Category Archives: Economy

“We Are Taking Our Country Back”

A 9~12 message from Glenn Beck

Patrick Henry’s Peaceful Dissent

Those who were once united by the “Spirit of ’76,” or the Revolutionary generation, were not necessarily united in supporting the Constitution in 1787-88. We need only look to the state ratification debates to see the diversity of opinions regarding the new plan of government among faithful and once-united patriots. Acceptance of the Constitution was anything but a foregone conclusion.

Virginia patriot Patrick Henry, famous for his “give me liberty or give me death” speech which prompted Virginia (and eventually her sister states) to join besieged Massachusetts in the cause of independence, was one such devout Anti-Federalists, or one who opposed the new Constitution. His voice was often heard (and feared by Federalists) during the Virginia ratification debates.

Patrick Henry’s objections were not unfounded. After fighting off a British superpower, he feared a large national government with no declaration of rights to limit its power. He warned that if Virginia ratified, “the Republic may be lost forever,” and subsequently demanded to know “what right had [the delegates at Philadelphia] to say, We, the People.”

As the Virginia convention drew near a final vote on ratification, Henry stood to deliver his most impassioned soliloquy against the Constitution. He condemned an affirmative vote by saying it would negatively impact not just the fledging United States, but countries and even generations yet unborn but nonetheless present in the convention hall with the delegates in ethereal form.

When I see beyond the horrison [sic.] that binds human eyes,” Henry began, “and look at the final consummation of all human things…I am led to believe that much of the account on one side or the other, will depend on what we now decide. Our own happiness alone is not affected by the event-All nations are interested in the determination. We have it in our power to secure the happiness of one half of the human race. Its adoption may involve the misery of the other hemispheres…”

Just as Henry finished his speech, a storm suddenly arose which combined with Henry’s rhetorical weaponry to have an eerie affect on his listeners. His final words were punctuated by thunder and lightning which “shook the whole building.”

Without calling for adjournment, the delegates—including such distinguished figures as George Washington, Governor Edmund Randolph, George Mason, James Monroe and James Madison—fled the convention hall. One listener explained why: “the spirits whom [Henry] had called, seemed to have come at his bidding.” Moreover, “[Henry] seemed to mix in the fight of his aetherial auxiliaries, and ‘rising on the wings of the tempest, to seize upon the artillery of Heaven, and direct its fiercest thunders against the heads of his adversaries.’”

Yet in spite of his vehement opposition, Patrick Henry demonstrated his commitment to the democratic process. Shortly after the Virginia Ratification Convention, he was approached by his Anti-Federalist colleagues to head a guerilla war against the ratified Constitution. Instead of continuing to oppose the Constitution outright, he declared “I will be a peaceable citizen.”

And he was. While Henry disagreed with some aspects of the new government, he also recognized that the Constitution left his head, hand, and heart free to advocate change “in a constitutional way.” He accepted the choice made by the American people and advocated for change within the system they had chosen. As a member of the Virginia House of Delegates, he ensured Virginia’s two U.S. Senators were Anti-Federalists, paving the way for the passage of the Bill of Rights.

ConSource logo

About All Those ‘POOR’ Folk Than Can Not Afford Health Insurance

Back in the day, the poor were represented appropriately, they literally had nothing but the clothing on their backs. Today, the liberal progressives have a different view.

National Review Online sheds some light on the ‘wealth’ of the ‘poor’ that say they can not afford health care:

 Today, the U.S. Census Bureau will release its annual poverty report. The report is expected to show an increase in poverty in 2008 due to the onset of the recession. It is no surprise that poverty goes up in a recession. What is surprising is that every year for nearly three decades, in good economic times and bad, Census has reported more than 30 million Americans living in poverty.
What does it mean to be “poor” in America? For the average reader, the word poverty implies significant physical hardship — for example, the lack of a warm, adequate home, nutritious food, or reasonable clothing for one’s children. By that measure, very few of the 30 million plus individuals defined as “living in poverty” by the government are actually poor. Real hardship does occur, but it is limited in scope and severity.

