Tag Archives: Nancy Pelosi

The Sixties Radical- Lets make Free Speech a Crime Except from The Political Class

The attack on our constitution and our freedoms are led by the spokes hole Nancy Pelosi. This time she wants to change the First Amendment of The Constitution. Pelsoi and the rest of the elites, the Left, the evil Obama, and the Democrat Socialist Party want to restrict what can be said and can‘t be said by business’s that disagree with the policies of the Left and those in power.

This story appeared on www.cnsnews.com

Terence Jeffery wrote this.

“House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi on Thursday endorsed a movement announced by other congressional Democrats on Wednesday to ratify an amendment to the U.S. Constitution that would allow Congress to regulate political speech when it is engaged in by corporations as opposed to individuals.”

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/pelosi-amend-first-amendment

Pelosi etal claim that this will level the playing field by cutting out special interest groups and those evil corporations (as referred to by the Left) who will be given a special advantage when they give money to political candidates. The sad truth is this. The Democrat Socialist Party always point to the corporations as ones who are influencing  the out comes of elections however in fact it is big money given by George Soros to groups like Media Matters, Planned Parenthood, the Politico, and many other groups far out spend conservative money. Now that we conservatives have learned how to play by their rules the Left is having a hissy fit.

Here is the link that lists all groups that George Soros funds.

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/viewSubCategory.asp?id=589

The Dummcrats ( a term I borrowed from Mark Levin) battle cry is take the money out of politics and this will fix the problem. This is why these people are so diabolical.  The McCain-Feingold was supposed to fix the problem however in reality this bill made sure that the incumbents stayed in power.

This is what the idiotic John McCain told us. The real truth this was done to murder the First Amendment.

McCain bought into the lies and thus we almost lost one of our liberties.

Here is part of the text from this bill.

“Reduction of Special Interest Influence – Amends the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (FECA) to prohibit: (1) national political party committees (including any officer, agent, or entity they directly or indirectly establish, finance, maintain, or control) (officer, agent, or entity) from soliciting, receiving, directing, transferring, or spending money that is subject to FECA limitations, prohibitions, and reporting requirements; (2) soft money spending (not currently subject to FECA) for a Federal election activity, in general, by State, district, and local political party committees (including any officer, agent, or entity) or by an association or similar group of candidates for State or local office or State or local officials; (3) soft money spending for fundraising costs by any such committee, officer, agent, or entity; (4) national, State, district, or local political party committees (including national political party congressional campaign committees, entities, officers, or agents) from soliciting, any funds for, or making or directing any donations to certain tax-exempt organizations; and (5) candidates for Federal office, Federal office holders, or their agents from soliciting, receiving, directing, transferring, or spending funds in connection with a Federal election, including funds for any Federal election activity, unless they are subject to FECA limitations, prohibitions, and reporting requirements, or in connection with any non-Federal election unless such funds meet specified equirements.”

http://www.thepoliticalguide.com/Legislation/house/107/H%20R%202356/n

The Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 decision that prohibited unions and corporations from airing paid ads thirty days before Candidates for Congress or President was unconstitutional. This in effected killed the McCain Feingold act.

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=35287  

This is what happens when temporary politicians make laws that restrict our freedom. Thank God the Supreme Court got it right. And this drives the Left nuts. These folks want it okay for Union thugs to have their say but not those evil corporations ( in the Left’s eyes). Yet it is those evil corporations (in the Left’s eyes) that pay the freight for their campaigns and expensive lifestyles.

The evil Obama and his sycophants in the media, the Democrat Socialist Party, the Left , and all those drones out there view The Constitution as something that must be overcome and destroyed. Once this is done then utopia on earth can be created. Except these folks forgot one little iddy biddy piece of information. This has been tried many times before and the results are hell on earth. Dictators rule supreme and “We The People become the serfs and slaves to the elites of society. And truly we are all in the screwed big time.

The Sixties Radical on The Republicans Selling out the Country for Nothing but a Pittance

I have had with the chicken shit Republican Leadership. These no good for nothing leaders will not stand up to the evil one Barrack Hussein Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and Chuck “YOU” Schumer etal.

Speaker of the House John Boehner and Republican leader Mitch McConnell have said that they will not attack the deficit problem.

These two idiots have both blinked.

McConnell and Boehner are in the process of selling us down the river for a slice of the power pie.

The Republicans don’t get it.

They were elected by “We The People” to stop this out of control spending and stop the government take over of our lives.

This country is in the position losing everything.

The evil one is spending trillions of dollars.

He is bankrupting this country and the country of our children and their children.

The straw dog argument is this.

We have to tax the rich. Tax the oil companies. Tax everyone who makes over 250 grand and this will fix our problems.

The real truth is this.

All of us little people will lose everything.

In the end “We The People” lose and get screwed.

The USA takes in enough money to cover its obligations.

We have a spending problem.

Let’s say the government takes all money from all millionaires and billionaires, all the money from the oil companies and big business this would only cover our expenses until mid-October.

