We have just finished our second year of presenting you with information and opinions on issues relating to attacks by our government on our rights, freedoms and way of life as intended and established by our Founding Fathers. These past 27 months under the ideologically radical, intellectually dishonest, corrupt, arrogant, racist and abjectly incompetent Obama Administration have been among the worst (excluding the Civil War) in our nation's history.
Even worse than the Carter's years.
We have a "president" who shows an unmistakable and perpetual disdain for our country and a majority of its citizens (which has been on display internationally). His actions have consistently been geared to weakening us economically and militarily and to reducing us to a non-exceptional and middling nation in the eyes of the rest of the world.
Domestically, he has relentlessly sought to abrogate our rights, freedoms and choices often by resorting to unconstitutional or fringe means and regulations that frequently make use of his hand-picked radical, anti-American and often Marxist czars and far-left infested government agencies. These are imposed against the will of the people - US!
These are the signs and manifestations of tyranny and MUST NOT BE TOLERATED.
Obama, as well as those in his Administration, in Congress and elsewhere who seek to negate our rights like that which occurred in the old Soviet Union through the Politburo, must be vehemently and vociferously opposed and either neutralized or removed from office or government positions.
Information is power and we must use it to Save Our Rights!
Thank you for your continued support ... and spread the word.
In keeping with their campaign promises to rein Obama’s personally appointed radical czars who operate outside our elected government, House Republicans have added an amendment to a spending bill that would defund them and their positions. This should both thwart their radical agenda which constantly is limiting our rights and freedoms and also help reduce some unnecessary government spending.
These Republicans are heading down the right track and are well representing the vehement wishes of their constituents.
GOP votes to defund Obama's policy 'czars'
Andrew Restuccia 02/17/11
The House GOP approved an amendment to a government-spending bill that would block funding for the Obama administration’s so-called policy "czars,” appointed advisers to the president that have been much-criticized by Republicans.
The vote was 249-171.
The amendment, offered by Rep. Steve Scalise (R-La.), specifically targets Obama’s “climate czar” by blocking funding for the assistant to the president for energy and climate change, the position's official title. The amendment would block funding for the 'czars' through the end of the fiscal year, when the spending bill would run out. The underlying bill also includes a provision to block funding for the position.
"I think this sends a strong signal to the president that we are tired of him running this shadow government, where they have got these czars that are literally circumventing the accountability and scrutiny that goes with Senate confirmation," Scalise said after the vote.
Carol Browner, who currently holds the position, announced last month that she will resign, leaving the future of the office in doubt.
Scalise said the measure blocking the czars also makes good fiscal sense.
"We are going to save millions of taxpayer dollars, but we are also going to send him a signal that he is going to have to hold his administration accountable to the same transparency that he promised, but has unfortunately failed to deliver," he said.
Republicans railed against Browner and Obama’s other policy advisers, arguing they played too great a role in the president’s policy decisions for officials that were appointed rather than confirmed by Congress.
The amendment would also prohibit funding for the director of the White House Office of Health Reform; the State Department’s special envoy for climate change; the special adviser for green jobs, enterprise and innovation at the Council on Environmental Quality; the senior adviser to the secretary of the treasury assigned to the Presidential Task Force on the Auto Industry and senior counselor for manufacturing policy; the White House director of urban affairs; the special envoy to oversee the closure of Guantanamo Bay; the special master for TARP executive compensation at the Department of the Treasury; and the associate general counsel and chief diversity officer at the Federal Communications Commission.
During his two year tenure as “president”, Obama has unmasked his true intentions and character: an unrelenting arrogant, contemptuous, narcissistic, racist, elitist Progressive who intends to transform the American political, economic and social system in direct opposition to the wishes of an overwhelming majority of citizens in order to realize his ideological goals. His agenda is authoritarian control or, in essence, tyranny and has been accomplishing much of this through his czars and fellow Progressives with regulations and rules that often bypass Congress.
