Wednesday, January 6, 2010

A Blunt Lie or Naive Promise: Is the Administration Telling Us More Than They Intend?

    Over the course of the Presidential campaign, President Obama made a pledge that is now raising the question, "Did he lie to us, or just make a naive campaign promise that he could not possibly keep?" There are, also, some very strong implications that can be drawn from the failure of the administration to keep its pledge.

    While some are willing to credit the broken promise made by Obama to televise Health Care negotiations to naive campaign promises, I believe that the failure to keep the promise He uttered no less than 8 times to be much more. It amounts to an outrageous and blatant lie. Obama stated on 8 seperate occasions that the negotiations would be televised in open transparency and specifically stated that they would air on C-Span. Now, we find that the negotiations will take place in secret amongst the Democrats with no press allowed.

    The question is left as to why it is so important that these proceedings would need to take place in such a secretive manner. The only logical answer would be that the process is going to be so dirty and so revolting that it could not be accomplished in the eye of the public. Also, there is no way that the administration can pass this legislation under the scrutiny of an already angry populace.

     Perhaps, there is more to the claims of individuals like Glenn Beck,  Hannity, and Limbaugh than the administration would like us all to believe. After all, if they truly have nothing to hide, why are they hiding?

Thursday, October 15, 2009

Transparency, Progress, and the Birther Issue

     All of us are keenly aware of the problems facing our nation, many of which have been a direct result of the economic crisis.  Many Americans have begun to ask questions of their leaders and elected representatives about the massive expansion of federal government through control of many areas of the private sector and many are taking a closer look at what amounts to be gross violations of Constitutional law. Some have raised questions and even accusations about the eligibility of Barack Obama to be the president citing the Constitutional requirement that the president be a natural born citizen.

     I had been aware of the arguments raised by this group since before the election of Obama last year, but I never put much stock into the claims, as they appeared to be just another conspiracy theory similar to claims made before about other candidates. I am not claiming, as others have, that Obama is not a natural born citizen, nor do I have an opinion one way or another. I am, quite honestly, the furthest thing from a supporter of his possible, but I believe that without proof one way or the other, it is obsurd to make claims or hold beliefs about such a serious claim. I have made some rather important observations and would like to share those here.

     First, the fact that Obama has spent large sums of money fighting the release of his birth documents and other important documents, is not in keeping with his campaign of transparency and a farewell to the politics of the past. One has to wonder that if he has nothing to hide, why he would spend so much money, over a million dollars, on keeping these records hidden. When accused of a crime, most people provide an alibi which clears them. However, if they were to withhold this information, it would likely steer more suspicion in their direction. No person in their right mind would do such a thing. Why is Obama? With so much at stake in this nation, why allow the distraction of continued claims and doubts? All of this could be put to rest very simply and easily with the release of the documents in question. 

Just some thoughts.

P.S. I would like to give credit to Michael Johns for inspiring most of this. Here is the link to his blog post.

Friday, October 2, 2009

Some Quick Thoughts on Change We Can Believe

     I'd love to post some thoughts about the recent health care debate and some true solutions that will work vs. the liberal government-run nightmare, but I don't have a lot of time, as I must get ready for work shortly. Instead, I have had some thoughts burning in my mind about the change that Obama promised. While Obama, the candidate campaigned on the need for change from the policies of the Bush administration, Obama the President seems to be embracing all of the policies he and the liberals in Washington charged to the former administration.

     Obama charged the Bush administration with giving tax breaks to the wealthy and punishing the middle class, yet the current administration has given massive bailouts to major corporations and the financial giants who got themselves into financial trouble. Much of this money landed right in the pockets of the fat cat's on Wall Street.

     Obama called the War in Iraq a massive failure of the Bush administration, and pledged to bring the troops home within the first year of his administration. Later, when it appeared that he had clinched the nomination, he began to step back the rhetoric. As President, Obama has pledged that the combat mission in Iraq will continue through 2010, indicating that support troops will remain after 2010.

     Obama and many liberals were intensely critical of the Bush administration use of the Patriot Act. However, we see a much different stance from the current President regarding the wiretaps and other policies they were so critical of, as they seek to renew the provisions of the Patriot Act which are set to expire this year.

     Bush was criticized for his massive deficit spending, and Obama campaigned on the fact that McCain would only provide more of the same. Interestingly enough, the Obama administration has gone on a spending spree that makes the Bush spending look conservative. We've seen massive bailouts, proposed deficits in the trillions, a proposed government takeover of health care that will cost nearly a trillion dollars and proposes tax increases on the middle class, and witnessed the continued devaluation of the dollar.