The Government would have to take everyone’s income from one dollar to a million dollars and this money would only take care of the expenses until midnight December 31 2011.

The government can’t continue spending money like a bunch of drunken Marxists.

WE ARE BROKE.

WE DON’T HAVE THE BUCKS.

The spending has to stop now.

If the Republicans cave on this issue you are finished.

People like me will never send you a dime.

We will form a third party.

The evil one will win another term and the USA is toast.

This is the sad fact of your actions if you cave and try sell us a bill of goods like you did the last time.

We are sick and tired of this shit.

Hey Boehner the House controls the purse strings.

You have the power.

Stop spending money.

Close the purse strings now.

It is time you stand up for this country instead of the Leftist, the Libs, the Republican Party, and the rest of the political elites in this country.

Beohner you are not a man of principle your are chicken shit who will sell out his country of bowl of porridge.

I have an idea read the Constitution.

Oh yeah, that’s right you did that and January and it went in one ear and out the other.

You still don’t get it.

Read the Bible.

Read a basic ECON 101 book.

You can’t spend more than you take in.

In the bulls eye of the evil Obama is our very way of life.

Our freedom is hanging by a thread.

You have to act now.

Stand up and do the right thing.

Don’t compromise.

Shut this sucker down.

If you Boehner, Mitch McConnell, Eric Cantor and the rest of you Republicans were around at the time our country was formed you would have sold us down the river.

We would still be under the thumb of England.

You are gutless wonder.

The difference between you and Chuck “YOU Schumer is this.

Schumer lies all the time and we know it.

You know what is right and won’t do it because you are scared of what the state run media will say about you.

You lie to us.

You say one thing and do another.

Does the recent Budget bill strike a familiar note?

You said 65 million when in reality it was it was less than that.

You lied.

You and the Democrat Socialist Party are a cut from the same cloth.

Government control of our lives under the guise of doing what is best of us we the people

Once freedom is lost we will never get it back.

You are the idiot. 

Boehner you are part of the problem.

You are part of the cancer that is murdering this country.

Boehner has to go.

Just like the rest of McCain wing of the Republican Party.

Let me ask you this.

How do you compromise between food and poison?

 

 

The Sixties Radical on Obama The Marxist

This President is nothing but a race baiting anti semantic prick. The evil one is void of substantive ideas. Instead he uses race baiting, class warfare. These ideas are taken right out of The Communist Manifesto.

Obama’s ideas aren’t new.

They have been tried since the advent of man.

I heard Mark Levin call him a Trotskyite.

Here is a simple but effective definition of Trotskyism-

trotskyism , definition of trotskyism , meaning of trotskyism – 1  ( noun )  Trotskyism the form of communism advocated by Leon Trotsky; calls for immediate worldwide revolution by the proletariat Noun1 . Trotskyism – the form of communism advocated by Leon Trotsky; calls for immediate worldwide revolution by the proletariatcommunism – a political theory favoring collectivism in a classless society

Trotsky is a believer in permanent revolution. He is disciple of Karl Marx except he takes it a step further.

Trotsky wants to keep a nation in total turmoil until the working class takes over.

Trotsky is an orthodox Marxist  and Bolshevik Leninist.

 He is a proponent of the dictatorship of the Proletariat.

This means the working class is total control of everything.

Trotsky’s ideas are anti capitalism.

It is pure Socialism.

Here is the kicker.

The mother state is Russia.

Trotsky’s ideas have spread to Bolivia, Brasil, Argentina, and Venezuela, Europe, and Asia.

Now the evil one is introducing Trotsky to the good old USA.

Trotsky is the founder of the International Left Opposition in 1930.

In 1933 the name was changed to International Communist League and then changed names in 1938 to the Fourth International.

The only difference between Obama and Trotsky is this. Obama wants to be King.

He is the ruler.

We are the surfs.

The state is God.

This will not be a workers paradise as created by Karl Marx but it will turn into a living hell for all except those in power.

 In the real world if we don’t follow the great Obama, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck “YOU” Schumer, Barney Frank etal we will die.

Here are the exact words of Karl Marx from the Communist Manifesto- In what relation do the Communists stand to the proletarians as a whole?

The Communists do not form a separate party opposed to the other working-class parties. They have no interests separate and apart from those of the proletariat as a whole.

They do not set up any sectarian principles of their own, by which to shape and mould the proletarian movement.

The Communists are distinguished from the other working-class parties by this only: 1. In the national struggles of the proletarians of the different countries, they point out and bring to the front the common interests of the entire proletariat, independently of all nationality. 2. In the various stages of development which the struggle of the working class against the bourgeoisie has to pass through, they always and everywhere represent the interests of the movement as a whole.

The Communists, therefore, are on the one hand, practically, the most advanced and resolute section of the working-class parties of every country, that section which pushes forward all others; on the other hand, theoretically, they have over the great mass of the proletariat the advantage of clearly understanding the line of march, the conditions, and the ultimate general results of the proletarian movement.