In isolation, Obama would have little success. Unfortunately, he and a cadre of Progressives in high places have worked to advance the far left causes which have been immensely aided by the fifth column press which is complicit in this revolution. We all know the names of some of these noxious Progressive politicians who are bent on undermining and destroying our country: Hillary Clinton, Barney Frank, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, and Pete Stark. (See yesterday’s post : Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s Outrageous Statements Made In An Arab Country Regarding the Tucson Shooter for just one example of the outrageous, destructive and irresponsible actions of Hillary Clinton)
We must vanquish this revolution being perpetrated by liberal Democrats and Progressives from within the government, doing whatever it takes to neutralize these individuals and their destructive actions. The November massacre of Democratic politicians at the voting booth is a start but we must continue on relentlessly. It is imperative that we fervently support the conservatives and Republicans in Congress in order to help regain our stolen rights and freedoms as well as reestablish sane fiscal policies.
Arrogant and Authoritarian: Barack Obama and the New Progressives
Chuck Rogér January 12, 2011
Blindness to physical reality, denial of human nature, and a consuming desire to use government force to impose fantasies on fellow human beings. Welcome to the mind of today's American "progressive."
Progressives veil sophomoric schemes in eloquent verbiage. Barack Obama's mastery of the technique got him elected president. Sixty-nine and a half million Americans would not have voted for Obama had he failed to conceal the differences between his campaign spiel and the contents of his heart.
Convinced of the goodness of their intentions, ideologues like Obama mistake tyranny for noble action. And to achieve their noble objectives, today's progressives bend the truth far more than did predecessors like John Dewey, Woodrow Wilson, and FDR. Yet Obama has increasingly adopted a more direct modus operandi since becoming president. The "centrist" disguise has disintegrated.
Progressivism initially appeared on the American scene in response to problems that cried for solutions. Peter Berkowitz describes the movement's birth.
The original progressivism arose in the 1880s and 1890s and flourished during the first two decades of the 20th century. It is associated with, among others, Presidents Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson, scholars Fredrick Jackson Turner and Charles Beard, reformer Jane Addams, theologian Walter Rauschenbusch, Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis, philosopher and educator John Dewey, and journalist and New Republic founder Herbert Croly.
At their best, the original progressives responded to dramatic social and economic upheavals generated by the industrial revolution, opposed real Gilded Age abuses, and promoted salutary social and political reforms. They took the side of the exploited, the weak, and the wronged. They fought political corruption and sought to make political institutions more responsive to the will of the people. And they advanced programs and policies that, in a changing world, brought liberal democracy in America more in line with the Declaration of Independence's and the Constitution's original promise of freedom and equality for all.
So some original progressives had a positive influence on the country. But history shows that the ideas of zealots like Wilson, Croly, Dewey, and FDR had devastating effects. Government size and intrusion into business and private life have mushroomed. America's education system has decayed into a vehicle for infecting young people with pie-in-the-sky misconceptions of human nature and twisted versions of the American story.
Decades since the progressive movement began, a clear picture has developed of rabid ideologues like Margaret Sanger, whose racism incited her to conceive the eugenic "Negro Project" to reduce the "inferior" black population. Progressive minds like Sanger's, capable of spawning the depravity of Planned Parenthood, are dark places.
Today, the truth stares Americans in the face. While progressivism was born of an earnest desire to advance personal freedom, the ideology devolved into a collection of approaches that would lock people in the chains of a centrally planned society, with progressive elites withholding the keys to the locks. The elitists truly believe that legislative and regulatory shackles can remold human nature to conform to an impossibly perfect vision.
We need look no farther than our progressive-in-chief for the embodiment of the stubborn pseudo-intellectual who views himself as society's infallible guiding hand. Barack Obama wants government to "spread the wealth" by taking wealth from high earners who spread it more broadly and deeply than government ever could. Our president thinks that Americans who are concerned about decaying values and explosive federal spending are too "scared" to trust cherry-picked "facts and science." Obama believes that people are wasting valuable time "pushing away challenges, looking backwards" -- presumably focusing on really dreadful stuff like wholesome values, common sense, and facts evidenced by history. Barack the magic driver says that Republicans critical of his magic bus "can come for the ride, but they gotta sit in back."