     While Obama promised change and hope, he has offered more of the same liberal policies and failures of the Bush administration. I'm not saying that the Bush administration was a failure in all aspects, there was much good that came from many of the policies of his administration, but there were many policies from the Bush administration which were disastrous and are being carried out in greater measure under Obama than any administration ever has.  So for all the promises, we have seen more and greater examples of failure and ineptitude.  We as the voting public with whom freedom and our children's future have been entrusted must hold the current administration accountable.

Thursday, September 24, 2009

Eco-Socialism, the Left, and the Path to Tyranny

     For decades, a struggle has been waged over the proper role of government and the rights of its citizens. I have referred to statements made as far back as 1927 by politicians referring to the resistance of citizenry to direct socialism and prophesied future acceptance of it through a gradual liberalism. Over time the euphemisms may have changed, but the struggle still continues.

     It is interesting to note that Eco-socialism is a movement or philosophy that sees capitalism as the root of class warfare and harm to the environment and seeks to replace capitalism through "collective ownership of the means of production." The numerous bailouts of the private sector and health care by the federal government with taxpayer funding is a prime example of this philosophy in action, and their plan to transform the current economy into a new green economy fit within the tennants of socialism and eco-socialism.

     Particularly troubling, is the propensity of Obama and the Left to stifle opposing views and expressions of ideas.  The most recent example of this, comes with the case of private companies like Humana Corp., which provide services to medicare recipients, being placed under a gag order by the government after attempting to inform their customers of the effects of pending legislation on the current care they receive. Those who fail to abide by the gag order have been threatened with being forced to pay a fine or going to jail. This is a perfect example of the tyranny that comes with the progressive left's socialization of America. In order for them to enact their agenda, they must start with a passive tyranny that comes in the form of intimidation and less than forceful methods of silencing opposition, and as history shows, leads to an agressive form of tyranny, such as that perpetrated in Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union. George Santayana once said, "Those who cannot remember the past, are condemned to repeat it." History clearly shows the path that other leaders and nations have taken down the path to tyranny.  Lenin, Stalin, and Hitler all campaigned on populist agendas appealing to the labor forces of their nations in their rise to power, and they all started gradually suppressing their opposition until they were a force that could not be stopped. They, also, ran very successful propaganda campaigns aimed at the working class emphasizing class warfare and targeted youth recruitment for their agendas (a topic we may explore at another time).

     We are clearly seeing an attempt by the Obama administration and the left to impose a larger federal government with expanded power beyond the scope of the founding fathers and the Constitution, even larger than even Franklin Roosevelt imagined it. We are witnessing their attempt to marginalize, demean, and intimidate all opposition into silence. We know from the lessons taught by history the path of tyranny that follows, and we know that path threatens the framework of our very nation. Finally, we may have but one chance left to reclaim what remains of our republic. We must continue to expose the agenda for the threat to our civil liberties that it is, and we must reclaim our republic in 2010 and 2012.

Friday, September 18, 2009

Obama and General Electric: Pay to Play

     Growing up in the state of Illinois, I've watched countless scandals unfold, from voter fraud to pay-to-play schemes. I grew up with the stories of dirty politics and the iron grip of the Chicago political machine. Both of the last two governors have been involved in corruption, and they were both from different political parties and tied to Chicago politics.  The latest and most famous scandal involved former Gov. Blagojevich in a pay-to-play scheme.

     In the last election cycle, many questions were raised about Obama from the obsurd Muslim extremist theories to questions about his citizenship status. There were, however, some legitimate questions raised (a topic for a future post) that were never fully vetted, due to the failure of the media to give a proper hearing to the evidence behind the questions.

     One of the most obtuse examples of the media biase, was MSNBC, who refused to air the mention of some of the stories that might negatively impact Barack Obama. When they did give a story airtime, it was almost always after every other network had aired it, but it was always portrayed with their pro-Obama spin. At least one member of the network publicly pledged their support in helping Obama.

    No doubt, the question is now raised as to what this might have to do with Obama and a pay-to-play type of scenario involving General Electric. Well, GE just happens to own MSNBC, and the CEO of GE, Jeff Immelt, is a key advisor to the President on the Economic Recovery Board. In addition, GE has lobbied for a large portion of the climate change legislation spending $18.66 million last year, and spent 2.9 million supporting democrats in last years election, much of it going to Obama.