The average person identified as “poor” by the government has a living standard far higher than the public imagines. According to the government’s own surveys, the typical “poor” American has cable or satellite TV, two color TVs, and a DVD player or VCR. He has air conditioning, a car, a microwave, a refrig­erator, a stove, and a clothes washer and dryer. He is able to obtain medical care when needed. His home is in good repair and is not overcrowded. By his own report, his family is not hungry, and he had sufficient funds in the past year to meet his family’s essential needs. While this individual’s life is not affluent, it is far from the images of dire poverty conveyed by liberal activists and politicians.

Various government reports contain the following facts about persons defined as “poor” by the Census Bureau:

Nearly 40 percent of all poor households actu­ally own their own homes. On average, this is a three-bedroom house with one-and-a-half baths, a garage, and a porch or patio.

Eighty-four percent of poor households have air conditioning. By contrast, in 1970, only 36 percent of the entire U.S. population enjoyed air conditioning.

Nearly two-thirds of the poor have cable or satellite TV.

Only 6 percent of poor households are over­crowded; two-thirds have more than two rooms per person.

The typical poor American has as much or more living space than the average individual living in most European countries. (These comparisons are to the average citizens in foreign countries, not to those classified as poor.)

Nearly three-quarters of poor households own a car; 31 percent own two or more cars.

Ninety-eight percent of poor households have a color television; two-thirds own two or more color televisions.

Eighty-two percent own microwave ovens; 67 percent have a DVD player; 73 percent have a VCR; 47 percent have a computer.

The average intake of protein, vitamins, and minerals by poor children is indistinguishable from that of children in the upper middle class. Poor boys today at ages 18 and 19 are actually taller and heavier than middle-class boys of similar age were in the late 1950s. They are a full inch taller and ten pounds heavier than the GIs who stormed the beaches of Normandy during World War II.
Conventional accounts of poverty not only exaggerate hardship, they also underestimate government spending on the poor. In 2008, federal and state governments spent $714 billion (or 5 percent of the total economy) on means-tested welfare aid, providing cash, food, housing, medical care, and targeted social services to poor and low-income Americans. (This sum does not include Social Security or Medicare.) If converted into cash, this aid would be nearly four times the amount needed to eliminate poverty in the U.S. by raising the incomes of all poor households above the federal poverty levels.
How can the government spend so much and still have such high levels of apparent poverty? The answer is that, in measuring poverty and inequality, Census ignores almost the entire welfare state. Census deems a household poor if its income falls below federally specified levels. But in its regular measurements, Census counts only around 4 percent of total welfare spending as “income.” Because of this, government spending on the poor can expand almost infinitely without having any detectable impact on official poverty or inequality.
Also missing in most Washington discussions about the poor is an acknowledgement of the behavioral causes of official poverty. For example, families with children become poor primarily because of low levels of parental work and high levels of out-of-wedlock childbearing with accompanying single parenthood.
Even in the best economic times, the typical poor family with children has, on average, only 16 hours of work per week. Little work equals little income equals more poverty. Nearly two-thirds of poor children live in single-parent homes, a condition that has been promoted by the astonishing growth of out-of-wedlock childbearing in low-income communities. When the War on Poverty began, 7 percent of American children were born outside marriage; today the number is 39 percent.
President Obama is pursuing his agenda to “spread the wealth” through massive hikes in welfare spending financed by unprecedented increases in the federal debt. Before we further expand the welfare state and pile even greater indebtedness on our children, we need a more honest assessment of current anti-poverty spending and the actual living conditions of the “poor.”

So, according to this report, my husband & I would be classified as ‘poor’. I am not at all happy with this label. We have always considered  living within our means, living simply and living happily without government intrusion into our personal life/living choices as being responsible and self reliant.

We also consider ourselves to be very wealthy. We have our faith, our family, our health and our strong determination for self responsibility. Sure we could work longer and harder to have a larger bank account, but we refuse to let monetary/material idolism take precidence over the more important  God given aspects of our wealth.

True wealth is given to us by our creator. It is our Faith, Family & Health and this country will never begin to heal unless material selfishness is cast aside for a deeper sense of personal responsibility and a good look at what our true inherent rights are.

It is time to reign ‘big government’ back into the 10 mile radius of DC and back to legislating only on the specific enumerated tasks permitted them under Article 1 of the Constitution.

All ‘Clunked Out’

Click on the photo for the full clunker!