The immediate aim of the Communists is the same as that of all other proletarian parties: formation of the proletariat into a class, overthrow of the bourgeois supremacy, conquest of political power by the proletariat.

The theoretical conclusions of the Communists are in no way based on ideas or principles that have been invented, or discovered, by this or that would-be universal reformer.

They merely express, in general terms, actual relations springing from an existing class struggle, from a historical movement going on under our very eyes. The abolition of existing property relations is not at all a distinctive feature of communism.

All property relations in the past have continually been subject to historical change consequent upon the change in historical conditions.

The French Revolution, for example, abolished feudal property in favour of bourgeois property.

The distinguishing feature of Communism is not the abolition of property generally, but the abolition of bourgeois property. But modern bourgeois private property is the final and most complete expression of the system of producing and appropriating products, that is based on class antagonisms, on the exploitation of the many by the few.

In this sense, the theory of the Communists may be summed up in the single sentence: Abolition of private property.

We Communists have been reproached with the desire of abolishing the right of personally acquiring property as the fruit of a man’s own labour, which property is alleged to be the groundwork of all personal freedom, activity and independence.

Hard-won, self-acquired, self-earned property! Do you mean the property of petty artisan and of the small peasant, a form of property that preceded the bourgeois form? There is no need to abolish that; the development of industry has to a great extent already destroyed it, and is still destroying it daily.

Or do you mean the modern bourgeois private property?

But does wage-labour create any property for the labourer? Not a bit. It creates capital, i.e., that kind of property which exploits wage-labour, and which cannot increase except upon condition of begetting a new supply of wage-labour for fresh exploitation. Property, in its present form, is based on the antagonism of capital and wage labour. Let us examine both sides of this antagonism.

To be a capitalist, is to have not only a purely personal, but a social status in production. Capital is a collective product, and only by the united action of many members, nay, in the last resort, only by the united action of all members of society, can it be set in motion. Capital is therefore not only personal; it is a social power.

When, therefore, capital is converted into common property, into the property of all members of society, personal property is not thereby transformed into social property. It is only the social character of the property that is changed. It loses its class character.

Let us now take wage-labour.

 The average price of wage-labour is the minimum wage, i.e., that quantum of the means of subsistence which is absolutely requisite to keep the labourer in bare existence as a labourer. What, therefore, the wage-labourer appropriates by means of his labour, merely suffices to prolong and reproduce a bare existence. We by no means intend to abolish this personal appropriation of the products of labour, an appropriation that is made for the maintenance and reproduction of human life, and that leaves no surplus wherewith to command the labour of others. All that we want to do away with is the miserable character of this appropriation, under which the labourer lives merely to increase capital, and is allowed to live only in so far as the interest of the ruling class requires it.

In bourgeois society, living labour is but a means to increase accumulated labour. In Communist society, accumulated labour is but a means to widen, to enrich, to promote the existence of the labourer.

In bourgeois society, therefore, the past dominates the present; in Communist society, the present dominates the past. In bourgeois society capital is independent and has individuality, while the living person is dependent and has no individuality.

And the abolition of this state of things is called by the bourgeois, abolition of individuality and freedom! And rightly so. The abolition of bourgeois individuality, bourgeois independence, and bourgeois freedom is undoubtedly aimed at.

By freedom is meant, under the present bourgeois conditions of production, free trade, free selling and buying.

But if selling and buying disappears, free selling and buying disappears also. This talk about free selling and buying, and all the other “brave words” of our bourgeois about freedom in general, have a meaning, if any, only in contrast with restricted selling and buying, with the fettered traders of the Middle Ages, but have no meaning when opposed to the Communistic abolition of buying and selling, of the bourgeois conditions of production, and of the bourgeoisie itself.

You are horrified at our intending to do away with private property. But in your existing society, private property is already done away with for nine-tenths of the population; its existence for the few is solely due to its non-existence in the hands of those nine-tenths. You reproach us, therefore, with intending to do away with a form of property, the necessary condition for whose existence is the non-existence of any property for the immense majority of society.

In one word, you reproach us with intending to do away with your property. Precisely so; that is just what we intend.

From the moment when labour can no longer be converted into capital, money, or rent, into a social power capable of being monopolised, i.e., from the moment when individual property can no longer be transformed into bourgeois property, into capital, from that moment, you say, individuality vanishes.

You must, therefore, confess that by “individual” you mean no other person than the bourgeois, than the middle-class owner of property. This person must, indeed, be swept out of the way, and made impossible.

Communism deprives no man of the power to appropriate the products of society; all that it does is to deprive him of the power to subjugate the labour of others by means of such appropriations.

It has been objected that upon the abolition of private property, all work will cease, and universal laziness will overtake us.

