Thursday, April 12, 2012

The Fiscal Consequences of the Affordable Care Act

Charles Blahous, Mercatus Center: The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) signed into law by President Obama in 2010 will significantly worsen the federal government’s fiscal position relative to previous law. Supporters argued that this comprehensive health care reform would deliver a much-needed correction to the government’s unsustainable fiscal outlook and would benefit the country’s overall fiscal situation. However, between now and 2021, the ACA is expected to add as much as $530 billion to federal deficits while increasing spending by more than $1.15 trillion. Despite the fondest hopes from its supporters, the passage of the ACA unambiguously darkens a dim fiscal picture.

The federal government promised the health care law would finance two different activities-increasing Medicare solvency and extending health care coverage, but with only enough savings to pay for one. Thus, the ACA’s total new spending well exceeds its cost-savings provisions. In 2014, the benefits will kick in and as history shows, it is nearly impossible to take benefits away after they are given. To ensure the ACA does not worsen the federal fiscal outlook, fully two-thirds of the ACA’s new health-exchange subsidies must be repealed, or financing offsets must be found before 2014.

Again, the bill promised to find savings in the government's biggest health insurance program, Medicare, and use those savings to reduce the deficit. Second, the bill promised to expand health care coverage to uninsured Americans. Sounds pretty good, right? But how does the government propose to pay for both? Here's where the math becomes fuzzy. View the following video then look at the full research paper, brief summary, and chart that illustrate our research on the fiscal consequences and outlook of the health care law.

-------------------
Dr. Charles Blahous is a senior research fellow at the Mercatus Center and public trustee for Medicare and Social Security. His primary research interests include retirement security, with an emphasis on Social Security and employer-provided defined benefit pensions, as well as federal fiscal policy, entitlements, demographic change, economic stimulus, financial market regulation, and health care reform.
--------------
Via the ARRA News Service

Tags: Charles Blahous, Mercatus Center, trustee, Medicare and Social Security, Fiscal Consequences, Affordable Care Act, ACA, Health Care, Health, Uninsured, Insurance, Medical, Medicare, Deficit Spending To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to Conservative Voices. Thanks!

Wednesday, April 11, 2012

The Export-Import Bank Nightmare

By Ken Blackwell, ARRA News Service: America, with its constitutionally protected freedoms and entrepreneurial spirit, has generated prosperity at a level which is unique to the human experience.

However, if the mortgage crisis, student loan crisis, and the disastrous failure of green-energy firms have taught us anything, it is government has a unique ability to destroy that prosperity and ruin lives while sticking taxpayers with outrageous bills.

The latest example of big government insanity is the Export-Import Bank. First established in the mid-1930s to finance exports to the Soviet Union, it became its own government agency in 1945 and decided to stick around long after the fall of the Berlin Wall to provide corporate welfare and pick favorites among U.S. producers, with little accountability.

The Ex-Im Bank, which was established for a very narrow purpose and a small $5 million cap, is reaffirming the notion that New Deal-era bureaucracies are the nearest thing to eternal life. Today, it has expanded far beyond its charter and uses funds backed by the American people to give money to foreign companies which compete with American businesses.

While our country is $15 trillion in debt and has the highest corporate tax rate as of April 1, we are mortgaging our children’s futures to give money to politically connected multinational corporations who do not need our support.

To make matters worse, by subsidizing exports, Americans lose money which could otherwise be privately saved, invested, and spent on attractive imports. This process makes taxpayers poorer while simultaneously making American companies less profitable.

In the spirit of true bipartisanship, establishment Democrats and Republicans are both supporting the reauthorization of the Ex-Im Bank, which hopes to spend $160 billion on taxpayer money on projects which are apparently too risky for private investment capital.

General Electric, which in 2010 paid no corporate taxes after earning $150 billion in profit, was helped with over $1 billion in Ex-Im loans for that same year. Even after the Ex-Im bank banked more than $600 billion in loans to Enron and financed loan guarantees to foreign customers of Solyndra, the failed solar panel company which was at the heart of President Obama’s “green jobs” initiatives, bureaucrats want to keep the doors of this inherently corrupt Keynesian institution open.

The Ex-Im bank is not supposed to make loans to countries which are bad credit risks, but it does anyway. Also, Congress is supposed to conduct reviews on how the loans could hurt American jobs, but these audits rarely, if ever, take place.

