Government Usurpation: Auto Industry

Yesterday, the White House released a statement indicating how the Obama administration plans to handle the hairy situation involving American automobile makers. It is nothing more or less than what has come to be expected from our new leadership: another hard poke of the government's finger into (what is left of) American private industry. Earlier this year, President Obama gave General Motors and Chrysler a chance to develop plans for restructuring. If their plans were acceptable to the administration, they would receive up to $39 billion in loans to help that restructuring process. Well, President Obama deemed their plans unworthy of the money and is now giving them an additional couple months (30 days for Chrysler, 60 for GM) to try again with their planning process; this time with the help of Obama's team. If their plans are found to be acceptable at the end of this period, further "investments" of taxpayers' hard-earned dollars will be provided to boost them along.

The ins and outs of this proposition are not what are most important here. It's not even the fact that we'll be losing more money to government spending (we best get used to that). The problem is that our government is gobbling up as much control and power that it can get its greedy beaks on. Where is this power going to end? If President Obama's "team" is now responsible for developing companies' business plans, what is to stop them from setting the wages that American workers are paid? What is to stop them from dictating what brand of equipment businesses use or where they setup shop? Don't think they'll do it? It's already underway courtesy of our friend Barney Frank. That article explains how the government can control how much employees of companies who received taxpayer funds are paid. Don't even think about saying, "well, that's just because they're talking about 'bailout' money." It won't stop there. Who returns power after it has been obtained? Just watch.

Easiest Way to End a War? Say It's Over.

Secretary of State Clinton as taken the liberty of discontinuing the term "war on terror", according to this AP article via Fox News. Evidently those words make it sound too much like we are in a war (???). I am not an advocate of government's use of fear tactics, but on the other hand, to sweep a war with radical killers under the rug is just irresponsible.

As an aside, look at the first minute of Bill O'Reilly's September interview with President Obama. You will here him say that we are "absolutely" engaged in a war on terror. Has our new Administration really been able to end this war in its first three months? Assuming the answer is "no", is it too much to ask for a shred of consistency? We are either at war or not. According to Sec. Clinton, she has not received any orders to cease the use of the term "war on terror". If that is indeed the case, President Obama needs to keep a leash on his Administration to make sure they are all on the same page and conveying the same messages to the American people.

Government of, by, and for the Government

The other day I was listening to a radio program when a woman called in and proposed an interesting idea. She suggested that political figures such as Congressmen and the President be required to acquire and maintain a sort of license in order to "practice". Her argument was that many other professionals (doctors, lawyers, plumbers, etc.) need to maintain some form of license in order to remain in business, so public servants should as well. Logically this may appear to be a reasonable idea, but practically it has one major problem.

The problem is, who would be responsible and held accountable for the licensing program? After all, accountability is the name of the game in this new administration. Requirements would need to be established to determine whether or not an applicant qualifies to hold a license for occupying a federal position and tests would need to be established to ensure that the applicants meet all of those requirements. Currently the Constitution states that to be President, an individual must 1. be a citizen of the United States of America 2. be at least 35 years old and 3. have been a resident of the United States of America for at least 14 years. It also states that to be a Congressman an individual must 1. be either 25 (Representative) or 30 (Senator) years old and 2. be a United States citizen for either 7 (Rep.) or 9 (Sen.) years. That is all.

But if a licensing program were to be put in place in addition to the requirements established in the Constitution, who would be in charge of it? Congress? How could they responsibly authorize and license themselves? The majority would end up simply voting changes to the requirements in order to license only nominees that are on the same page as their agenda. The President? Sounds like a dictatorship. The Supreme Court? That may be a little more promising, but they would be bought off and swayed very easily. ACORN? Please.

Anyway you slice it, we would end up with a system of extreme corruption. Once a majority, such as the one that is in power right now, gains control, they would be able to easily manipulate the program to block out individuals that do not agree with them and expedite the acceptance of new partners in crime. This would in effect create an aristocracy where those in power have command over who is even eligible to merely run for office, which would completely do away with the government of the people, by the people, and for the people.

The Real Demise of Healthcare

Yesterday, the Senate approved its version of "The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009" (available for your viewing here). This is the so called stimulus package that is being steamrolled through the system by the Obama administration without any time for contemplation or debate. Not only is this plan filled to the brim with pork, it contains devastating provisions for the American health care system. A giant step towards socialized medicine. Basically what the section on health care states is that there is going to be a new federal agency created for the purpose of monitoring and controlling the care that doctors and hospitals provide patients. The agency will see to it that doctors only provide the most "cost effective" treatments rather than treatments that have the best chance of saving a life. See this great article for a more detailed analysis of the plan, but the point is that this bill is a monumental step in a economic and social direction that has been proven time and again to fail.

If you take a look at the article by Betsy McCaughey, you will see several quotes by Mr. Obama and his henchmen along the lines of “The issue is too important to be stalled by Senate protocol.” The only problem is, that protocol is the American way! That is how our government works and to bypass it is to completely ignore the way our Founding Fathers intended the government to be run. They are trying to get this bill passed so fast because they know that if the majority of the American people actually learn and think about what is inside, they will be against it.

It is critical that everyone who reads this calls their representative in the U.S. Senate and pleads for action to be taken against this bill and all of its socialist filth. Find your senator's contact information here: http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm