Sunday, July 29, 2012

Did the State Make You Great?

President Obama Attacks Business
While Promoting Big Government
“If you’ve got a business — you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.”
— Barack Obama, Roanoke, Va., July 13

And who might that somebody else be? Government, says Obama. It built the roads you drive on. It provided the teacher who inspired you. It “created the Internet.” It represents the embodiment of “we’re in this together” social solidarity that, in Obama’s view, is the essential origin of individual and national achievement. Charles Krauthammer explains at NRO.

Related articles:
Obama to Business: 'You Didn't Build that'
President Obama is Anti-Business

Tags: Barack Obama, anti-business, business, small business, Big Government, attacks business, Charles Krauthammer, NRO, To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to Conservative Voices. Thanks!

Saturday, July 28, 2012

The Poisonous Seeds Sown by Barack Obama

From the poisonous seeds of class warfare and race hustling, mighty dictatorships grow. These are the seeds Barack Obama sows in America's garden.

In any of his daily orations on class warfare, just substitute the word “Jew” for his favorite word “rich.” It’s eerily reminiscent of the wicked rhetoric from the National Socialist party that spewed their hatred around the world in the 1930s. There’s no difference in their class warfare message; rise up and “take the income and wealth from the greedy “haves” and give it to the rightful owners, “the government.”

Naturally, the promise of redistribution to the “have not’s” is paramount in all socialistic rhetoric. It is this pledge on which politicians depend to act as an accelerant to the parasites waiting to attach themselves to the back of a healthy society.

This inglorious President dares not unleash the free-enterprise system, lest he loses Marxist control of industry and the American people. Therefore, this disastrous, Spartan economy is his life-long dream. It allows him to blame the “rich," and all of his other strawmen. It also presents the opportunity to rule the country by dictating his will in the name of doing it for the greater good.

Nearly every dictatorship begins with promises of equality and a classless society, and then ends in devastation. The People’s Republic of China and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics were both examples of wicked, humanitarian and economical calamities. They both began by sowing the seeds of class dissatisfaction and nurturing their growth with the vacant promise of making everyone equal. Surprisingly, even in this country, lowering everyone to the lowest common denominator strikes a pleasurable chord to a large segment of the population.

A free-running economy is a catastrophe for every big-government advocate. Barack Obama is the most anti-business, anti-capitalist American President in history. He never gives a speech or issues a press release without stridently repeating every loser’s refrain. “It’s not my fault,” followed by the “rich” aren’t paying their fair share. It’s evident to even the most casual observer that Barack Obama abhors this country, its Constitution, and its free enterprise system. It’s painfully obvious every time he opens his mouth that he holds them in bitter contempt.

Four years ago, the media fabricated a pristine aura around their all-time favorite progressive. That aura is gone and only the reek of ugly, corrupt, Chicago-style politics remain. Tabbed as the great uniter, he is the most divisive political figure - not to mention the most divisive President - in American narrative.

Visionaries of the possible built our nation.  The Founders believed in unleashing the free spirit, imaginative mind, and determination of the average American. Likewise, they knew that lashing the federal government securely to the confines of the Constitution would secure liberty and create the greatest nation in civilization. Entrepreneurs know that self-sacrifice, hard work, and determination in a free enterprise system will provide them the only chance at real success.

This President is a left-wing ideologue and a fantasist who subscribes to the fool’s gold idea of success lying in government dependency and control, high taxes, and less personal freedom. He believes that restraining individual liberty allows the centralized government to operate in the best interest of the citizenry. He also preaches that success and fulfillment without the government’s patronage and guidance is impossible.

Obama spent his entire presidential term dismantling everything that made this country the envy of the world. His outrageous diatribe against entrepreneurial businessmen that, "If you've got a business - you didn't build that. Someone else made it happen," is emblematic of his leftist, “collective” mindset. Only a true Karl Marx believer would utter such a contemptible remark. Knowing full well that this idea does not play in mainstream America, he spends his campaigning time culling special interest groups from the general electorate herd and making them outlandish, special promises of other peoples’ money.

The media promised Obama would bring a new refinement to the presidency. Instead, he brought an indelible, crude coarseness seldom seen; even in the crass political arena. His highbrow friends from academia held his hand all the way into the White House in an all-out effort to give credibility and stature to his socialist ideology. They, in turn, brought an evil dogma of the most extraordinary kind. Their character and beliefs are, like Obama’s, devoid of any concept of freedom.

The intellectual left considers being anti-American as the latest style in sophistication. This is the promised refinement and elegance Obama brought to the White House. Every member of this elitist administration exemplifies this hatred of everything constitutional, and everything traditionally American.

During his term in office, Barack Obama soiled the economy, the presidency, the country, and indeed, himself.  Now, he proclaims how badly everyone else smells. If elected for another term, the stench will permeate every corner of the government, segment of society, and institution in our Republic.

Another four years of following Barack Obama down his liberal-progressive road and this country will pass through the gates of a collectivist hell. This presidency should go down in the history books as the “era of the great conversion;” the conversion of middleclass America into the great permanent welfare class. Excuses, blame, welfare, unemployment, food stamps, social justice, income redistribution, and race hustling are now part of the permanent vernacular of Barack Obama’s lexicon.

This President and his Marxist comrades cannot abide any political system that allows freedom. Their power depends upon the peoples’ enslavement and they cater to the slugs and leeches in society because that’s where the votes are.

Neither liberty nor a free enterprise system automatically lifts everyone. However, they enhance the opportunities for everyone to lift themselves. This is the concept for which so many great Americans fought and died; and the concept so despised by the political charlatan, Barack Obama.

Jim Mullen, Parkersburg, WV
Freedom For US Now
Conservative Voices

Tags: Barack Obama, class warfare, poisonous seeds To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to Conservative Voices. Thanks!

Friday, July 27, 2012

Washington! It Is Time To Stop Digging!

Washington Could Learn A Lot: If you keep on digging, you'll put yourself deeper and deeper in the hole. The bureaucrats and politicians in Washington, D.C. have put this country in a $15,874,876,409,526.41 hole (U.S. national debt ending on July 20, 2012).

Maybe its time we stop digging!

To learn more, visit is a project of Public Notice Research and Education Fund (PNREF). PNREF is an independent non-profit dedicated to educating the American people about economic policy and the principles of economic freedom. PNREF believes an empowered American public will cause lawmakers to be better stewards of the nation’s economy, and of Americans’ economic freedom. If you agree, watch, comment and share this video!

Tags: Debt, economy, jobs, Washington, bureaucrats, politics, fiscal policy, out of control spending, spending, election, congress, small business, business, Government Agencies, regulations, White House, United States Congress, killing job creators, digging a hole, Time To Stop Digging, Washington Could Learn A Lot As published by the ARRA News Service. To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to Conservative Voices. Thanks!

Sunday, July 22, 2012

Senate Democrats’ Outrageous Death Tax Hike

ARRA News Service Note: Last Thursday, U.S. Senator John Boozman (R-AR) introduced the “Death Tax Repeal Act,” a bill that would permanently eliminate the federal estate and gift taxes that punish our small business owners and agriculture producers. Although the bill will politically not be approved under a Senate controlled by democrats, it set the stage for being reintroduced next legislative session. It is now up to the American people in November, to replace the Democrats who wish to tax Americans from the the womb via taxes associated with the health care bill through the tomb via death taxes.
Phil Kerpen, ARRA News Service: There is no more vivid or offensive example of the “you didn’t build that” philosophy on the books than the federal death tax, which supposes that when you die a hefty portion of everything you built up over a lifetime ought to go to government. It’s a vestige of the feudal days when all property was owned by the king.

That’s probably why the death tax is the “worst tax — that is, the least fair” according to polling by the Tax Foundation. And it’s also why our founders thought the idea of seizing an estate at death so outrageous that they prohibited it as a penalty for treason in the U.S. Constitution (Article III, Section 3). And yet now, seizing more than half of it as a penalty for accomplishing the American dream is the preferred policy of Democrats in the United States Senate.

You’re born. You work hard. You pay your taxes all your life. Maybe, you build something along the way. But when you die the IRS can tax you again.

This year, they can take 35 percent of everything above $5 million. Senate Democrats announced yesterday that as of January 1, they want to raise that up to 55 percent of everything above $1 million. And because the $1 million is not indexed to inflation, over time this confiscatory tax would hit almost everyone who achieves some success and wants to pass it on.

That means family farms and businesses will be forced to shut down when the founder dies just to pay the tax bill.

Former Congressional Budget Office director Douglas Holtz-Eakin estimates that the Democrats’ 55 percent death tax would destroy as many as 1.5 million small-business jobs, walloping an already weak economy. That’s the problem with taxing “the rich” — even after they die — the real pain is suffered by the people they employ, who lose their jobs.

Unfortunately, rather than seize the moral high ground by advocating full repeal of the death tax, Senate Republicans have included a compromise position in their alternative tax package: they want to keep the tax at its current 35 percent rate. The study from Holtz-Eakin found that would destroy 857,000 jobs — which can only be described as “less bad” than the economic damage Democrats are proposing.

Senate Republicans are compromising even though they know the right position is full repeal because they fear the political implications of advocating full repeal at a time when the media and left-wing agitators are even more obsessed than usual with class warfare and the politics of envy.

This fear is not well founded. Polls have consistently shown very high levels of public support for repealing the tax, including among people who will never be directly affected, but understand the indirect economic consequences and the sheer immorality of seizing a large portion of estates at death as a penalty for success.

One of the most remarkable political science papers I’ve ever read was published back in 2006, during the last serious Senate effort at full repeal. The paper by two Yale professors, Mayling Birney and Ian Shapiro, comprehensively reviewed the issue. They said: “Many polls since the late 1990s have shown widespread public support for estate tax repeal, in the range of 60, 70 or 80 percent. Moreover, supporters appear to be spread more or less equally across income groups, contrary to what self-interest would predict.”

So let the Democrats, the media, and the class-warfare demagogues do their worst. The American people know this tax is wrong.

The House has an opportunity to lead by scheduling a vote on H.R. 1259, Rep. Kevin Brady’s (R-Texas) bill to permanently repeal the death tax, which now has a majority of the House signed on as cosponsors. An analysis by Palmer Schoening, who leads death tax repeal efforts for the influential 60 Plus Association, found that there are 33 current Democratic members of the House who have voted for repeal in the past, making a strong bipartisan vote possible.

With Senate Democrats now actively trying to raise the death tax to 55 percent and Senate Republicans just trying to keep it where it is, it’s more important than ever that the House redouble its efforts to finally repeal this most hated tax.
Phil Kerpen. He is the president of American Commitment where he first shared this article; a columnist on Fox News Opinion, and the author of Democracy Denied: How Obama is Bypassing Congress to Radically Transform America – and How to Stop Him. Phil Kerpen is a contributing author for the ARRA News Service. His article first appeared in The Daily Caller

Tags: Phil Kerpen, American Commitment, Senate, democrats, Death Tax Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. To share or post to your site, please mention / link to Conservative Voices. Thanks!

Saturday, July 21, 2012

IRS, Labor Department Audit Businessman on Obama’s Enemies List

ARRA News Service -- Rob Bluey, Heritage Investigates: Frank VanderSloot grew up a poor kid in rural Idaho. His father made $300 a month. His clothes came from the Salvation Army. Yet through determination and hard work — and with the help of America’s free-enterprise system — today he’s the successful CEO of a global supplier of wellness products.

Frank VanderSloot
VanderSloot’s rags-to-riches story is not unlike other American tales of individuals who have benefited from the free market. In VanderSloot’s case, however, that success came with a price — but only when he decided a write a check to a super PAC that supports Mitt Romney.

On April 20, President Obama’s campaign named VanderSloot to the first presidential “enemies list” since the Nixon era. Eight private citizens were singled out for their donations to Romney. They committed no crimes, sought no attention, and yet they became the subject of Obama’s scorn.

VanderSloot is now facing persecution from the federal government. Kimberly Strassel reveals in The Wall Street Journal that two federal agencies — the Internal Revenue Service and Labor Department — both launched investigations of VanderSloot after his name appeared on Obama’s enemies list.
In a letter dated June 21, he was informed that his tax records had been “selected for examination” by the Internal Revenue Service. The audit also encompasses Mr. VanderSloot’s wife, and not one, but two years of past filings (2008 and 2009).

Mr. VanderSloot, who is 63 and has been working since his teens, says neither he nor his accountants recall his being subject to a federal tax audit before. He was once required to send documents on a line item inquiry into his charitable donations, which resulted in no changes to his taxes. But nothing more—that is until now, shortly after he wrote a big check to a Romney-supporting Super PAC.
Two weeks after receiving the IRS letter, Mr. VanderSloot received another—this one from the Department of Labor. He was informed it would be doing an audit of workers he employs on his Idaho-based cattle ranch under the federal visa program for temporary agriculture workers.

The H-2A program allows tens of thousands of temporary workers in the U.S.; Mr. VanderSloot employs precisely three. All are from Mexico and have worked on the VanderSloot ranch—which employs about 20 people—for five years. Two are brothers. Mr. VanderSloot has never been audited for this, though two years ago his workers’ ranch homes were inspected. (The ranch was fined $8,400, mainly for too many “flies” and for “grease build-up” on the stove. God forbid a cattle ranch home has flies.)

Strassel acknowledges the investigations could be unrelated to VanderSloot’s inclusion on the enemies list. It reveals, however, the danger of persecuting private individuals for their political donations. It’s something Heritage’s Rory Cooper predicted would happen months ago:
Prominent donors are often thrust into the spotlight in political campaigns, but this example was extraordinary and unprecedented. The writing was on the wall: If you give to an opposing cause, we will unleash a grassroots effort to destroy your personal reputation. This message delivered on behalf of the most powerful man in the nation has real implications. If the IRS were to audit one of these individuals, how could they not wonder if their political contribution was the root cause?
VanderSloot knew immediately his life changed on April 20. He was initially the subject of hit pieces by left-wing Mother Jones and Salon’s Glenn Greenwald. That was followed by reports of a former Senate Democrat staffer snooping around the local courthouse in Idaho for his divorce records. Now two powerful federal agencies have come after him.

He said the allegations made by the Obama campaign — that he was “litigious, combative, and a bitter foe of the gay rights movement” — are completely false. He isn’t going to let anyone sully his reputation — even if it means taking the fight directly to the most powerful man in America.

That’s what he told me when we sat down for an interview in May:

Tags: 2012, Audit, Department of Labor, Enemies List, Frank VanderSloot, Glenn Greenwald, Internal Revenue Service, Kimberly Strassel, Labor Department, Mitt Romney, Mother Jones, Nixon, President Obama, Wall Street Journal Heritage Investigates, Rob Bluey To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to Conservative Voices. Thanks!

Thursday, July 19, 2012

Medicaid Patients, Not Uninsured, Crowded Emergency Rooms

Phil Kerpen
Phil Kerpen, ARRA News Service: Supporters of the president’s unpopular health care mandate tax are now trying to justify it on the theory that those who go uninsured later impose large costs on the rest of us through emergency rooms. But the truth is emergency rooms are crowded not by the uninsured, but by Medicaid patients. Far from alleviating the problem, the president’s law dumps millions of people into a failed Medicaid system. It’s the opposite of reform.

The original purpose of the mandate was not to reduce the costs of uncompensated care, but rather to extract revenue from young, healthy people who go uninsured because they are low utilizers of health care. Legal expert Steven G. Bradbury summarized: “The individual mandate was originally enacted to compel millions of Americans to pay more for health insurance than they receive in benefits as a means to subsidize the costs that the Act’s guaranteed-issue and community-rating requirements will impose on private insurance companies.”

In other words, a free-rider problem was created by the law’s requirement that insurance companies issue a policy to anyone, even after they are sick (guaranteed-issue), at the same premiums as healthy people (community rating). The significant purpose of the mandate was to force people who don’t use health care to pay premiums to subsidize these new costs.

Democrats cut a corrupt deal with the insurance industry: the industry would accept expensive regulations in exchange for a mandate forcing millions of new customers to buy their product. That’s why the insurance industry — contrary to popular political misconception — advertised heavily in favor of the law.

The newly created, after-the-fact argument that the mandate is about reducing emergency room “free riding” doesn’t make sense. If you’re uninsured, you’re likely to go to the emergency room only in the event of a genuinely serious emergency that would justify paying the bill or facing bankruptcy.

That’s not the case for Medicaid patients, whose bills are paid by taxpayers and who are unlikely to have better options than the emergency room because of how badly the program is failing.

A new study that came out last week showed Medicaid patients use emergency rooms twice as frequently as patients on private insurance. “That’s because they wait until their symptoms get so serious that they require emergency care,” explained David Seaberg, MD, FACEP, president of the American College of Emergency Physicians. “This often happens because they can’t find doctors who will accept their insurance, most likely because the reimbursement rates are so low. It isn’t fair to say ‘don’t go to the emergency room’ without providing available medical alternatives, which currently are woefully inadequate.”

Medicaid pays doctors below-market reimbursements and burdens them with extensive paperwork and bureaucracy. It’s not surprising then that a recent survey by the Texas Medical Association found that just 31 percent of doctors in Texas are accepting new Medicaid patients, down from 42 percent in 2010 and 67 percent in 2000. And a separate national survey by the Doctor Patient Medical Association recently found that 49 percent of doctors intend to respond to the new health care law’s lower reimbursement rates by not taking new Medicaid patients.

Giving out more Medicaid cards won’t translate into actual health care access. According to CBO estimates, the president’s law adds 17 million more people to the Medicaid rolls, exacerbating the shortage of primary care physicians and specialists who can afford to take Medicaid patients and adding significantly to emergency rooms’ workload.

Medicaid is so broken that surgical outcomes for Medicaid patients are actually worse than for patients who are uninsured — and much worse than for patients with private insurance. A landmark 2010 study from the University of Virginia, “Primary Payer Status Affects Mortality for Major Surgical Operations,” found that that surgical patients on Medicaid are 13 percent more likely to die than uninsured patients and 97 percent more likely to die than patients with private insurance.

We needed real health care reform so the least among us could enjoy the same access to care that the rest of us have. President Obama’s law failed to deliver it; America still desperately needs health care reform that respects and empowers all patients.
© Copyright 2012 Phil Kerpen. He is the president of American Commitment where he first shared this article; a columnist on Fox News Opinion, and the author of Democracy Denied: How Obama is Bypassing Congress to Radically Transform America – and How to Stop Him. Phil Kerpen is a contributing author for the ARRA News Service.

Tags: Phil Kerpen, Patients, not insured, Crowded emergency rooms, American Commitment Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link" and link to Conservative Voices. Thanks!

Wednesday, July 18, 2012

The Bureaucratic War Against Americans

a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth. ~ Ronald Reagan

Our federal government came into existence with a unique, unfamiliar model in which its powers were expressly limited by the Constitution and reserved for the people.

Since Americans’ freedom originates from the founding principles of limited federal government with absolute power left in the hands of the people and the states, it’s a very simple concept that less government means more personal liberty. It is also a simple notion for politicians to retain their power they must overpower the populace and extract their wealth.

To accomplish these nefarious deeds in the war against the people and the states of the American Republic, politicians use an army of governmental, civilian soldiers commanded by an established tyrannical power. The United States government’s supremacy advances by using the most sophisticated, well-organized, and powerful force in the history of our country; the federal bureaucracy. Bureaucracies have long been politicians’ favorite weapons against American freedom. They’re created for the distinct purpose of controlling and regulating the masses - and for the extraction and spending of taxpayers’ money.

Bureaucrats are the civilian soldiers in the federal government’s all-out war against the people and the states. Historically, Congress and the President demonstrated dismissive disregard for the constitutional limits to federal power. Over the years, they deliberately instilled a sense of paralyzing fear into the American Citizenry. Fear of their own government by Americans was the worse case scenario envisioned by the Founders. They warned in dramatic fashion of the disaster to befall the people if they allowed the governmental reins to slacken and release the wild, natural spirit of politicians and public administrators. They understood the instinctive course would trample the Constitution and run roughshod over this great nation established with such enormous pride and extraordinary vision.

Using their army of bureaucrats, typically equipped with Legislative or Executive-powered edicts and Judicial writs, they wield dictatorial power over every man, woman, and child in our nation. Their ever-growing legions dwarf the uniformed forces of our nation’s Military serving to protect and preserve our freedom from foreign powers. While our Military fights America’s enemies abroad, the home front politicians and their soldiers, the bureaucrats, usurp the constitutional power of the people and enslave the nation.

Congress uses so many lawyers and disjointed lobbyists to write legislation it results in cryptic legalese so obscure and incomprehensible that no one reads or understands a bill before enacted into law. Likewise, they incorporate into nearly every law sweeping, all-encompassing provisions for creating panels, commissions, bureaus, agencies, boards, or entire departments. Enforcement of their unconstitutional mandates depends on these evil strokes of the political pen, and provides the means by which tyranny overwhelms liberty.

Likewise, it’s from here, behind their self-made bureaucracies where politicians take up their defensive positions. When citizens become enraged at the loss of their liberty and fortunes as pen pushing officials unleash the latest congressional monster upon America, the elected cowards hunker down and point accusatory fingers of blame at the Frankenstein they created. Meanwhile, Americans surrender their liberty and have their fortunes confiscated.

The federal government is the nation’s largest employer; therefore, American lives and fortunes unquestionably serve the demands and dictates of the bureaucrats. There is always an army of government officials at the ready to apply their unlimited power to oppress the people by stripping them of their dignity, their constitutional rights, and their legally accumulated wealth.

Once born, bureaucracies live forever and they forever erode the constitutional principles of freedom. They take on lives of their own, and politicians cry that they are unable to control or eliminate the very beasts they created.

The spirit of American exceptionalism lies shattered and our once proud people reduced to waiting in governments’ bureaucratic inferno for the next magnanimous program that promises nirvana and delivers despair.

Ronald Reagan had it right. Today, decades later, the weight of liberal-progressive government continues unabated to crush liberty.
Jim Mullen

Tags: bureaucratic war, against Americans, To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to Conservative Voices. Thanks!

Monday, July 16, 2012

Are Democrats Open To Another Recession?