A hundred years ago, Herbert Croly foretold the Obama mindset, declaring that "the average American individual is morally and intellectually inadequate to a serious and consistent conception of his responsibilities as a democrat1." Peter Berkowitz suggests that today's progressives probably find Croly's declaration "mortifying." I think Berkowitz misses the mark. Hillary Clinton, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Time's Joe Klein, U.C. Berkley linguist George Lakoff, Massachusetts Representative Barney Frank, and countless other progressives routinely make an exhibition of their insufferably arrogant elitism. Obama's superior manner and California Representative Pete Stark's outrageous impudence typify the demeanor of today's enlightened ones.
With a smugness celebrated by soul mates in the media, Barack Obama inspires American progressives to flaunt their haughtiness. Describing the posturing that accompanies the haughtiness, Berkowitz observes that Obama's techniques constitute an "effort to push dramatic transformation under the cover of moderation, pragmatism, and post-partisanship."
My characterization is more straightforward. The media actively sell Obama's phony "moderation, pragmatism, and post-partisanship" to "cover" actions that are immoderate, impractical, and entirely partisan. Obama purveys doublespeak to convince people of one thing while the illusionist-in-chief does another. Millions of Americans voted for a package of illusions in 2008.
Obamaesque deceit and conceit are easily summarized: progressives sanctify pretty theory as obviously true and condemn ugly reality as necessarily false. Progressives see themselves as incapable of error and believe that rejection of their high-mindedness could be undertaken only by commoners too dim to comprehend what's best.
During the two years after Barack Obama moved to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue and Democrats increased their stranglehold on Congress, something became crystal-clear. A hideous infestation called progressivism has uglified the White House and the Democrat Party. The tyrannous legislative and regulatory rampages that Obama and the Democrats undertook made something else clear. Until progressivism is flushed from the party, Democrats must never again be entrusted with substantial influence in government.
A writer, physicist, and former high tech executive, Chuck Rogér invites you to visit his website, www.chuckroger.com. E-mail Chuck at email@example.com.
If the first few days in the House of Representatives under Republican control is any indication of what the next two years may be like, then freedom loving Americans have a lot to cheer about. For starters:
1. Opening with the reading of the U.S. Constitution
2. Submitting a bill for the expeditious repeal of Obamacare
3. Pursuing the negation of birthright citizenship – the anchor baby problem associated with illegal immigration
4. Introduction of a bill to reduce or eliminate Obama’s appointed, non-scrutinized, independent, and powerful czars
Finally, our representatives may truly be that – plenipotentiary agents that will serve and protect our interests, rights, freedoms and hard earned income.
Quite a difference from the last few years!
GOP Introduces Bill to Roll Back Executive Branch ‘Czars’
Meredith Jessup Jan 6, 2011
A group of nearly 30 Republican members of the House of Representatives has introduced a bill to rein in the various “czars” serving in the Obama administration.
Van Jones, former WH green jobs "czar"
The bill mirrors similar legislation introduced in the 111th Congress that was not allowed to advanced under Democrats’ majority control.
But with Republicans commanding the House majority in the 112th Congress, Rep. Steve Scalise, R-La., and the 28 other Republican co-sponsors on the bill are hoping to do away with the informal, paid advisers President Obama has employed over the last two years.
The Hill reports:
The legislation, which was introduced in the last Congress but was not allowed to advance under Democratic control, would do away with the 39 czars Obama has employed during his administration.
The bill defines a czar as “a head of any task force, council, policy office within the Executive Office of the President, or similar office established by or at the direction of the President” who is appointed to a position that would otherwise require Senate confirmation.
Republicans had complained about the president’s use of czars to help advance his agenda in Congress. In particular, the GOP had harped about the personal history of Van Jones, the president’s czar for “green jobs,” over past comments Jones had made about Fox News came to light. Jones eventually resigned.
Another prominent czar over the past year was Carol Browner, the president’s energy and environmental adviser. She helped head up efforts in response to the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, and the ultimately unsuccessful effort for an energy and climate bill from Congress.