Ex-Im bank often funds the purchase of airplanes by foreign carriers which compete with American firms. A vast majority of its efforts are with airplane manufacturers such as Boeing, which according to Timothy Carney of The Washington Examiner, shockingly accounted for 90% of Ex-Im’s loan guarantees in 2009.

The unfair competition, while good for Boeing, has been bad for airlines such as Delta, which was forced to stop a popular international route because it could not compete with a foreign airliner receiving Ex-Im subsidies.

It is a myth that government must run a bank to make up for a supposed market failure. If a company cannot find private funding sources, that should be a giant red flag as to why taxpayers should not be handing them money. And new, unconventional ways for risky ventures to raise capital, such as crowdfunding and micro-investing, are far more useful than anything government could develop.

Investment gimmicks subject to endless political pressure by central-planners are dubious and inherently inefficient ways to invest money. The unintended consequences of government-backed loans have been disastrous and continue to encourage companies to lobby Congress for special perks and privileges at your expense. This is a form of European-style socialism, and it is time to stop repeating failed policies.

Fiscal conservatives in Congress must make the Ex-Im bank an “ex-bank.”
---------------
J. Ken Blackwell is a conservative family values advocate. Blackwell is a senior fellow at the Family Research Council. He is the co-author of the new bestseller: The Blueprint: Obama’s Plan to Subvert the Constitution and Build an Imperial Presidency. He is a National Federation of Republican Assemblies board member and a contributing author to the ARRA News Service. Blackwell's article was also published on CNS News

Also Read:
- Mounting Debate On Re-Authorization / Expansion Of U.S. Export-Import Bank
- Blast From the Past: Export-Import Bank linked to "Mexican Drug Cartels"


Tags: Export-Import Bank, Ex-Im, Bank, Nightmare To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to Conservative Voices. Thanks!

Tuesday, April 10, 2012

Voter ID: Registering Eric Holder, Tim Tebow and Tom Bradley To Vote in MN

Conservative filmmaker James O’Keefe has released a new undercover video that shows a man being offered Attorney General Eric Holder’s District of Columbia ballot. The poll worker caught on film tells the cameraman that he doesn’t need to see identification.

The video, released Monday, contrasts clips from the “sting” with quotes from Holder saying that voter fraud is generally “a problem that does not exist.” Holder’s Justice Department has blocked voter ID laws in South Carolina and Texas on grounds that include the supposed superfluity of those laws.
O’Keefe’s Project Veritas has targeted voter fraud in previous videos. One project, released last month, shows undercover filmmakers registering to vote in Minnesota, where the governor has attempted to block a voter ID bill, using the names of NFL quarterbacks Tim Tebow and Tom Brady.
Another undercover video by Pajamas Media shows that some of the most vocal opponents of voter ID laws require that visitors to their Washington D.C. offices present ID at the door. That video looks to undercut claims that ID requirements are excessively burdensome and unwarranted.

"What's wrong with showing identification when you vote? That's an egregious civil rights violation if you ask the Obama Administration and liberal groups like the Center for American Progress, and the Advancement Project. So what happens if you show up at the front door of these groups without ID? Find out on this PJTV undercover investigation."


Heritage Foundation noted that "the Supreme Court just recently weighed in on voter ID, and found its detractors’ arguments lacking. The court ruled in 2008 that Indiana’s voter ID law, which the National Conference of State Legislatures says is one of the strictest in the nation, did not constitute an overly-burdensome restriction on voting, and was perfectly justified in the face of potential fraud." [H/T The Scribe]

Tags: DC Voter Fraud, James O'Keefe, Project Veritas, Eric Holder, Voter ID, Minnesota, MN, Tom Brady, Tim Tebow, Voting, Caucus, Elections, Pajamas Media, pj media, pjtv, civil rights, Center for American Progress, Advancement Project, undercover videos, Scott Ott, voter fraud, id, justice department To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to Conservative Voices. Thanks!

Monday, April 9, 2012

Good Money: Why Kevin Brady's Sound Dollar Act Worries Barney Frank

Rep. Kevin Brady (R-TX)
by Ralph Benko, Contributing Author: Why is Rep. Barney Frank rounding up his liberal legislative militia to oppose the Sound Dollar Act of 2012? This is a bill recently introduced by Rep. Kevin Brady, top Republican on the Congressional Joint Economic Committee. It is co-sponsored by 31 of his House colleagues and has a Senate counterpart from Utah’s Mike Lee.