Democrats Admit Willingness To Go Over Fiscal Cliff, ‘Plunge The Nation Back Into Recession,’ And ‘Raise Unemployment’
Editor's Note: Don't Believe Us! Read The Following Sources!
‘Democrats Are Making Increasingly Explicit Threats,’ ‘Refuse To Budge’
“Democrats say they are prepared to go over the so-called fiscal cliff at the end of the year ...” (“Democrats Risk Fiscal Cliff By Targeting Top Earners’ Break,” Bloomberg News, 7/10/12)

“… senior Democrats say they are prepared to weather a fiscal event that could plunge the nation back into recession if the new year arrives without an acceptable compromise.” (“Democrats Threaten To Go Over ‘Fiscal Cliff’ If GOP Fails To Raise Taxes,” The Washington Post, 7/15/12)

“Democrats are making increasingly explicit threats about their willingness to let nearly $600 billion worth of tax hikes and spending cuts take effect in January...” (“Democrats Threaten To Go Over ‘Fiscal Cliff’ If GOP Fails To Raise Taxes,” The Washington Post, 7/15/12)
CBO, IMF and FED Chairman Warn: ‘Recession,’ ‘Significant Threat’
“…economy-shaking consequences if no deal is reached… resulting blow to the economy next year could be enormous.” (“The Democrats Play Hardball,” Politico, 7/16/12)

BLOOMBERG: “The potential changes are part of the $607 billion so-called fiscal cliff of automatic spending cuts and tax increases that the Congressional Budget Office has warned could push the country into a recession.” (“Senate Democrats Split From Obama On Taxing Dividends,” Bloomberg News, 7/15/12)
BEN BERNANKE, Fed Chairman: “…the so-called fiscal cliff–would, if allowed to occur, pose a significant threat to the recovery.” (“Bernanke Warns Congress: Don't Let Fiscal Cliff Destroy The Economy,” Forbes, 6/7/12)

IMF: “It is critical to remove the uncertainty created by the ‘fiscal cliff’…” (“Concluding Statement Of The 2012 Article IV Mission To The United States Of America,” IMF, 7/3/12)
  • “Going over the fiscal cliff could cause a U.S. recession next year, Olivier Blanchard, the International Monetary Fund's chief economist, told CNBC’s ‘Squawk on the Street.’ … ‘It would probably kill growth in the U.S. next year and probably kill growth in advanced economies,’ Blanchard said. ‘I think that if the U.S. fell off the fiscal cliff, I’m quite sure we’d see negative growth in the U.S. next year.’” (“‘Fiscal Cliff’ Could Trigger US Recession: IMF Economist,” CNBC, 7/16/12)
‘Companies Are Starting To Delay Hiring And Spending Out Of Concern’
NEW YORK TIMES: “…business leaders and policy makers are growing concerned that the tax increases and government spending cuts set to take effect at year’s end have already begun to cause companies to hold back on hiring and investments.” (“Fear Of Year-End Fiscal Stalemate May Be Having Effect Now,” The New York Times, 7/11/12)

BLOOMBERG: “Companies are starting to delay hiring and spending out of concern that Congress won’t reach a compromise in time to avoid automatic tax increases and budget cuts that would pull billions of dollars of purchasing power out of the economy.” (“Fiscal-Cliff Concerns Hurting Economy As Companies Hold Back,” Bloomberg, 6/19/12)
  • “Kimmie Candy Co. this month put on hold plans to add five or six workers to its 23-person payroll because of slowing sales growth and the political uncertainty in Washington, said Joseph Dutra, president of the Reno, Nevada-based company. ‘For a small business like mine, cash flow is the biggest concern,’ said Dutra, whose company makes Choco Rocks and Sunburst candies. ‘If you don’t know where the economy is going and where the government is going on taxes, you don’t want to take too many risks.’”  (“Fiscal-Cliff Concerns Hurting Economy As Companies Hold Back,” Bloomberg, 6/19/12)

Tags: Democrats, Recession To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to Conservative Voices. Thanks!

Constitution’s Limits Threaten in an Obama Second Term

Ken Blackwell and Ken Klukowski - ARRA News Service: Public officials and pundits are still digesting the Supreme Court’s Obamacare decision in NFIB v. Sebelius. Not yet discussed are the extraordinary implications for the size and role of government in a second Obama term in light of President Obama’s new stump speech, as it is clear there is not a reliable majority on the Court to restrain government power by enforcing the limits imposed by the Constitution.

Most provisions in the Constitution fall into two categories. The first are authority provisions, explaining the structure and powers of government. The second are liberty provisions, declaring certain rights of the people.

The original Constitution had only the former, because the latter were regarded as superfluous. If something was not found in a specific authority clause, it was automatically illegal and beyond the purview of the federal government. Political backlash from the Anti-Federalists and others led to some states threatening to withhold ratification unless a Bill of Rights was promptly added. Likely our fourth president James Madison would have lost his first congressional race to our fifth president James Monroe had Mr. Madison not joined Mr. Monroe’s call to add the Bill of Rights to the nascent Supreme Law.

Perhaps the most revolutionary aspect of our Constitution is that it is a written document. It is written so that all can see what the powers of the national government are, and guaranteeing in the Tenth Amendment that all powers not specifically granted to the Constitution are reserved to the states or the people. This doctrine of enumerated powers is the cornerstone of our constitutional order and the federal system.

We wrote in our second book that if President Obama won a second term, Americans’ liberties would only be as secure as the courts were faithful to properly exercise their power of judicial review to invalidate actions that violate the Constitution. Whether invalidating unconstitutional legislation passed by Congress or unconstitutional executive actions, the courts must not flinch when cases are properly brought to them.

Mr. Madison explained that “ambition must be made to counteract ambition” for checks and balances to work. Each branch must boldly discharge its constitutional duty. Part of the tragedy of the Obamacare decision is realizing that the current membership of the Supreme Court will not exercise robust judicial review.

It appears clear that Chief Justice John Roberts conducts judicial review rigorously only when the liberty clauses of the Constitution are implicated. For example, he invalidated government action when it violated the First Amendment’s Free Speech Clause in Citizens United (campaign finance) and Religion Clauses in Hosanna-Tabor (the ministerial exception), invalidated a federal gun ban under the Second Amendment, and extended that right against state and local gun bans through the Fourteenth Amendment.