If the Republicans gain enough seats in the House to seize control away from Pelosi and the Democrats, they plan to aggressively scrutinize Obama’s parallel government of possibly 40 or more czars all of which had been appointed by him without any investigations or oversight. These individuals have served as an unelected shadow government with broad powers and have promulgated regulations on the American people and businesses which are costly and serve to restrict our rights and freedoms. Their activities have also occurred outside of Congressional control and scrutiny.
The Republicans also plan to severely restrict or abolish their powers and thus reel in the ever expanding reach of the Obama Administration. It should be one more step in the taking back of our government which must be a servant of the American people and not the other way around as Obama and the Democrats have planned and engineered.
Republicans plan January takedowns of Obama’s ‘czars’
John Rossomando The Daily Caller 10/14/2010
Republicans will have President Barack Obama’s czars and his use of regulatory powers to circumvent congressional inaction on issues such as cap and trade in GOP crosshairs if the party takes control in January.
Since taking office, Obama has named more than 30 czars (though the exact number is hard to pin down) without Senate confirmation and congressional oversight, and together they hold power over everything from the environment and bank bailouts to the auto industry.
The president’s practice of naming czars has garnered criticism from members of his own party, such as the late West Virginia Democrat Sen. Robert Byrd, who called it unconstitutional.
“When the Republicans are in charge, you will see the oversight subcommittee of the Energy and Commerce Committee active on a whole host of fronts,” said Rep. Fred Upton, Michigan Republican, who likely would chair the subcommittee if the Republicans take control of Congress. “How are these [czars] funded? So whether it be the authorizing committees and appropriations committees in terms of deleting the funds for those, I think you could go after it in one of two different ways.
“It is time to hold them accountable for what they are trying to promulgate with rules and regulations.”
The relevant congressional oversight committees have not exercised close oversight over the czars and other administration regulatory efforts during the last two years, but Upton plans to change that in January by regularly subpoenaing administration officials.
“We need to go line by line, page by page through the line items they happen to fund,” Upton said. “For a lot of these programs, I’m not sure they were authorized [by Congress], so how is it we are spending money for them?
“We are going to be focusing like a laser beam on overreaching by the regulators.”
The presidents’ czars need to justify why they were appointed and why they continue to have jobs that frequently overlap work done by previously existing government officials, Upton said.
“I think if Republicans take over the House, we have a duty to oversee all of the federal spending in each of our committees’ jurisdictions,” he said. “We have a $1.5 trillion deficit this year and last year, and one of our policy goals will be that we have a lower deficit and less spending a year from now.”
Upton also plans to put the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) effort to circumvent congressional inaction on cap and trade by regulating carbon dioxide as a pollutant under the microscope if Republicans win in November.
The rule, published last spring, will regulate new power plants, oil refineries and factories that contribute more than 100,000 tons of carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons and sulfur hexafluoride annually and existing ones that increase emissions by 75,000 tons annually. Smaller emitters will be exempted from the rule.
The EPA estimates that 900 additional permits would come under its purview and 550 new permits would be issued for the first time covering greenhouse-gas emissions. These permits would have to show they use the “best available control technologies” to minimize emissions.
Democrats likely will be too chastened by a likely bloodbath at the polls on Election Day to bring cap and trade up for a vote in the Senate during the upcoming lame duck session, Upton said.
Nontheless, this EPA rule, which amounts to a regulatory implementation of a form of cap and trade will take effect on Jan. 2 — just days before the start of the 112th Congress.
Upton promises to also examine EPA regulations that make it difficult to build nuclear power plants and define coal ash as a hazardous waste.
“They feel they are able to move forward without any real legislative authority to do so,” Upton said. “I would like to see our Investigations Oversight Subcommittee expose all of these different regulations … and have lengthy hearings exposing these things one at a time, and if we show they are not acting in the best interests of the country, we should be taking up legislation to block them.”
House Minority Leader John Boehner has endorsed this approach, Upton told TheDC.
California Rep. Darrell Issa, who would chair the House Government Reform committee if Republicans gain the majority, has promised a similar strategy.
Americans for Tax Reform President Grover Norquist believes Republicans need to have a governing strategy in place should they find themselves with the majority in January, and putting Obama administration officials in the hot seat would be a good place to start.