A panicked Rep. Frank snapped to immediately. He rounded up 26 liberal democrats to sign a letter of opposition. “We believe strongly that the dual mandate should be maintained, and we believe that the Federal Reserve’s actions in pursuit of that mandate have been helpful in dealing with our unemployment problem,” wrote Frank and fellow liberals to committee chairman Spencer Bachus.

Believe it or not, Frank’s beliefs do not always coincide with common sense reality. As Boston Globe columnist Jeff Jacoby wrote in 2008:

“Time and time again, Frank insisted that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were in good shape. Five years ago, for example, when the Bush administration proposed much tighter regulation of the two companies, Frank was adamant that “these two entities, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, are not facing any kind of financial crisis.” When the White House warned of “systemic risk for our financial system” unless the mortgage giants were curbed, Frank complained that the administration was more concerned about financial safety than about housing.

“Now that the bubble has burst and the “systemic risk” is apparent to all, Frank blithely declares: ‘The private sector got us into this mess.” Well, give the congressman points for gall.

Frank and other liberals are hostile to legislation that constrains the Fed’s “discretionary activism.” Discretionary activism is what Columbia dean (and key Romney economic policy advisor) R. Glenn Hubbard indicts in Seeds of Destruction: Why the Path to Economic Ruin Runs Through Washington, and How to Reclaim American Prosperity. This book contains a chapter entitled “Why an Easy-Money Street is a Dead End” and a subchapter “The Road to American Prosperity Cannot Be Paved with a Cheap Dollar.”

Brady’s legislation plays a major role in helping the GOP formulate a crucial plank in its economic platform: good money. Even more potent is this bill’s extraordinary emphasis on gold. In its findings, the Act directs the Federal Reserve to monitor prices in three sectors. One is, exclusively, gold: The “Federal Reserve should monitor … the value of the United States dollar relative to gold… to determine whether the Federal Reserve’s monetary policy is consistent with long term price stability.” Another section directs the Fed to monitor the prices of “major asset classes (including… gold and other commodities…).”

Gold alone thus occurs in two of the three directives to the Fed. This appears by no means accidental. Brady elegantly has structured this legislation in a way that gives space both to the conservatives (supply side, movement, libertarian, and constitutionalist Tea Party) and Establishment Republicans (and conservative Democrats) to come together to work out what good money looks like.

The overwhelming conservative consensus is for the dollar, whether issued by the government or the private sector, to be defined as a fixed weight of gold and for currency convertibility. Intramural differences among conservatives, and between conservatives and Republicans (and, for that matter, Blue Dog Democrats who are attuned to the popularity of the gold standard with voters) are far narrower than the differences between conservatives and liberals. The Weekly Standard.com, reports Brady’s position: “Our goal today…is to start a thoughtful debate….” He succeeds.

A highly respected member of the Republican policy establishment, Stanford University professor of economics John Taylor, recently testified before the Joint Economic Committee in favor of the Sound Dollar Act re-enforcing Dean Hubbard’s key point. Prof. Taylor then wrote a Wall Street Journal op-ed entitled The Dangers of an Interventionist Fed: A century of experience shows that rules lead to prosperity and discretion leads to trouble.

The conservative policy establishment view is exemplified by the Conservative Action Project chaired by President Reagan’s counselor and attorney general Edwin Meese III in its Conservative Consensus For 2012 issued last December. This important document firmly placed sound monetary policy in the top of the conservative agenda. The conservative policy establishment consensus also is exemplified by two nonprofit groups professionally advised by this writer, the American Principles Project and the Lehrman Institute’s monetary policy site, and by Atlas Economic Research Foundation’s Sound Money Project. These thought leaders, and many others, teach about a dollar defined as a fixed weight of gold and currency legally convertible at that weight.

The hard left reacts to monetary reform and the gold standard as a vampire does to a crucifix. Astute Roosevelt Institute fellow Mike Konczal, blogging at Rortybomb last April 2011 began the litany: “Conservatives are organizing against a full employment mandate and rallying around the gold standard wing of their party.” Since then, Think Progress’  Marie Diamond has stated that “Tea Party groups are determined to make returning to the gold standard a litmus test for GOP presidential candidates.” Paul Krugman warned in the New York Times that “Gold bugs have taken over the GOP.” Thomas Frank, in Harper’s Magazine, called gold “yet another eccentricity of the right-wing fringe… into the mainstream of American life.” Nouriel Roubini slurred supporters of gold as “lunatics and hacks.” Former Clinton Treasury Secretary and chair of Obama’s National Economic Council Larry Summers called the gold standard “the creationism of economics.”