Herseth-Sandlin & Her Stimulus Oversight

I was not at all quiet about my displeasure of Stephanie’s vote for the $787 stimulus aka C.R.A.P. bill. When I questioned her on it, she said that she was able to vote ‘yes’ because, unlike the TARP, the C.R.A.P. had the oversight needed to avoid wasteful spending.

So, read for yourself, the kind of stimulus, or as Michelle Malkin puts it : ‘smut-ulus’, that Stephanie is overseeing:

· $25,000 to the San Francisco Cinematheque in San Francisco, California. The website’s calendar states that next season will be announced in the weeks ahead but the News tab describes recent Co-presentations such as a documentary on “the legendary underground filmmakers Mike & George Kuchar” and thier film “Thundercrack” of which a reviewer raves: “Witness if you dare, the world’s only underground kinky art porno horror film, complete with four men, three women and a gorilla. Ecstasy so great that all heaven and hell becomes just one big old Shangri-La!” First mention on the website’s Archives tab is Treasures IV: American Avant-Garde Film which includes Peyote Queen. Peyote Queen is billed as: “A classic of the psychedelic tendency … An attempt to visually render the wealth of kaleidoscope visions of peyote, the hallucinogenic cactus ritually used by the Indians of New Mexico” … an “… exploration in the colour of ritual, in the colour of thought, a journey in the depths of sensorial disorder, of the inner vision, where mysteries are represented in the theatre of the soul.”

· $25,000 to Jess Curtis/Gravity, Inc. in San Francisco, California. One of their most recent works is the Symmetry Project where nude couples are mounted on each other in various poses. Note in the first pictures nude children are present with nude adults.

We now have ‘Smutulus’ we can believe in thanks to Stephanie, however, is this the kind of oversight you want for your health care?

I guess for Stephanie, her view of wasteful spending oversight wasn’t quite the kind she promoted during the 2008 election.

When you lie down with dogs, it doesn’t matter what color you are, especially in partisan politics.

Breaking: Geithner to China: Don’t Count on US Buyers

via Breitbart:

“China’s success in shifting the structure of the economy towards domestic demand-led growth, including a greater role for spending by consumers, will be a huge contribution to more rapid, balanced, and sustained global growth,” Geithner said at the start of two days of high-level talks in Washington.

read full article here

12 Million Illegals: We Don’t Need No “Stinkin’ Amnesty”, Cuz We Get Free Health Care Under the Law

Reported in Newsmax on Sunday:

Democrats moved one step closer to giving free health insurance to the nation’s estimated 12 million illegal aliens when they successfully defeated a Republican-backed amendment, offered by Rep. Dean Heller, R-Nev., that would have prevented illegal aliens from receiving government-subsidized health care under the proposed plan backed by House Democrats and Barack Obama.

The House Ways and Means Committee nixed the Heller amendment by a 26-to-15 vote along straight party lines, and followed this action by passing the 1,018-page bill early Friday morning by a 23-to-18 margin, with three Democrats voting against the plan.

The Democratic plan will embrace Obama’s vision of bringing free government medical care to more than 45 million uninsured people in America — a significant portion of whom are illegal aliens.

This corroborates the Mark Levin caller from a couple of weeks back who had attended a La Raza meeting on health care. She was very upset at what Sen. Manendez’s staffer, sent to speak on his behalf, was saying. Take a quick 4 min to listen for yourself:

Stop the Apologies and Get Back to Common Sense Business for “We the People”

Our 21st Century Thomas Paine clears up some confusion and makes yet another plea. This time to the President, but for the sake of “Common Sense”, it would behoove US Congress as well as State Congresses to heed Mr Paine’s advice:

Bending over backwards to be N.I.C.E. and see to it that we will forever be H.A.P.I.


Right on cue, the White House comes out with a plan that will supposedly help pay for their gargantuan health care program:

This morning, VP Biden and “Tiller the baby killer’s biggest supporter”, HHS Sec Sebelius announced:

“the hospitals are ready to give up about $155 billion over 10 years in government payments. The money could then be used to help pay for covering millions of uninsured.”

So they would have us believe that this is a true reduction? Reduction does not come without a cost and that cost will be a reduction in services to medicare. So forget that new joint or that cancer treatment if you are are one of those pesky elderly that refuses to die for the sake of the illegal immigrant who is younger and more productive. Forget that life saving medical care if you are a cash strapped parent of a preemie in need of extensive medical care. The NICU will be off limits to your newborn.