According to this, bourgeois society ought long ago to have gone to the dogs through sheer idleness; for those of its members who work, acquire nothing, and those who acquire anything do not work. The whole of this objection is but another expression of the tautology: that there can no longer be any wage-labour when there is no longer any capital.

All objections urged against the Communistic mode of producing and appropriating material products, have, in the same way, been urged against the Communistic mode of producing and appropriating intellectual products. Just as, to the bourgeois, the disappearance of class property is the disappearance of production itself, so the disappearance of class culture is to him identical with the disappearance of all culture. That culture, the loss of which he laments, is, for the enormous majority, a mere training to act as a machine.

But don’t wrangle with us so long as you apply, to our intended abolition of bourgeois property, the standard of your bourgeois notions of freedom, culture, law, &c. Your very ideas are but the outgrowth of the conditions of your bourgeois production and bourgeois property, just as your jurisprudence is but the will of your class made into a law for all, a will whose essential character and direction are determined by the economical conditions of existence of your class.

The selfish misconception that induces you to transform into eternal laws of nature and of reason, the social forms springing from your present mode of production and form of property – historical relations that rise and disappear in the progress of production – this misconception you share with every ruling class that has preceded you. What you see clearly in the case of ancient property, what you admit in the case of feudal property, you are of course forbidden to admit in the case of your own bourgeois form of property.

Abolition [Aufhebung] of the family! Even the most radical flare up at this infamous proposal of the Communists.

On what foundation is the present family, the bourgeois family, based? On capital, on private gain. In its completely developed form, this family exists only among the bourgeoisie. But this state of things finds its complement in the practical absence of the family among the proletarians, and in public prostitution.

The bourgeois family will vanish as a matter of course when its complement vanishes, and both will vanish with the vanishing of capital.

Do you charge us with wanting to stop the exploitation of children by their parents? To this crime we plead guilty.

But, you say, we destroy the most hallowed of relations, when we replace home education by social.

And your education! Is not that also social, and determined by the social conditions under which you educate, by the intervention direct or indirect, of society, by means of schools, &c.? The Communists have not invented the intervention of society in education; they do but seek to alter the character of that intervention, and to rescue education from the influence of the ruling class.

The bourgeois clap-trap about the family and education, about the hallowed co-relation of parents and child, becomes all the more disgusting, the more, by the action of Modern Industry, all the family ties among the proletarians are torn asunder, and their children transformed into simple articles of commerce and instruments of labour.

But you Communists would introduce community of women, screams the bourgeoisie in chorus.

The bourgeois sees his wife a mere instrument of production. He hears that the instruments of production are to be exploited in common, and, naturally, can come to no other conclusion that the lot of being common to all will likewise fall to the women.

He has not even a suspicion that the real point aimed at is to do away with the status of women as mere instruments of production.

For the rest, nothing is more ridiculous than the virtuous indignation of our bourgeois at the community of women which, they pretend, is to be openly and officially established by the Communists. The Communists have no need to introduce community of women; it has existed almost from time immemorial.

Our bourgeois, not content with having wives and daughters of their proletarians at their disposal, not to speak of common prostitutes, take the greatest pleasure in seducing each other’s wives.

Bourgeois marriage is, in reality, a system of wives in common and thus, at the most, what the Communists might possibly be reproached with is that they desire to introduce, in substitution for a hypocritically concealed, an openly legalised community of women. For the rest, it is self-evident that the abolition of the present system of production must bring with it the abolition of the community of women springing from that system, i.e., of prostitution both public and private.

The Communists are further reproached with desiring to abolish countries and nationality.

The working men have no country. We cannot take from them what they have not got. Since the proletariat must first of all acquire political supremacy, must rise to be the leading class of the nation, must constitute itself the nation, it is so far, itself national, though not in the bourgeois sense of the word.

National differences and antagonism between peoples are daily more and more vanishing, owing to the development of the bourgeoisie, to freedom of commerce, to the world market, to uniformity in the mode of production and in the conditions of life corresponding thereto.

The supremacy of the proletariat will cause them to vanish still faster. United action, of the leading civilised countries at least, is one of the first conditions for the emancipation of the proletariat.

In proportion as the exploitation of one individual by another will also be put an end to, the exploitation of one nation by another will also be put an end to. In proportion as the antagonism between classes within the nation vanishes, the hostility of one nation to another will come to an end.

The charges against Communism made from a religious, a philosophical and, generally, from an ideological standpoint, are not deserving of serious examination.

Does it require deep intuition to comprehend that man’s ideas, views, and conception, in one word, man’s consciousness, changes with every change in the conditions of his material existence, in his social relations and in his social life?

What else does the history of ideas prove, than that intellectual production changes its character in proportion as material production is changed? The ruling ideas of each age have ever been the ideas of its ruling class.

When people speak of the ideas that revolutionise society, they do but express that fact that within the old society the elements of a new one have been created, and that the dissolution of the old ideas keeps even pace with the dissolution of the old conditions of existence.