Yet so bad has discretionary activism proved that even the center-left New York Times could headline, last August, a column A Gold Standard is Unthinkable No More. The sober, certainly not right wing, Bank of England issued a report last December which Bloomberg headlined as Global Economy Worked Better With Bretton Woods Currency System, BOE Says — Bretton Woods being a dilute gold standard.

Outside the cozy precincts of the hard left the gold standard has been rehabilitated. Clearly there is a productive conversation to be had between gold’s distinguished conservative and classical liberal proponents — such as Steve Forbes, Lewis Lehrman, Sean Fieler, James Grant, Judy Shelton, Brian Domitrovic, Lawrence White, Charles Kadlec, John Allison, John Tamny, James Rickards, and other respected figures who support gold convertibility — and the many distinguished mainstream economists who lean toward the something like the Taylor Rule. Brady has created a context for that thoughtful debate.

Since monetary reform is crucial to robust job creation Brady performs an invaluable public service by putting it front and center. The sponsors of the Sound Dollar Act demonstrate genuine statesmanship in moving the conversation forward in such a way as to allow everyone who believes in prosperity, with equity, through good money to unite behind Taylor’s axiom: “[T]he Federal Reserve should move to a … more rules-based policy of the kind that has worked in the past.” Rep. Brady and Sen. Lee have introduced legislation that represents a mortal threat to the practice of central planning that lingers on at full strength in just three capitals, Pyongyang, Havana, and Washington, DC … panicking Barney Frank.
------------
Ralph Benko is senior advisor, economics, to American Principles in Action’s Gold Standard 2012 Initiative, and a contributor to he ARRA News Service. The article which first appeared in Forbes was submitted for reprint by the author.

Tags: Ralph Benko, Federal Government, Rep. Kevin Brady, Sound Dollar Act, Rep. Barney Frank To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to Conservative Voices. Thanks!

Sunday, April 8, 2012

VIDEO: Undercover Investigation Reveals Liberal Hypocrisy on Voter ID


Rob Bluey, Heritage Foundation: U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder is currently blocking implementation of voter ID laws in South Carolina and Texas, claiming such measures are “unnecessary,” discriminatory and would make it harder for minorities to vote.

But if you’re planning to visit Holder’s office in Washington, D.C., you better bring a photo ID. The Department of Justice has two armed guards stationed outside its headquarters to check IDs of anyone who wants to enter — employees and visitors.

Holder’s politically motivated crusade against voter ID laws has the support of liberal advocacy organizations such as the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law and the Advancement Project. These organizations have criticized photo identification for voting, yet they require it to enter their Washington, D.C., offices as well. There’s even a sign in the building of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law: “ALL VISITORS MUST SHOW ID.”

The undercover investigation was carried out by PJTV.

Holder is able to block laws in South Carolina on Texas because they are subject to Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, a civil rights-era law that gives the Department of Justice authority over voting changes. It remains unclear if those states will be able to enforce their laws for this November’s election.

“The Obama-Holder Department of Justice has launched an all-out war on voter ID and other measures,” former Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell said upon launching a new initiative called Protect Your Vote. “Although Holder’s actions are purported to prevent African-Americans from being disenfranchised, in reality they serve as a crass political attempt to ensure his boss gets re-elected this year.”

Liberals have long trotted out false arguments about voter ID laws, claiming they suppress the vote among those individuals who do not have photo identification. But a 2008 U.S. Supreme Court case upholding Indiana’s voter ID law revealed there was no such hardship. Opponents of the law were unable to produce a single plaintiff who could plausibly claim inability to get a photo ID. In addition, states with longstanding voter ID laws, such as Georgia and Indiana, have actually experienced an increase in turnout of minority voters. Cross-posted from ARRA News Service.

Tags: Department of Justice, Eric Holder, Georgia, hypocrisy, Indiana, photo ID, Section 5, South Carolina, supreme court, Texas, Video, Voter ID, voting rights, Voting Rights Act To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to Conservative Voices. Thanks!