     GE stands to benefit from the Obama budget according to an article in the Washington Examiner, for which I have provided a link. Here's a quote from the article.
"Obama’s budget includes the payoff, promising to start a multibillion-dollar greenhouse gas industry by 2012. In a letter this week, GE’S Immelt told shareholders that current events present an “opportunity of a lifetime,” because “capitalism will be ‘reset.’ ”
Immelt wrote: “The interaction between government and business will change forever. In a reset economy, the government will be a regulator; and also an industry policy champion, a financier, and a key partner.”

     In another article, regarding Obama's sudden shift in policy on missile defense, a program aimed at reigning in Iran's Nuclear Missile Program and one that had raised tensions with Russia, the article points out that GE stands to benefit from the immediate effects of this decision as demonstrated by Putin's announcement that he will meet with execs from GE and two financial companies. GE stands to benefit from this sudden change in national security policy through an opportunity to expand its operations into strategic parts of the Russian economy.

      This raises a lot of questions about the politics of the Obama administration.  Does this relationship and the relationships of the administration with organizations like ACORN (which will require another post to examine), equate to a large-scale pay-to-play scheme? At the least it appears that there are some serious ethical problems within the Obama administration and some definite abuses of power. And here we Bernie Madoff was a huge scandal. This looks like Watergate compared to Madoff.

Mike Nadeau

Tuesday, September 15, 2009

The Bell Tolls for Thee

My father raised my siblings and I with the belief that there is no greater cause than these three: Faith, Family, and Country, particularly the freedoms bought and paid for by the blood, sweat, and tears of patriots who gave all for it. I grew up hearing my father warn about the evils of liberalism as the mask of socialism, and vehemently argued with him over the notion that we would face the fate of the Roman Empire and every other great empire throughout history that lost the will to preserve itself. Then, on one particular night, in which I found myself unable to sleep, I found myself watching the History Channel show a program laying out the rise and the fall of the Roman Empire. I was stunned at the parallels I found, and am even more stunned today at the course of recent events that threaten the very foundations of this country, particularly the Health Care Reform debate.
Perhaps, many of you may disagree with some of my political views, or what you presume to be my political views, but this isn't about politics. It is about basic American principles and ideals. You don't have to read what I say or even participate in the process, but a free people who refuse to defend their freedoms are doomed to lose them. It is for you that the bell tolls.
Now, it wasn't just my father who warned of the events that have led us to this point. Many others have warned us along the way, and even history sounds a warning bell in our ears. Ronald Reagan, back in 1961, warned us that the simplest way to bring about socialism was through medicine, and specifically the portrayal of nationalized health care as a moral obligation. He, also, spoke of Norman Thomas six time Presidential candidate for the Socialist Party, who in 1927 stated that Americans would never adopt direct socialism but would through the path of liberalism be brought to bear every aspect of socialism in its fullness.
The liberals just like Nero of ancient Rome are watching as Rome (the American economy) burns to the ground. Rahm Emanuel chief adviser to the Obama administration in his response to the catastrophe, advises that the President do much like Nero and "not waste a good crisis." Do they really believe that the only way is to allow the entire system to collapse so that they may rebuild it in their image.
The nationalization of health care in this country is but the final bend in the road on the path toward socialism. We have nationalized the auto industry, our financial system through the banks, and now, health care is next. This will be followed by (and it has been publicly advocated by members of the administration) a Chavez style takeover of the airways, effectively silencing all opposition and ensuring that we go beyond socialism and adopt a totalitarian state.
However, though the portrayal painted is black, such is not the case. Hundreds of thousands of Americans are standing up and saying a resounding, "NO." They are demanding that the powers that be recognize that "We the People" give them power, and we take it away. Not through violence of force, but through the safeguards put in place by the founding fathers. It is through the democratic process and an enlightened electorate. Don't vote for Repubs or Dems. Vote for individuals. Vote for the guy who will defend liberty at all costs whether he be Republican, Democrat, Independent, Libertarian, White, Black, Yellow, or Purple. Stand up and be heard by your elected officials and let them know that free market solutions are the only solutions, that government is the problem, and that you vote. In the words of Ronald Reagan, "If you don’t, this program I promise you, will pass just as surely as the sun will come up tomorrow, and behind it will come other federal programs that will invade every area of freedom as we have known it in this country. Until, one day, as Normal Thomas said we will awake to find that we have socialism. And if you don’t do this and if I don’t do it, one of these days you and I are going to spend our sunset years telling our children and our children’s children, what it once was like in America when men were free."

Source: Ronald Reagan Presidential Library & Museum