When the ancient world was in its last throes, the ancient religions were overcome by Christianity. When Christian ideas succumbed in the 18th century to rationalist ideas, feudal society fought its death battle with the then revolutionary bourgeoisie. The ideas of religious liberty and freedom of conscience merely gave expression to the sway of free competition within the domain of knowledge.

“Undoubtedly,” it will be said, “religious, moral, philosophical, and juridical ideas have been modified in the course of historical development. But religion, morality, philosophy, political science, and law, constantly survived this change.”

“There are, besides, eternal truths, such as Freedom, Justice, etc., that are common to all states of society. But Communism abolishes eternal truths, it abolishes all religion, and all morality, instead of constituting them on a new basis; it therefore acts in contradiction to all past historical experience.”

What does this accusation reduce itself to? The history of all past society has consisted in the development of class antagonisms, antagonisms that assumed different forms at different epochs.

But whatever form they may have taken, one fact is common to all past ages, viz., the exploitation of one part of society by the other. No wonder, then, that the social consciousness of past ages, despite all the multiplicity and variety it displays, moves within certain common forms, or general ideas, which cannot completely vanish except with the total disappearance of class antagonisms.

The Communist revolution is the most radical rupture with traditional property relations; no wonder that its development involved the most radical rupture with traditional ideas. But let us have done with the bourgeois objections to Communism.

We have seen above, that the first step in the revolution by the working class is to raise the proletariat to the position of ruling class to win the battle of democracy.

The proletariat will use its political supremacy to wrest, by degree, all capital from the bourgeoisie, to centralise all instruments of production in the hands of the State, i.e., of the proletariat organised as the ruling class; and to increase the total productive forces as rapidly as possible.

Of course, in the beginning, this cannot be effected except by means of despotic inroads on the rights of property, and on the conditions of bourgeois production; by means of measures, therefore, which appear economically insufficient and untenable, but which, in the course of the movement, outstrip themselves, necessitate further inroads upon the old social order, and are unavoidable as a means of entirely revolutionising the mode of production.

These measures will, of course, be different in different countries.

Nevertheless, in most advanced countries, the following will be pretty generally applicable. 1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.

. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
5. Centralisation of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.
6. Centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State.
7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
8. Equal liability of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country.
10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children’s factory labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, &c, &c.

When, in the course of development, class distinctions have disappeared, and all production has been concentrated in the hands of a vast association of the whole nation, the public power will lose its political character. Political power, properly so called, is merely the organised power of one class for oppressing another. If the proletariat during its contest with the bourgeoisie is compelled, by the force of circumstances, to organise itself as a class, if, by means of a revolution, it makes itself the ruling class, and, as such, sweeps away by force the old conditions of production, then it will, along with these conditions, have swept away the conditions for the existence of class antagonisms and of classes generally, and will thereby have abolished its own supremacy as a class.

In place of the old bourgeois society, with its classes and class antagonisms, we shall have an association, in which the free development of each is the condition for the free development of all.

 

The Sixties Radical on the Decline of The USA

Look folks there only so many ways one can say this. This nation is broke. We do not have the money. The evil Obama and his minions have spent us into oblivion.

All you lap dog Democrat Socialist Party members, seminar writers, lame stream state run media sycophants, and leftist are helping the evil one rearrange the deck chairs on the Titanic.

You are buying into the destruction of this country.

This is either because you are stupid or this is done on purpose.

I think this is done on purpose.

The sad fact is this most of you like me will wind up losing everything and be forced to live under the dictates of the King.

Obama, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi etal believe they are the rulers of us all.

Please remember the evil Obama said during his campaign for President that he wanted to change the nature of this country.

The evil one has. He has pushed us towards the new Democrat Socialist States of America.

Please show me where it is written in the Constitution it is the job of the President to change the country into his own image.

Lets remember this all-important fact. Once you give up freedom you never get it back.

The lynch pin to our freedom is private property rights.

Once this is taken from us all of other freedoms will be take away.

The downfall we as a nation are facing is directly tied to 1962 when we officially kicked the God of the Bible out of our country.

Remember God didn’t abandon us we abandoned God.

We told him voce vai.

Since the 1960’s the institutions of the family, religion, and education have been destroyed by well meaning fools.

The last to go is the economy.

Guess what folks this is happening big time.

Please read this article written by The Heritage Foundation-

The Debt Is Not a Game, Mr. President

Well, President Obama asked for it. And last night he got it in grand fashion—a “clean vote” on raising the nation’s debt limit, free of any of the desperately needed spending cuts that Americans are demanding, conservatives support, but liberals abhor. And by a 318–97 margin, the House of Representatives shot down the President’s effort to authorize $2.4 trillion in additional borrowing by the federal government without condition.

The vote was introduced by the House Republican majority to send a message to the President in advance of their meeting today at the White House: There cannot be more borrowing and spending without significant spending cuts and reforms. But when asked yesterday about the vote, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney merely said, “It’s fine. It’s fine,” and assured reporters that President Obama will “definitely” win the debt limit fight. Meanwhile, Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-MD) decried the vote, calling it a “political charade” and a “30-second ad attack.” Rep. Hoyer and Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) then joined Republicans and voted against President Obama’s wishes.