Saturday, April 7, 2012

Mr. President: “Take Care!”

Bob Morrison and Ken Blackwell
ARRA News Service - Ken Blackwell and Bob Morrison, Contributing Authors: President Obama took the oath of office on Tuesday, January 20, 2009. In that Abraham Lincoln Bicentennial year, Mr. Obama sought to stress his admiration for the only other president from Illinois. Millions of people watched as he placed his left hand on the Lincoln Bible and raised his right hand. Around the world, billions viewed the event on television. On the National Mall, army howitzers of the Presidential Salute Battery fired off a 21-gun salute to honor the new commander-in-chief.

It was surely a great day for all Americans. Nearly 400 years before, a single Dutch ship had brought chained Africans to Jamestown in the colony of Virginia, thus beginning centuries of slavery and oppression. President Obama was right to see the transcendent meaning in his elevation to the highest office in the land.

That is why his contempt for law is so deeply troubling. We understand that he rejects the Defense of Marriage Act and views it as unconstitutional. Still, until it is repealed, or until it is deemed by our courts--including the highest court--to be unconstitutional, he has taken an oath to “faithfully execute the office of President of the United States.” The Constitution that he swore before God to “preserve, protect, and defend” requires the president to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed.” Not just the laws he approves of, not merely those laws he would have voted for as a legislator, but the laws.

Lincoln taught Americans to reverence the laws. He broke with the abolitionists of his day over the hateful Fugitive Slave Act. Lincoln hated that law, too, but he said we had to obey it because the Constitution provided for it. We had to obey that law, Lincoln wrote his dearest friend, slaveholder Joshua Speed of Kentucky, even though “we crucify our feelings” in so doing. Crucify our feelings. What a phrase.

Why is it important for President Obama to obey and to enforce the law? Because reverence for the laws is one reason those army howitzers fired blanks into the chill noon air—and not at the White House. How many other republics have seen their constitutions and their liberties crushed under tank treads? Our national reverence for law and our military’s respect for civilian authority are two more of the many, many things that make America exceptional among the nations.

There are serious consequences for failure to take care that the laws be faithfully executed. In 1974, the Judiciary Committee of the House of Representatives voted three articles of impeachment against President Richard Nixon. Article III charged Nixon with “failure to take care that the laws be faithfully executed.” Once the Nixon White House tapes were handed over, under order of the Supreme Court, Republicans and Democrats together demanded Nixon’s ouster. No one could deny that a two-year secret campaign of denial, diversion, and obstruction of justice had resulted in, at the very least, a failure to take care that the laws be faithfully executed. Nixon was soon forced to resign.

No one is suggesting that Mr. Obama’s defiance of law will result in his defeat or in his impeachment. What we are suggesting is that he does grave harm to the power and legitimacy of his own high office by his contempt for law. As a former constitutional law professor, he should be the first to uphold the majesty of the law.

We appeal to President Obama: Be true to the Oath you swore on the Lincoln Bible.
You spoke before a cloud of witnesses. We urge you, Mr. President, to maintain respect for law. If you conscientiously disagree with the Defense of Marriage Act, then seek its repeal through proper legislative and judicial channels.

Of course, we will oppose that repeal. We believe that the laws of nature and of nature’s God, so powerfully invoked by our Declaration of Independence, support the civil right of marriage. True marriage is an institution that existed before the republic.

It will be a tragedy of historic proportions if this president, of all presidents, is the one to overturn the civil right of marriage. In 1866, thousands of freedmen and women walked to Tennessee. Many of them walked barefooted. Why? They desperately sought to have their slave marriages recognized in law. Those newly freed Americans understood the civil right of marriage better than do many constitutional law professors today. Let’s preserve marriage. And let’s take care that the laws that defend it be faithfully executed.
 -------------------------
J. Ken Blackwell is a conservative family values advocate. Blackwell is a former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Human Rights Commission and is a senior fellow at the Family Research Council and a visiting professor at Liberty University School of Law. Bob Morrison is a Senior Fellow for Policy Studies at the Family Research Council. He has served at the U.S. Department of Education with Gary Bauer under then-Secretary William Bennett. Both are contributing authors to the ARRA News Service.