Welcome to “Orwellian Medical Care”, because they care so much, “NOT”!

This Orwellian care will come with its very own “HAPI”board to oversee your care:

AT: The bill is S.391 and is currently making rounds in the Senate. Incidentally, we have a bit of Orwellian “doublespeak” that seems to be the standard in Washington, especially in regards to social oriented legislation: The “Healthy Americans Private Insurance” plan, which states as its purpose “to provide affordable, guaranteed private health coverage that will make Americans healthier and can never be taken away” isn’t a private plan at all; it’s a public one.

Much like the UK’s “NICE” board that does everything but protect that patient:

Reuters UK: Kidney cancer patients should not be treated with four expensive new medicines on Britain’s state-run National Health Service, the country’s health cost-effectiveness watchdog said


The decision fuels controversy about the way NICE rations treatment on the state health service in England and Wales, denying patients access to costly modern medicines that are used routinely in many countries, notably the United States.

Cancer Research UK said it raised questions about whether NICE’s system of appraisal was appropriate for all types of drugs, especially when there were few alternative treatments.

NICE argues it has to make tough choices when deciding which drugs should be paid for and which not.

Yep folks, our elected officials are bending over backwards to be N.I.C.E. and see to it that we will forever be H.A.P.I. about a new government run health care system.

All in unison now: “Ain’ that special?”

OUCH! Cavuto v. Obama

The video clip says it all..GO Cavuto!!!

Vodpod videos no longer available.

more about "OUCH! Cavuto v. Obama", posted with vodpod

UPDATED:New Health Care Tax: $8,000 For Every Family of Four On Top of the Cost of the Mandated Health Insurance

pic_homie_05-21-09_AUpdates are in red:

Dem’s say: “uh, but it’s only,uh, uh, a pittance uh, uh compared to what we are already going to uh, uh, soak you with…uh…so what’s the big deal?”

News came out today that the Health Care legislation being drafted by the Democrats will include a 600 billion dollar tax increase and a $400 billion reduction in Medicare and Medicaid services(cuts in medical care for our military and elderly).

WaPo:In his weekly radio address, Obama proposed limiting the growth of Medicare fee-for-service payments …(snip)… Obama also proposed slashing subsidies to hospitals that treat uninsured patients, on the theory that very few uninsured patients will remain in the wake of reform. (Umm, kinda ignorant thinking of him, in light of his view to keep the doors open for the illegal immigrants who are the super majority of this type of abuse)

If we take this into perspective, as it will affect every single breathing body in the United States as medical insurance will now be mandatory if this is passed, the cost to each and every man, woman and child will be a mere $2000(estimated and rounded off) a year. Of course this is a low-ball estimate as they also said the cost of their program will in all likelihood be upwards of a trillion dollars and we all know how accurate their numbers are.

“There is no doubt that Medicare and Medicaid need reform, but serious changes should not be rushed through Congress as part of a new government-run program that will raise taxes and make health care more expensive, costing middle-class families even more,” said House  Minority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio).

So, the average family of 4 will be taxed an additional $8,000 a year on top of having to pay for their mandated health insurance. Oh, wait a minute, not everyone pays taxes, so double that number as only half of the country’s households pay income tax.

The good news is, the Dems are getting a lot of flack and feed-back from the moderates in their own party, so let’s keep up the pressure on DC and get this squashed, bagged up and thrown out into the trash-heap of bad legislation where it belongs.

But like other parts of Obama’s plan to pay for health reform, the measures announced today are likely to be met with skepticism on Capitol Hill. Many lawmakers are not enthusiastic about slashing payments to hospitals and other providers back home without clear evidence that the cuts will not hurt patients. Even small cuts on the Senate Finance Committee list have provoked widespread grumbling.

Aides in Senate Finance and House Ways and Means, whose members are now working furiously to draft health reform financing plans, predicted today that Obama’s new proposals would “raise some hackles” and spur “some pushback.”

It was also unclear whether $950 billion would indeed be enough to cover the full cost of reform. Some outside analysts have said that Congress may have to spend $1.5 trillion or more…

read full atricle here