Unfortunately, all is not fine, this is not a game, and what the White House and congressional Democrats view as nettlesome roadblocks to the continued growth of government is a movement to at long last restore sanity to the federal government amid a fiscal crisis. And that movement is occurring in the utter vacuum of leadership centered at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

That failure to lead can be traced back to 2010, when the Democrat-controlled Congress did not pass a budget for the first time since current budget rules were put into place in 1974. And from there, a straight line can be drawn to last week, when the Senate voted 97–0 against President Obama’s fiscal year 2011 budget proposal. It is in this empty garden, left untended by leadership from the White House, that our federal government has been allowed to grow unchecked.

The federal government is borrowing 40 cents of every dollar it spends.  The accumulated national debt stands at nearly 70 percent of the country’s annual economic output, set to climb to 100 percent by the end of this decade. And according to some comparisons, the U.S. economy is already in worse shape than the stumbling economies of most European nations. But never fear: The President is holding a meeting with congressional Republicans today to “hear and listen to their ideas, their concerns.”

Mr. President, it’s not enough to simply “hear and listen.” Now is the time for you to lead the way in cutting spending and reforming government. Take the advice of more than 150 economists who authored a letter warning about the consequences of increasing spending without changes in the way government does business:

An increase in the national debt limit that is not accompanied by significant spending cuts and budget reforms would harm private-sector job growth and represent a tremendous setback in the effort to deal with our national debt.
And with yesterday’s vote, it’s clear that raising the debt limit without reforms is not an available option. The path forward should instead be one marked by substantial spending cuts designed to target our nation’s fiscal problems. Those cuts should be followed by crucial changes such as hard spending caps and entitlement reforms that would return the nation to fiscal sanity and keep it there. David S. Addington, Vice President for Domestic and Economic Policy at The Heritage Foundation, writes:

[T]the least acceptable outcome is for Congress to continue to raise the debt ceiling over and over, doing nothing to drive down federal spending and borrowing, and to pile trillions of dollars in debt upon the shoulders of America’s children and the generations to follow.”
While the White House warns that not raising the debt limit would be “calamitous,” “disastrous” and “catastrophic,” their end-of-days rhetoric is equally applicable to the present state of the nation’s fiscal course. In the absence of leadership from the President, conservatives in Congress have attempted to right the ship. It’s about time that the President get on board.

The Sixties Radical on The Remaking of The USA

Our Founding Fathers knew and believed that all liberties came from God almighty. This means the God of the Bible and Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

This translates into economic freedom and private property rights.  Without economic and private property rights this would leave “We The People” as slaves to the landowners and the King.

This is what happened in Europe. We were called surfs. We worked the land for the Landowners and the King.

The King and the government owned all our money and property.

All money and goods belonged to the state.

The state deemed what we could have and not have.

This is what is happening now in this country.

The evil Prez Obama is shredding the Constitution to bits and remaking this country into a Socialist, Communist, Marxists society.

The King Obama wants to own everything.

Obama is setting himself up as the new God of the land.

This is called the Godliness of Kings.

Our Founding Fathers used their own personal experience living in England and other European countries to shape the very founding of this country. These brave men knew from first hand experience that a state run religion would destroy all the freedom of “We The People.”

The evil Obama and his minions in the state run media, The Democrat Party, The Republican Party, and The Left are now on the verge of establishing a state run religion and power structure.

This religion and power structure now has a new name and God. It is called the God of The State.

“We The People” will now be forced to worship and serve the God of the state.

If we don’t it will be off with our heads.

Our history is now coming full circle.

The evil Obama, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck “YOU” Schumer, and the rest of the Democrat Party are establishing themselves as the new absolute ruling class.

Many Republicans such as John McCain, Olympia Snow, Sax Chambliss, Mitch McConnell, and others want to be a member in this ruling class.

John Boehner, and the rest of his idiots in the Republican Party are blind to these realities.

It is time these fools wake up and smell the stench of the new God of the government.

A few brave men such as Paul Ryan, Rand Paul, and others see this coming but are in a death struggle with members of the Republican Party who want to a part of this new ruling class.

The sad fact is we don’t have the time to wait until the 2012 election.

By then most of our God given freedom will be gone.

John Boehner and the idiot leadership etal need to stand up and take the fight to the evil Obama and his four horsemen of the Apocalypse.

This is not the time to cave in but fight.

These evil people will use whatever means possible to paint us conservatives as the real evil in this country.

Please remember the real evil is Obama and the Democrat Party.

Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck “YOU Schumer Prez Obama etal are typhoid Mary’s.

The shit they pedal doesn’t kill them but us- “We The People.”