Tags: Ken Blackwell, Bob Morrison, President Barack Obama, take care, oath of office, US Constitution, contempt for law, obey the law, enforce the law, grave harm, respect for the law, civil right of marriage, slave marriage, preserve marriage To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to Conservative Voices. Thanks!

Friday, April 6, 2012

America Can’t Tolerate More Liberal Brilliance

Jim Mullen
by Jim Mullen, ARRA News Service: Poor, poor, liberals feel so put upon and unappreciated. Their brilliance seems so clear and real to them and Conservatives are obviously dim-witted cretins, they reason, by virtue of their complete lack of awe for the liberal mind. Of course, if their ideas were truly that magnificent, the cities and states they’ve controlled for decades would be unsullied, shining examples of liberals’ superiority instead of the ‘cesspools of despair’ strewn generously about the nation by their regressive, failed experiments.

The multitudes of failures by liberals aren’t necessarily signs they lack talent, It's just that they are unable to get their wispy, cloud-shaped pipedreams to fit into the confining space of reality. For example, they have uncanny abilities to lead the world in repeatedly finding solutions that do not work for real problems, and conjuring up perfect answers to imaginary ones. They find the most ingenious approaches to taking a bad situation and turning it into an intolerable one, and are long-time masters at spotting injustice where none exists.

Likewise, they excel at sticking their arrogant; busybody noses into other peoples’ business, and then become indignant when the objects of their intrusion show any hint of resentment toward that intervention. Job #1 for any liberal is always to feel good about themselves and their sacred quest to interrupt, rearrange, and take charge of the natural order of life, and the flow of humanity. The old saw that the road to hell is paved with good intentions was surely written by a victim of liberalism.

However, the aptitude for which liberals are most infamous is their insistence that other people should accept responsibility for financing progressive idealism. Stealing money and property is illegal and frowned upon throughout most of civil society. Undaunted, however, liberals discovered they could bribe politicians into stealing it for them. Their altruistic endeavors and ‘care for people’ begin and end in the pockets and checkbooks of society’s producers, never their own.

Mesmerized by the Siren song of the left, too many Americans slipped ever so gently and ever so gradually into an intolerable obedience to and dependency upon, government. Where once there stood a proud monument to human possibilities, a hapless people kneels before the all-powerful government about which our Founders warned us.

The fire of liberty in the hearts of our Founders forged this country. Masses of humanity followed from every freedom-starved country in the world. They yearned for just the opportunity at self-determination and prosperity. They came with desire in their soul for success and a strand of DNA that cried for Independence from the constraints of tyrannical governments and religious persecution. That craving not only drove people here, but also led them to excel in their endeavors far beyond anything imaginable in their day and circumstance.

They arrived and encountered hardships, dangers, losses, and prejudice. Yet, they persevered and were thankful for the freedom to succeed and for the strength to face failure. They continued undaunted, fighting for their dreams, and then dared to dream again. They followed the beacon of liberty provided by the Constitution to right legitimate wrongs and did all this with a spirit that inspired the world. We came together and became known uniquely as the unbreakable American spirit.

Nearly every problem in this country germinates from government breaking the restraints placed upon it by the Constitution, then running wild and roughshod over the American people with liberals leading the charge.

Once upon a time, we made our own decisions; earned our own money, saved what we wanted, set our own goals, worked for our families, and passed the idea of American exceptionalism to the next generation. This American strength and character is something of which other nations can only dream, and which many in our country, sadly, have forsaken. People incapable of self-reliance and willing to cede their liberty to socialist-Marxist tyrants are doomed to serfdom.

It began with the Constitution and a pride of ownership by Americans in this land of opportunity, and then devolved into a dependent nation as an increasingly larger segment of society developed freeloading tendencies. They plead on bended knees or riot in the streets demanding that government confiscate the labor rewards of the productive and give it to an unproductive, whining class of ne’er-do-wells.

Subsequently, the parasitic gene replaced the DNA of freedom in much of society and leftists convincingly made their pitch that it was greedy not to cede power and riches for redistribution. The obvious truth is that those coveting the fruits of another’s labor, and a government that sells our freedom for votes, are the very embodiments of greed.

Fruition of any liberal, progressive, or Marxist idea leads from one hell on earth to another. With all that liberals profess to know, their lack of wisdom and understanding remain at the forefront of everything that is wrong with this country. Marxists ravage the land like a plague and leave a trail of heartaches, hopelessness, and evil. They hold the knife of government to the throat of the republic, always demanding more of our rights and riches.