But Chief Justice Roberts shows extraordinary deference to the federal government when the actions of the president or Congress are challenged for exceeding federal powers under the authority clauses. First came U.S. v. Comstock (2010), where Justice Kennedy chided the liberal justices and Chief Justice Roberts in giving an exceedingly-broad reading to the Necessary and Proper Clause.

Part of the consternation from the Obamacare decision was seeing Chief Justice Roberts engage in linguistic gymnastics to ignore Congress’ word choice in writing the statute and the president’s televised vows, upholding the individual mandate as a tax despite 200 years of precedent that penalties are not taxes. He also saved half of a Medicaid expansion that coerces the states, and insisted on severing it to save the rest of what was now a misbegotten mutation of Congress’ statute.

This reluctance to unapologetically apply judicial review when authority clauses—rather than liberty clauses—are implicated bodes ill for many current court challenges. There might not be five votes to succeed in challenges to Dodd-Frank, EPA’s cap-and-trade rules, the FCC’s internet-control rules, the recess-appointment challenges, and other power grabs.

Mr. Obama announced on July 6 in Ohio that this election is about a “clash of visions” about the role of government in our lives, arguing for massive entitlements and regulatory controls. If he wins, he will claim a mandate and take federal power to heights we’ve never seen. We can no longer be confident that the Supreme Court will stop him.

Liberty endures only when each branch fully and fearlessly checks and balances the other two branches. Abdicating judicial review empowers President Obama to subvert the Constitution with an imperial presidency, and fundamentally transform the United States to the detriment of future generations.
National-bestselling authors Ambassador Ken Blackwell and Breitbart News legal columnist Ken Klukowski are on faculty at Liberty University and discuss the constitutional role of the courts in Resurgent: How Constitutional Conservatism Can Save America. Both are contributing authors to the ARRA News Service.

Tags: Ken Blackwell, Ken Klukowski, Constitution, constitutional limits, role of government, Barack Obam, second term To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to Conservative Voices. Thanks!

Sunday, July 15, 2012

Vetting and the American Narrative

Vetting has become the new way to change the American Narrative and eventually destroy Liberty. From local to Presidential candidates, the main stream media under the First Amendment of free speech believe it is their responsibility to educate the voters as to the qualifications of the person seeking office.

 Possibly 100 years ago, this vetting practice was more pure in its intention being less driven by an ideological perspective and more about educating the voter. Today, vetting is all about ensuring the public does not hear the American Narrative because the main stream media wants to not only control what they believe the truth should be, but more importantly change what made this country great - The American Narrative.

When reading a quote by Condoleezza Rice I realized how insidious, no evil, this vetting process has become. Rice said in a recent speech:

"It is a narrative that is being pushed by our current president, that 'I'm doing poorly because you're doing well. That has never been the American narrative. Ours has never been a narrative of aggrievement, and ours has never been a narrative of entitlement."  

The election of our current President is a reflection of how the vetting process attempted to change the American Narrative. Critical information was never shared to the voters because this individual epitomized the ideological perspective held by the majority of the main stream media.  Any vetting criticism of him was "spun" by the main stream media and his supporters as being racist.

His associations with a known domestic terrorist such as Bill Ayers to a controversial minister, The Rev. J. Wright were downplayed and ignored by many in the main stream media. A new claim about one of his mentors, Frank Marshal Davis a known communist, is just surfacing after four years.

Conversely the vetting of Sarah Palin was actively undertaken.  Even though she held the highest elected office in the State of Alaska, Governor, her qualifications from the "vetting process" according to the main stream media and her critics (the other party) made her unfit to hold the office of Vice-President. Palin's story reaffirmed the American Narrative, yet this was unacceptable by the main stream media and her critics including some Republicans.

The vetting process should determine if the person is qualified under the current Constitutional requirements. Past achievements as noted on their resumes should be verified to ensure accuracy. However digging into their personal lives under this disguise of  the "vetting process" to find "dirt" only harms Liberty.

Wouldn't it be interesting if the main stream media along with all the political pundits and consultants were held to the same vetting process as potential elected officials?

With the Internet, the citizens of Liberty now have the ability to undertake their own "vetting process." More and more citizens are realizing that they can no longer trust the main stream media because of the continued sanitizing of the truth.  NBC's ignoring of Fast and Furious until it finally had to report this 18 month old news story is one more recent example. No wonder these organizations and individuals despise Fox News to Drudge because the truth is no longer under their control. (Drat, that First Amendment!)

Maintaining the American Narrative is at a critical juncture in our history of Liberty.  We can either continue to walk the main stream media vetting process or strike out on our own and undertake our own research.

What the main stream media and those against Liberty are gambling on is the apathy that has always been present since our inception and struggle for Liberty will continue allowing them to tell a new American Narrative as they have quietly undertaken within the public education social studies (history) textbooks where Oprah now has more importance than Einstein.

Edmund Burke wrote:
"All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."

Now is the time for good men and good women to continue to push back on this main steam media controlled vetting process and push forward with the American Narrative.  By taking this action, we will continue to have the Liberty our Founding Fathers and those after gave their lives for and continue to die for.

Tags: vetting, American Narrative, vetting process, main stream media, liberty, fast and furious,  To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to Conservative Voices. Thanks!

Saturday, July 14, 2012

The American Narrative Has a New Statesman

In the last six decades, statesmen in American have been few and far between. Webster's dictionary defines a statesman as "one who exercises political leadership wisely and without narrow partisanship in the general interest."

Maybe this is why President George Washington spoke against political parties in his Farewell Address as their creation kept individuals from being statesmen because human greed and self interest took over.