Please consider this from The Heritage Foundation-

Illegal Immigration Is No Laughing Matter

The White House correspondents’ dinner might have been two weeks ago, but President Barack Obama continued his comedy routine yesterday in El Paso, Texas, only this time Donald Trump wasn’t the butt of the jokes. Instead, during a speech on immigration, the president mocked Republicans at large, the rule of law, and any American who takes the defense of our nation seriously.

Respectfully, Mr. President, illegal immigration and border security are no laughing matter.

But to the president, they apparently are, especially when it provides fodder for a purely political speech, delivered amid a round of campaign fundraisers in the Lone Star State. After claiming that his administration has “gone above and beyond” Republicans’ calls for immigration reform (which he hasn’t), Obama launched into an all-out assault on the GOP:

We have gone above and beyond what was requested by the very Republicans who said they supported broader reform as long as we got serious about enforcement. All the stuff they asked for, we’ve done. But even though we’ve answered these concerns, I gotta say I suspect there are still going to be some who are trying to move the goal posts on us one more time.

You know, they said we needed to triple the Border Patrol. Or now they’re going to say we need to quadruple the Border Patrol. Or they’ll want a higher fence. Maybe they’ll need a moat. Maybe they’ll want alligators in the moat.”
And if that weren’t enough to prove just how political the speech was, the White House went so far as to include catcalls from the audience on the official transcript from the speech, including, “We love you!,” “Tear it down!,” “They’re racist!,” 53 mentions of the audience’s applause and nine mentions of laughter. We get it, Mr. President — you played to your crowd quite well.

This isn’t a question of racism, the goal posts haven’t moved, and a moat is not what’s needed. In case the president hasn’t noticed, the 1,896-mile Rio Grande, arid deserts, treacherous mountain ranges, Border Patrol and hundreds of miles of fence haven’t been enough. And though the president claimed, “The fence is now basically complete,” a February 2011 GAO report shows that Border Patrol does not have control of the border.

Maybe, amid all the applause, the president hasn’t noticed that millions of illegal immigrants now live in the United States, and our laws aren’t being enforced. And when Arizona attempted to enforce the law since the federal government would not, the Obama Justice Department sued to stop it.

Rather than offer effective solutions to the illegal immigration problem, Obama’s response was to ridicule those seeking to enforce the law and offer amnesty for others to curry their political favor. He even dredged up the DREAM Act, a mini-amnesty in sheep’s clothing, which fell flat on its face in Congress. That’s par for the course with this president, who continues to place politics before policy as a matter of routine. The Heritage Foundation’s Jena McNeil explains:

An amnesty would cost taxpayers millions, if not billions of dollars—at a time where debt is at its ceiling and budgets are busted. It would also reward those who broke the law and came to the U.S. illegally over those who came to the U.S. the legal way.
Solving the problem, though, isn’t the president’s goal. Cynically winning Hispanic votes is his end game. Heritage’s Israel Ortega writes:

It’s obvious that political calculations are driving the President’s push for immigration reform in light of his all-time-low support among Hispanics. President Obama’s advisors remain convinced that immigration reform will guarantee their support, despite polling that indicates that unemployment and education are issues that keep most Hispanics up at night.

Unfortunately President Obama continues to believe that Hispanics are single-issue voters who will reward him for his stump speeches on immigration.
America faces a real illegal immigration problem. It also faces an unemployment problem, a spending problem, an entitlements problem and a national security problem.

On immigration, the right solution is making a real commitment to border security, workplace and immigration enforcement, a temporary worker program and visa reforms to get employers the employees they need. On all of the above, the solution starts with a president who is willing to lead and get down to business — but not the business of taking cheap shots to score points in the political arena.

The Sixties Radical on The American Dream

This little piece of information needs to be shared. The evil Obama and his Marxists cohorts in the media, the left, and the Democrat party are murdering the American dream.

The Democrat Party of today is not the same Democrat Party of John F. Kennedy.

This I borrowed from Mark Levin and Rush Limbaugh.

The Dems stand only for themselves and keeping their power at any cost.

These folks are evil.

The Dems want to destroy this country and turn it into a Communist state.

Obama doesn’t care about anyone else all he cares about is himself and taking all of our money, property, and freedom and giving it to the state, the state and federal unions, and all of the Democrat special interest groups.

If you think Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck “YOU” Schumer etal want a better life for you and your family I have a bridge for sale.

It is called the Brooklyn Bridge.

The real truth is this. We don’t have two until the 2012 elections to stop these people dead in their tracks.

Obama and his evil cohorts need to be stopped now.

John Boehner and the rest of you Republicans better wake up now and fight for this nation.

It is time to fight fire with fire.

Call the Dems on their lies.

The Dems are liars.

The Prez is a liar.

It is time We The People take our country back.

Please read this little diddy from The Heritage Foundation- It is an eye opener.

