat. Like the govt determining what services would be available to senior citizens, not they and their doctors; like an individual can only purchase govt insurance after the law goes into effect; like you are forced to buy insurance if you choose not to; like paying for abortions with govt tax money; like paying for the health services of illegal aliens with US citizens tax dollars.

Congressmen and Senators are out for the August break trying to talk with constituents and tell them about what they are doing in congress. The sleeping giant is tired of being told what to do, how to think, and of what’s best for us. We want, and are going to expect, our elected leaders to listen to us, not talk to us. They have refused to listen for years and now that they have awakened the sleeping giant they don’t know what to do. What used to be annual small town hall meeting with a few locals, thousands of people show up to show their displeasure. They no longer have control of the message and are scared. So they attack the people, calling them an angry mob, accusing them of being paid for by the GOP or insurance companies, anything to deflect the fact that the people are awake and mad. They can’t control the message, with CSPAN, YouTube, Talk Radio, and Bloggers everywhere, all protected by the constitution they no longer determine what people see and hear.

The problem the "ruling elite" have is that we live in a country which the supreme law of the land is not an individual or body of men. There is no Caesar to pay tribute. We live in a time and place which declared that since people are corrupt or corruptible, we will choose temporary leaders and give them limited powers to govern and protect the rights of individual citizens. We defined these powers in the Constitution, and it divided the powers so that no single man, or group of men, had all the power. We wrote that simple 12 page document with rules that made it flexible but difficult to change. It declared that the people have the power, prohibited the government from silencing them, from separating them, from disarming them, and guaranteed them equal protection, and put no person or group of people above the law. Unlike virtually every other nation the problem the "ruling elite" have here is that they govern at the consent of the people.

The "ruling elite" have awakened the sleeping giant; it is the people of this country. We don’t like what we see and are withdrawing our consent and they don’t like it; too bad for those in Washington. The libertarian party has been trying to wake the public for decades; in the end it is the "ruling elite" in Washington themselves through their own fascist actions which woke the sleeping giant.

The message from the town hall meetings, tea parties, blogs, and the people is for the "ruling elite" to shut-up and listen, we not you know what’s best for us. I fear that they won’t because they think the people are stupid that they are better than the people.

Yet Again It looks like 1930's Germany

I thought I was done comparing the Obama administration to 1930's Germany. But in glaring similarity to Hitler's Germany the Obama administration is now attacking mere citizens not just media personalities, and is asking fellow citizens to report anything "Fishy" back to the government by email, at flag@whitehouse.gov.

Can you say "Brown Shirt"? .... I thought you could.

Calling citizens who ask hard questions and criticize government officials at town hall meetings an "Angry Mob" is outlandish. His irrational nationalistic hatred of any criticism is very fascist in nature.

The Obama administration is having trouble with the first amendment and the very internet he used to help get elected. Because of these he can't control what information the people get. Truth about the government takeover of health care (not reform), and the other socialistic and communistic policies he's trying to inact, keep getting out and when exposed to the light these programs are being shown for what they are.

The first amendment and internet expose the lies he's been telling. Like no new taxes to those making less than $250K, The new Tobacco Tax disproportionally affects those making less than $250K. Or the lie of there being 47million people without health care. There are 47million without insurance but 22million make over $50K, can afford insurance but choose not to purchase it but pay cash for their health care needs, and around 12 million are illegal aliens, and a significant percentage of the remainder are people who are eligible for existing government funded medical care but haven't signed up for it. So the 47million people are not without health care, they just don't fit the traditional employer paid for health insurance users. They have healthcare, so its a lie.

How about the lie of an open debate on health care; most of the major decisions in the multi-thousand page healthcare bill were done in secret, that's not the transparency he promised. He is a liar.

I love the lie of We need the Stimulus now, and unemployment will stay less than 8%; it's now around 9% and another 1/2million are out of work in July, and retail sales are down by nearly 8%.

Watch for the Obama administration to attempt to control information on the news and internet, and try to end talk radio, blogging by just anybody, etc. It's is the logical step that Hitler took in the 1930's that Obama will try and take now. We are watching the US march towards Fascism under Obama’s leadership.