However with the increase speculation that former Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice, is being considered as the running mate with Mitt Romney suggests we now be seeing our next outstanding statesman. (Yes I now she is a woman, but let's forget the political correctness shall we? For the word man is symbolic of mankind, human beings.)

In listening to a recent speech given by Condoleezza Rice I was impressed that she clearly articulated the American narrative and this is very unusual. In this speech she made many excellent observations that received two standing ovations. However this one I found particularly impressive:

"It is a narrative that is being pushed by our current president, that 'I'm doing poorly because you're doing well. That has never been the American narrative. Ours has never been a narrative of aggrievement, and ours has never been a narrative of entitlement." 

The American narrative was founded on meritocracy and this is a word many dislike because it does not allow room for entitlement mentality such as we hear daily about the "fat cats," "I owed this or that,", etc.

Possibly Dr. Rice will continue to stay out of the political limelight. However, maybe she will recognize the nation once again needs a statesman and will answer that call to continue the American narrative.

Tags: statesman, Condoleezza Rice, meritocracy, American narrative, entitlement, President George Washington, farewell address, Mitt Romney To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to Conservative Voices. Thanks!

Thursday, July 12, 2012

Welcome Harrison Bergeron

The sometimes controversial author Kurt Vonnegut wrote a short story entitled "Harrison Bergeron." Even though it was classified under science fiction genre, this story published in the the fall of 1961 was indeed in the likes of Jules Verne and H.G. Wells who foretold the future with their tales of marvelous yet to be inventions intertwined with the innate nature of mankind.

Now some 50 years later,  those US citizens who speak against this unrealistic and unattainable concept of fair can welcome Harrison Bergeron and pray they do not end up like he did.

For those not familiar with this story, the setting is in the last part of the 21st century where everyone is equal because it is not fair that some are prettier than others or smarter. Pretty people walk around with bags over their heads and smart people have electronic implants keeping them from thinking.

In our society, this dangerous concept of fair has been embraced and we can see the results every day with them growing in leaps and bounds as our liberty is continually eroded. 
  • Valedictorians and salutatorians are no longer in many schools
  • Everyone must get a trophy
  • Excessive scoring is discouraged because it may cause some psychological harm
  • Standards are lowered allowing less than qualified people preference
  • Wealth redistribution continues to expand to meet the less productive
What is even more frightening is in this story, any dissident to liberty such as Harrison Bergeron, is re-indoctrinated. Unfortunately in Harrison's case, re-indoctrination does not work and extreme measures are taken to silence him.  Just be glad we still have the First Amendment and Second Amendment.

How often do we hear from those who support this unattainable and absolutely illogical concept of "fair" verbally striking down and attacking those who don't? Anyone who goes against fairness is associated with the Tea Party, Fox News, radical right wing associations, being uncaring to "not doing the right thing."

These "Harrison Bergerons" types are obviously uneducated, unread and fools. 

After observing and participating in many discussions during the last several decades, all I can say is the public educational system has been the greatest creator of non-thinking, accepting, mindless robots. When the bags are placed over their heads, the implants placed into their brains, it will be too late. 

Tags: Harrison Bergeron, it is not fair, Second Amendment, Kurt Vonnegut To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to Conservative Voices. Thanks!

Wednesday, July 11, 2012

The Most Dangerous Four Letter Dirty Word to Liberty

Four letter dirty words are many. Today Lady Liberty is coming to face to face with the most dangerous four letter dirty word that has ever graced this country.

Now this word is not new. Actually, it has been present since the very early formation of our country. Many of our founding fathers fought against this word and lost some very significant battles.

Of course, this particular word was not used specifically because those who publicly spoke this word would have been quickly branded traitors to the very essence of liberty. After all this country was founded because some very smart men recognized that this word truly did not exist in any consistent and quantifiable manner.

And that word is FAIR.  

The Declaration of Independence did not state "... all men are created fair."  Unfortunately many people confuse equal with fair. 

First, life begins without any thought to fair.  If this was true, then all births would be perfect. Our genetic makeup creates individuality which is the opposite of fair. Add our experiences to the mix and watch the unfairness grow and multiply.

For example:
  • Is it fair that some men and women were born to wealth while others were born to poverty?
  • Is it fair that some individuals can eat everything in sight without gaining a pound while others just walk by the bakery and gain a pound without eating anything?
  • Is it fair that some are born with blue eyes, blond hair, straight teeth, wavy hair, small ears, etc.?
  • Is it fair that some are considered beautiful while others are thought to be ugly?
  • Is it fair some are more intelligent than others?
  • Is it fair some can survive military combat without a scratch while others are seriously wounded and may even die?
How many laws have been enacted out of this false belief of fairness?
  • Social security - It is not fair people lost their savings.
  • Prohibition - It is not fair that people turned to drink and abandon their families.
  • Inheritance Taxes - It is not fair that someone inherits the wealth from a family member.
  • Smoking - It is not fair that I must smell someone elses' smoke.
Fairness never has existed and never will because of these two reasons:
  1. Human beings are different from the day they were born thanks to their genes
  2. Fairness is a value perception and hence cannot be consistently measured
Hence, fairness by its innate construction is unfair and therefore there is no such concept of fairness.  What happens is almost logical circular reasoning because the person who wants the fairness has one perception and yet the other person who wants fairness has another.  Both can argue for fairness without achieving any fairness.

Now, equal can be measured.  6 apples for you; 6 apples for me. Fairness cannot be measured because it is based on value perception, emotions and not logic or reasoning.  

Those who argue for fairness cannot tell you what fair is because it is a moving target depending upon what they want.  Argue against them and you are judged to be unkind, uncaring and not a fair person.