The American Dream Is In Jeopardy

Companies like General Electric and Caterpillar might sound as American as apple pie, but like many other multinational firms, which employ a fifth of all American workers, they’re cutting back on their domestic workforces and increasing hiring overseas. That disturbing trend points to a serious problem in the United States: the Land of the Free is not the attractive place to do business that it once was.

Big government policies are setting us on a path away from a fundamental freedom we cherish—one the Founders strove to preserve. It’s the freedom to pursue the American dream—economic freedom—that, tragically, is in jeopardy.

When many folks think about freedom, the first thing that comes to mind is the freedom of speech and religion, the right to bear arms, to vote, or to have a trial by a jury of their peers. Though it isn’t enumerated in the Bill of Rights, economic freedom is just as important. In The Heritage Foundation’s “Understanding America” series, Kim R. Holmes, Ph.D. and Matthew Spalding, Ph.D. explain why it is so important:

America’s founders knew that liberty is about more than just securing political freedoms. True liberty requires economic freedom—the ability to profit from our own ideas and labor, to work, produce, consume, own, trade, and invest according to our own choices. Thomas Jefferson underscored that point when he observed that “a wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement.”

The desire to control one’s freedom to pursue happiness was at the heart of the American Revolution. That freedom was in short supply as the colonies suffered under economic policies over which they had no say. That sentiment sounds familiar to many Americans today as they watch our government grow unchecked with trillion-dollar deficits and an entitlement crisis waiting to smother future generations. That frustration gave birth to the Tea Party movement and the conservative tidal wave in the November 2010 elections. Americans were right to be concerned.

Sadly, the United States is no longer economically “the Land of the Free.” According to The Heritage Foundation’s Index of Economic Freedom, the United States ranks ninth internationally, behind such countries as Denmark, Canada, and first-place Hong Kong. And that’s all due to huge increases in government spending, which was supposed to combat unemployment and spur economic growth. But that growth hasn’t happened, and instead the American economy is handcuffed by taxes and regulations that have strangled creativity, productivity, and competition, all of which are at the core of economic freedom.

And now we’re seeing the results. As The Wall Street Journal reports, “companies cut their work forces in the U.S. by 2.9 million during the 2000s while increasing employment overseas by 2.4 million.” That’s in stark contrast from a decade ago, when for every job U.S. multinational companies created abroad, they created nearly two jobs here in America, according to economist Matthew Slaughter. Though President Obama might pay lip service to Americans’ desire to rein in government, he’s late to the party. From Obamacare to a nearly trillion dollar stimulus bill, trillions in new debt, a $26.1 billion government union bailout, and more, President Obama and the previous Congress have given us plenty of reasons to question their commitment to reform government and restore economic freedom.

With the arrival of the Tea Party movement, the culture of Washington began to change, and the trending topic in D.C. became fiscal restraint, not government largesse. That’s good news for those who want to ensure that America remains the Land of the Free.

The Sixties Radical on Media Frenzy

The media frenzy and panic over the fake government shut down glosses over the problems this country is having. The real truth is this the government will not shut down. Sure, Jelly Stone Park, the museums, and God forbid some government employees will stop working.

SHUT IT DOWN.

The Dems and the Prez are playing games with our very lively hoods. Welfare recipients, the God almighty government workers, and God knows who else are more important than our military.

The Republicans passed a bill that would pay the military until the end of the year yet the Dems and The Prez are screaming bloody murder over the riders attached to the bill.

Nancy Pelosi and the evil gang attached riders to every bill they have passed.

Obama care had rider attached to a bill that kicked in millions of dollars to implement the take over the healthcare system in this country.

Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, The Prez, and the Dems are liars.

You can’t get a straight answer if their very lives depended upon it.   

The cause of this mess is the evil Prez Obama and his merry band of Marxists.

Nancy Pelosi and her gang had control of Congress since 2007 and not a single budget was passed.

Why?

To hide the real truth of what they wanted to do.

Change this country into a Marxists nation.

The God of the government is king in Prez Obama’s and his Dem destroyer’s eyes.

The Dems are ones who want the government to shut down.

Why?

Because the Dems polling numbers indicate that the Republicans will take the hit.

The Dems are more concerned with getting their power back than leading this country in the right direction.

WE ARE BROKE.

A real fix is needed.

No seniors will not lose their social security checks.

Medicaid and Medicare will still take care of the seniors.

Old folks will not starve.

The poor will not stop eating or driving cars or watching their color TVs.

They will still have computers and Internet service.

The poor will still have running water and electricity.

If you want to see real poor go to Brasil.

I will show you real poor folks.

The American poor are actually rich compared with the poor in Brasil.

Try Africa or the Middle East.

China tamben.

I guess in the end this is all a distraction to the Prez and the Dems.

Screw the military. Screw the people who make this country go.

In the end it is all about keeping your power, destroying the country, and turning the greatest nation on earth into a third world country run by the God of Marxism.

Hail to our leader Obama.

The God over us all.

For we will are royally screwed.

Oh I forgot the biggie killing millions of babies disquised as womens health.