Health Care Bill Outlaws Private Insurance

H.R. 3200, the 1,018-page Health Care bill, contains the following segment listed under "Protecting the Choice to Keep Current Coverage," in the "Limitation on Enrollment" section on Page 16:

Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day of the year the legislation becomes law.

That means once law; nobody may purchase new private health care. You will only be allowed your employer's insurance or the government's insurance. This is the nail in the coffin that clearly demonstrates that the Obama regime is pushing the USA to and a fascist state. The Italian Charter of Labour, introduced by the fascists, contained the following statement:

The corporate State considers that private enterprise in the sphere of production is the most effective and useful instrument in the interest of the nation. In view of the fact that private organisation of production is a function of national concern, the organiser of the enterprise is responsible to the State for the direction given to production.

Mussolini stated in The Doctrine of Fascism:
The Fascist State lays claim to rule in the economic field no less than in others; it makes its action felt throughout the length and breadth of the country by means of its corporate, social, and educational institutions, and all the political, economic, and spiritual forces of the nation, organized in their respective associations, circulate within the State.

We the people of the United States of America have elected a Fascist president. We have elected an extreme left liberal/socialist congress. Socialist healthcare is what we will have if congress passes this healthcare bill. It will bankrupt and destroy the nation. Socialism economically destroyed the “democratic republics” of East Germany, the USSR, and Cuba. Let's not even talk about the cars the eastern block produced which are the type of junk we will be forced to buy from GM and Chrysler.

My question is by what constitutional authority can the how can the government not allow insurance companies to sell insurance to private individuals?

The Emperor Has No Clothes

The Emperor Has No Clothes is the famous fable by Hans Christian Andersen about an emperor who unwittingly hires two swindlers to create a new suit of clothes for him.

The basic plot is that an emperor of a prosperous city-state who cares more about clothes and looks than running his city-state. He hires two swindlers who promise him the finest suit of clothes from the most beautiful cloth. This cloth, they tell him, is invisible to anyone who was either stupid or unfit for his position. The Emperor cannot see the (non-existent) cloth, but pretends that he can for fear of appearing stupid; his ministers do the same. When the swindlers report that the suit is finished, they dress him in mime. The Emperor then goes on a procession through the capital showing off his new "clothes". During the course of the procession, a small child cries out, "But he has nothing on!" The crowd realizes the child is telling the truth. The Emperor, however, holds his head high and continues the procession.

The difference between this Danish fable and today's reality is, that today when someone points out that the emperor has no clothes, the emperor his ministers and the press attack him as a "denier" trying to keep the people from seeing the obvious.

Alan Carlin a senior analyst in the EPA's National Center for Environmental Economics and a 35-year veteran of the agency, submitted a 98-page analysis arguing the agency should take another look at the science behind man-made climate change because the evidence was "inconclusive at best." The "Transparent" Obama administration has tried to bury this, and have been caught.

Unable to defend the EPA's actions, anonymous EPA officials are doing what they does best: ad hominid attacks on Mr. Carlin, decrying him as a "denier." The EPA tells us he is, "only" an economist, but the fact is that Carlin holds a degree in physics from CalTech.The EPA says that his study was full of sham science, but the fact is tThe majority of the science is from peer-reviewed studies. The EPA says it isn’t his responsibility to look at this issue, but the fact is that he works in an office tasked with "informing important policy decisions with sound economics and other sciences."

Because the Obama EPA's endangerment finding is a policy act, the EPA is required to make public those agency documents that pertain to the decision, to allow for public comment. Court rulings say rulemaking records must include both "the evidence relied upon and the evidence discarded." By not allowing Alan Carlin’s study to be circulated the Obama EPA has hidden the evidence from the people and decision makers. He, through the EPA, lied by omission. How does this sit with his April 2009 statement saying "the days of science taking a backseat to ideology are over." Hardly the “transparency in Government” he has promised.