When tallying their final toll of destruction, by far the most pernicious consequences to our country are the losses of liberty and the downfall of American character and pride. The crises created by the wide-eyed Marxist fanatics are ones from which the republic may never recover.

Freedom’s torch has dimmed to a mere flicker, and sadly, we are a nation enslaved by our own government. Did millions of our best young people fight and die to defend us from tyrants and dictators around the world for us to succumb to tyrants and dictators in our own country?
-----------
Jim Mullen of Parkersburg, West Virginia is a Republican conservative activist. He is a contributing author  for the ARRA News Service, Conservative Voices, Parkersburg Conservative Examiner and his personal site, Freedom For Us Now.

Tags: Liberalism, Liberals, destroying America, liberty is waning, Jim Mullen To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to Conservative Voices. Thanks!

Thursday, April 5, 2012

Obama Unhinged

by Gary Bauer:  In his speech to reporters yesterday Barack Obama unleashed a barrage of rhetorical falsehoods and demagoguery at the latest budget proposal by Rep. Paul Ryan, which was approved by House Republicans. Obama went beyond policy disagreements and set out to demonize the GOP with slashing rhetoric and alarming adjectives. The goal of Obama's attack was to portray himself as a moderate or centrist and portray the GOP as extremists.

Here are some of the ways Obama described Ryan's budget: "radical," "a Trojan horse," "a prescription for decline" and "thinly veiled social Darwinism." (That's odd -- I thought liberals were big fans of Darwin.) At one point, Obama even suggested that Ronald Reagan could not win a Republican primary today because the GOP is so extreme. How ironic. When Reagan ran, the left tried to paint him as an unelectable right-wing extremist! They were wrong about Reagan then, and Obama is wrong about the GOP today.

Unbelievably, Obama also complained to his left-wing media allies saying, "This is not a situation where there is equivalence." Translation: Conservatives have no legitimate point of view you should be covering. Once again, Obama's intolerance for dissenting points of view was on full display.

The editors of the Wall Street Journal fired back today and summarized well the president's over-the-top attacks. Here's an excerpt from the Journal's editorial:
"The President's depiction of the wonkish and formerly obscure House Budget Chairman as some political monster is itself telling. Mr. Obama is conceding that he can't run on the economic recovery, the stimulus, health care, green energy or any of the other grand liberal ambitions that have dominated his time in office. All of those are unpopular or failures. He was elected on hope and change, but now his only hope is to change the subject to the ogres he claims are the disloyal opposition. Did you hear about the GOP's red-in-tooth-and-claw plan for Medicare? Grandma and Gramps are going to be drafted for the Hunger Games."If you're not familiar with the Hunger Games, it is a popular movie in which teenagers are forced to fight for food in a post-apocalyptic world.

But the Journal's underlying point is one we have made repeatedly in this daily report: Obama can't run on his record (as you will read below), so he is going to demonize those of us who fight him and his agenda in a desperate attempt to portray the GOP as a worse alternative. Yet in spite of Obama's vicious personal attacks, we keep hearing over and over again that the one thing the GOP establishment is afraid of doing is attacking Obama.

I can guarantee you this much: Obama's entire campaign will be one negative attack after another. According to one reporter, the goal of the Obama campaign is to make the Republican Party radioactive in the next 60 days. They want to so poison people's minds before the campaign traditionally begins in earnest -- after Labor Day -- that there is no chance of the GOP candidate being able to recover by November 6th.

Again, my friends, I'm not trying to discourage you. I am trying to prepare you for the fight that lies ahead so you can help your friends and family members see through Obama's distortions and point out his hypocrisy.
-------------
Gary Bauer is is a conservative family values advocate and serves as president of American Values and chairman of the Campaign for Working Families.

Tags: Barack Obama, Obama Unhinged, Gary Bauer, Campaign for Working Families To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to Conservative Voices. Thanks!

Wednesday, April 4, 2012

Burn POTUS

From the ARRA News Service - Enjoy this parody by Duane Lester: Coming this fall (Nov 2012) to the USA ... hopefully!!!


Tags: Burn POTUS, POTUS, Barack Obama, 2012 elections, parody, Video, Duane Lester, ARRA News Service To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to Conservative Voices. Thanks!