True liberty recognizes that this 4 letter dirty word of fair does not exist.
  • What does exist is the desire to become better individually and not at the expense of someone elses' productivity. 
  • What does exist is personal responsibility and accountability for one's own actions.
What does exist is liberty to the edge of another's nose or property line.

George Washington saw the sins of fairness in his farewell address in which he strongly advise to avoid becoming embroiled in the affairs of other countries as well as debt. He understood we as a country cannot control what happens to other countries and to engage in this behavior would be detrimental to the true liberty and sanctity of this country.  Debt only expands this ridiculous concept of fair and becomes much like that endless hole where digging (debt creation) never stops.

So if we are going to ignore the advice of our Founding Fathers, then let us start with FAIR at the highest levels of government because:
  • It is not FAIR that our elected officials make more than the average citizens
  • It is not FAIR that our elected officials have better benefits from health care to retirement than the average citizens
  • It is not FAIR that our elected officials remove themselves from the same laws the average citizens must adhere to such as the House Banking Scandal just to name one
Then let's examine laws that harm our own legal citizens based on this dangerous word of fair because:
  • It is not fair that we have children starving in this country and yet we give foreign aid to other countries
  • It is not fair that the minority of citizens pay the taxes in this country while the majority pay little to nothing
  • It is not fair the those who are not legal citizens get the same rights and even better benefits in some cases such as college tuition than those who are legal
  • It is not fair that those who played by the rules, worked, scrimped and saved must now help others who choose not to work hard, scrimp and save
  • It is not fair that uneducated citizens both legal and illegal get to vote because of their own self interests reinforced by federal government that wants dependency and fosters an entitlement of fairness
Life is not fair and now is the tine to get over it.  If you want to get ahead, then work harder and work smarter. There is no quick fix, no magic pill to make your life better.

From the moment you were born, life is life, it is what it is, the good, the bad and the ugly.  However, you have the opportunity to leverage what you have, as little as it may be and work with liberty to have what you want.

For over 200 years, liberty prompted people to leave their comfort zones and tackle the impossible. These folks ignored the word fair. Today unfortunately far too many citizens have embraced this dangerous word and the liberty for all will suffer the consequences unless something changes.

P.S. If you want to see what happens to a "fair society," read the classic short story of Harrison Bergeron by Kurt Vonnegut.  Do not become confused with the word "equal" for what is described is fair.

Tags: life is not fair, it is not fair, liberty, true liberty, four letter dirty words, dirty word, House Banking Scandal, Harrison Bergeron To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to Conservative Voices. Thanks!

Thursday, July 5, 2012

The Best of America

There was a Time! It wasn't too long ago that the quiet heroes of this land walked tall with the pride of knowing that they lived in a country unlike no other. On this Independence Day, we celebrate that sense of American optimism and recommit ourselves to bringing that feeling back to us once again.

Tags: Mitt Romney, There Was A Time, 2012, election 2012, Mitt 2012, Believe in America To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". From the ARRA News Service.

Wednesday, July 4, 2012

Give Me Liberty Not Give Me Freedom

Patrick Henry's speech of "Give me Liberty or Give Me Death" is well known as one of the precursors to what we now call 4th of July, our Independence Day .

Henry saw liberty as the action of freeing the colonies from the rule of Britain and his majesty King George.  He also recognized the result of this new action called liberty was freedom.

Henry did not say give me freedom or give me death.

No, because liberty was far more reaching, much more encompassing that just freedom.

With the overwhelming majority of the colonists content with their freedom (research suggests less than 10% of the colonial population was involved in the American Revolution), Henry spoke to those forward thinkers who saw how liberty freed the individuals to be even better than they currently were.

At the time of the Revolution, Americans had the highest per capita income in the civilized world and paid the lowest taxes. Henry and other soon to be rebels wanted this to continue because they recognized their economic to intellectual prosperity would be stranglehold by Britain.

More importantly, Henry understood liberty had consequences when he spoke these words:

"Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation?  For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst and to provide for it."

How many times do we as citizens fail to speak up, to call the Emperor or King in Henry's case, naked? 

We fear because we do not want to know the whole truth or to take the appropriate action implied in a Few Good Men when Jack Nicholson said "You can't handle the truth." 

Maybe we fear because we may lose business if we are self-employed or possibly because someone may make a judgement about us such as being an uncaring, self serving, rich 1%, to even racist. 

The question we all should be asking ourselves today is:

What is the difference between King George then and the Federal Government today?

"I ask gentlemen, sir, what means this martial array if its purpose be not to force us to submission? Can gentlemen assign any other possible motives for it? Has the U.S. Federal Government any enemy, in this quarter of the world to call for all this accumulation of  IRS agents to compliance officers? No, sir, she has none. They are meant for us: they can be meant for no other. They are sent over to bind and rivet upon us those chains which the U.S. Federal Government have been so long forging." (Note:  Only changed the words in red.)

Henry continues and again how are his words spoken over 200 years ago any different today?

"Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves longer.  Sir, we have done everything that could be done to avert the storm which is now coming on. We have petitioned - we have remonstrated - we have supplicated - we have prostrated ourselves before the throne (Courts), and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry (President) and Parliament (Congress).  Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with contempt, from the foot of the throne (Courts).  

 They tell us, sir, that we are weak - unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British Guard (electronic monitoring device) shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance by lying supinely on our backs, and hugging the delusive phantom of Hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot? 

 Sir, we are not weak, if we make a proper use of the means which the God of nature hath placed in our power. Three millions of people (210 millions of people), armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us."

Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us.  The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat, but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged, their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable - and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come!

It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, peace, peace - but there is no peace. The war is actually begun. The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; 

but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death! 

Tags: Give me liberty or give me death, Patrick Henry, American Revolution, highest per capita income, Independence Day, Leanne Hoagland-Smith To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to Conservative Voices. Thanks!