It’s not one child that is calling the townspeople to notice that the emperor has no clothes, it is the brightest and best scientists of the world. Oklahoma Sen. Jim Inhofe now counts more than 700 scientists who disagree with the U.N. -- 13 times the number who authored the U.N.'s 2007 climate summary for policymakers. Princeton's Will Happer is leading a group of 54 noted physicists who are demanding the American Physical Society revise its position that the science is settled. Both Nature and Science magazines have refused to run the physicists' open letter. The world's first woman to receive a Ph.D. in meteorology, Joanne Simpson, expressed relief upon her retirement last year that she was finally free to speak "frankly" of her non-belief. Japanese environmental physical chemist, Dr. Kiminori Itoh, a contributor to a U.N. climate report, declared that man-made warming is "the worst scientific scandal in history." Man Made Global Warming is the "new religion" according to Norway's Ivar Giaever, Nobel Prize winner for physics.

To quote Kim Strassel‘s recent WSJ article. "The collapse of the "consensus" has been driven by reality. The inconvenient truth is that the earth's temperatures have flat-lined since 2001, despite growing concentrations of C02. Peer-reviewed research has debunked doomsday scenarios about the polar ice caps, hurricanes, malaria, extinctions, rising oceans. A global financial crisis has politicians taking a harder look at the science that would require them to hamstring their economies to rein in carbon. " It’s about Power not science. Obama and the Press want to ram Cap-and-Trade down our throats before we notice that the science doesn’t support their position.

The child is pointing out "Man Made Global Warming is a Lie". When will the crowd recognize the truth?

Similarities between 1930's Germany and the USA today

Similarities between 1930's Germany and the USA today

Let's start with H.R. 675. This House resolution Provide police officers, criminal investigators, and game law enforcement officers of the Department of Defense with the authority to execute warrants, make arrests, and carry firearms.
http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h675/show

The authorities granted by the bill:

To execute and serve warrants;

To make arrests without warrants;

To carry firearms;

To enforce federal laws enacted to protect persons or property;

To prevent breaches of the peace and suppress affrays or unlawful assemblies

Why does the DOD or some new Federal police force need the authority to execute warrants, make arrests and carry firearms? The FBI can already do that, and the Justice Department can prosecute federal crimes. I believe that the 1878 Posse Comitatus Act explicitly prohibits the Department of Defense from involvement in state and local law enforcement activities. So the whole reasoning behind HR675 just doesn't' make legal sense, and no where in any of the 28 powers authorized to congress is there a power to create a federal law enforcement agency. By the specific restrictions on the Federal Government in the 9th and 10th amendments tot he constitution the power to police is specifically restricted to the states or the people.

This sounds like Obama is trying to do exactly what he told us he'd do when running for office. Form a national police force that is not accountable to the people but accountable to Him, didn't Germany do that in the 1930's? If I remember my pre-PC history, I believe that Hitler did the same thing, it was called the Gestapo.

The first amendment to the US Constitution says that congress shall pass no laws infringing on the right of the people to peaceably assemble. So what is an unlawful assembly? Any assembly the government doesn't approve? This HR wants to prevent "unlawful assemblies", didn't Germany do that in the 1930's. Those laws were used to arrest those how tried to protest against the Nazi party.

Earlier in this blog I wrote about Democratic congress persons claiming that those who would actually hold elected officials accountable and publicly tell them they would vote them out of office if they vote raise taxes are Terrorists.. They are trying to use a revamped version of the Fairness Doctrine to shut down Talk Radio, and proposing other laws to shut down blogs, etc. to restrict what the press can and can't say or who can and can't say what. Didn't Germany do that in the 1930's.

There are several bills before congress that would require the registration of all firearms, didn't Germany do that in the 1930's.

Obviously because current police and military have taken an oath to protect the constitution and the people, and are held accountable if they execute unconstitutional orders, the Democrats in Washington want to create this federal police force.

Obviously the virtues independence and individual freedom are not those of the Democrats and power mongers in Washington. Government control seems to be the virtue they most want cherish.

Democrats are pushing for Fascism, but don't call it that

Back On March 30'th I said America is becoming a Fascist state (Click to read the entry)

On April 28th I showed More evidence Obama is a Fascist (Click to read the entry)

Today's Townhall.com article by Jonah Goldberg titled
Don't Call It 'Socialism'!(Click to read it) uses similar arguments to come to the same conclusion.

Goldberg's article concludes:

"Personally, I think socialism is the wrong word for all of this. "Corporatism" -- the economic doctrine of fascism -- fits better..."

Since this blog is Libertarian, and not yet widely read, it's nice to read that others in the media are logical, believe in individual liberty, and see the danger in where Obama is taking this country.

I do disagree and openly call it full out Fascism, because liberals are not only wanting and working to implement economic fascism, but are also trying to destroy the Bill of rights, as they get in the way of their fascist goals.

Rush, Hannity, and Beck are all Wussies

Michael Savage, the number 3 talk show host in the USA, has been banned from traveling to England, because some hatefully leftists are afraid that taking his opinions out of context, will upset the Muslim population, and lead to violence.

Voltaire said "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

Rush, Hannity, Beck, the RNC and most of the media wether liberal or conservative are silent, on the suppression of one of the great minds of our era. Not only are they not defending Savage, they haven't even mentioned this atrocity.

Law professor and columnists Ellis Washington made a great point about this in his www.wnd.com column today. He closed his article as such:

"It is my prayer that conservative talk radio set aside their fears, jealousies and silent acquiescence to the fascist blacklisting tactics of Britain and unite with Savage's righteous cause, defending freedom of speech and freedom of expression in England, in America and throughout the world."

I agree.

More evidence Obama is a Fascist

Cass Sunstein is Barack Obama's nominee for "regulatory czar". He advocates a "Fairness Doctrine" for the Internet that would require opposing opinions be linked and also has suggested angry e-mails should be prevented from being sent by technology that would require a 24-hour cooling off period.

Sunstein has argued that the Internet is anti-democratic because of the way users can filter out information they don’t want to see.

"A system of limitless individual choices, with respect to communications, is not necessarily in the interest of citizenship and self-government," he wrote. "Democratic efforts to reduce the resulting problems ought not be rejected in freedom's name." Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth, and Happiness with Richard Thaler (Yale University Press, 2008).

He wants to put a “Civility Check” into the internet that restricts how and when you can send email that may be considered to be angry. He believes that everything we read online, right down to our personal e-mail communications, should be inspected and approved by the federal government prior to posting on the net.

Sunstein’s basic political philosophy is sometimes described as libertarian paternalism. This philosophy believes the state can “help you make the choices you would make for yourself—if only you had the strength of will and the sharpness of mind.”

This is a sick philosophy which inherently considers people as too weak willed to know what’s best for themselves, and stresses that the government knows best how people should live their lives. So through government coercion, he espouses that the government manipulate the populace to do what the government thinks is best. Right down to forcing you to being exposed to whatever ideas the government wants you to be exposed to, rather than let you filter what you want through the internet. Compare this philosophy to the Philosophy of Liberty.

Since he is Obama’s nominee obviously Obama wants his ideas in our government. Obama must also believe that everything we read online, right down to our personal e-mail communications, should be inspected and approved by the federal government. His Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, has been quoted as saying we have too much Freedom of Speech, and there should be a “Gatekeeper” to news and information. It is obvious that Obama is a fascist, and believes the government knows what’s best for us, and should be in control of the press, private industry, even individual opinions and ideas.

Ask a question Get Arrested

More evidence of US becoming Fascist State

Are you really free in your person, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures. The 4th Amendment says you are, but apparently the TSA doesn't think so. You are expected to explain why, you have what you have, where your going, what your doing, and allow the government to look through your stuff when ever the want. Just having a legal possession can trigger arrest.

From dictionary.com
Arrest: the taking of a person into legal custody, as by officers of the law.

Here's a terrible story about the government arresting a man because he had the temerity to ask if he was legally required to answer questions about his possessions. The possession in question was cash.



Here's a question, by what constitutional authority does the government have to arrest a person for having any legal possession? Or by what authority does the government have to make cash illegal?

We are slipping into tyranny a little bit at a time, are you going to allow it to happen?

If it Walks Like a Duck

Patrice Lewis has an excellent article on the United States march to Socialism. http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=90946 “According to Dictionary.com, socialism is "Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy." She talks about many the Obama administration’s actions that are not only “extra constitutional” but classically socialistic. Socialists believe; in the use of force to gain their personal ends, the state owns the output of individuals, you have no right to self defense, etc. If it quacks like socialism, if it looks like socialism, if walks like socialism then it’s Socialism. This is an outstanding article that every liberty loving person should study.