“You can’t force the president to sign a bill extending the tax cuts because he could veto it, but if you don’t vote for a spending thing it doesn’t happen,” Norquist said.
Democrats have routinely used congressional oversight to keep Republican presidents in check in the past, and Norquist believes Upton and Issa should follow through with their threats to do the same to Obama.
“From Issa and Upton’s schemes for unending hearings to McConnell and Boehner’s posturing on shutting down the government, Republicans continue to make it clear that if put in power they plan to make the government work for their political interests rather than making government work for the interests of middle class families,” DNC National Press Secretary Hari Sevugan said in an e-mailed statement.
The Obama Administration is replete with elitists and academicians with little real-world practical experiences. Their biases are theoretical and ideological versus empirical and historical.
The most severe, protracted and painful economic “Recession” since the Great Depression. The actual situation is far more severe than most are aware because both the federal government and the news media have suppressed much of the damning information.
What the Obama Administration is doing to combat our disastrous economic milieu is the antithesis of what would actually work. In other words, they are exacerbating and needlessly prolonging the agony rather than curing it, just like the errors perpetrated by the Franklin Roosevelt presidency. Even worse, if Obama was a student of history, he should learn from these mistakes.
But he is not learning nor does he show substantive concern … except when it comes to playing golf and taking a multitude of vacations.
Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner and head of the National Economic Council, Larry Summers, must be fired or resign.
And, of course, Obama must also be removed from office.
Fire the Job Killers
by Newt Gingrich 09/01/2010
On Monday we will celebrate Labor Day, a holiday to commemorate and give thanks for the contributions of the American worker to our nation’s strength and prosperity.
This year’s holiday is a particularly opportune time to reflect upon that message.
America’s unemployment rate stands at a stubborn 9.5%. If you include those who are underemployed (working part-time but seeking full-time work) that number is closer to 18.4%.
Last week, the Labor Department revised second quarter economic growth down from 2.4% to 1.6%.
Sales of existing homes are at the lowest level since 1995.
The small business confidence survey is at the lowest level since the survey began in 2003.
Overall, it has been 31 months since the recession started and the economy is still losing jobs.
This Labor Day, ask yourself: If America’s strength is indeed a product of the strength of the American worker, what does it tell us about America’s prospects when so many Americans are not working?
In other words, can America work if Americans aren’t working?
John Boehner was right: Geithner and Summers Must Go
Last week, House Minority Leader John Boehner called on President Obama to ask for the resignations of Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner and Larry Summers, the head of the National Economic Council.
John Boehner is exactly right. While President Obama cannot be blamed for causing the recession, it was the actions of his administration (and his accomplices in the Democratic Congress) which have artificially extended the length of this recession and caused more pain for the American people.
John Boehner has good standing to lead the charge for a change in direction in our economic policies.
In addition to being a small business owner himself, John was the fourth ranked conference chair when I was Speaker of the House from 1995-1998. Two weeks ago, in this newsletter, we reviewed the record on job creation of the Gingrich Congress versus the Pelosi Congress. By controlling spending and cutting taxes under the Gingrich Congress, job creation soared while the budget was balanced, leading to over $600 billion of federal debt being paid. John remembers these principles well.
In the speech, Boehner rightly targeted the out-of-control spending, a tax code that is too complicated and has become a tool for special interests, and big “government run amok” as some of the chief culprits behind our prolonged recession.
The big government stimulus bill, the tax increases of the health bill, the plan to let the 2003 tax cuts expire, and the massive growth of government under the Obama Administration are all actions directly attributable to this administration which have killed jobs.
President Obama must be willing to hold his administration officials accountable.
The Worst Decision of All?
A few weeks ago in this newsletter, I cited a study by Robert Barro which estimated that without the extension of unemployment benefits to 99 weeks, the unemployment rate would be 6.8% instead of 9.5%.
Barro had an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal this week that echoed Leader Boehner’s call for the President to replace his economic team, and outlining why the Obama Administration’s policies are directly responsible for the unnatural long life of this recession.
In the piece, Barro points out that the extension of unemployment insurance to 99 weeks was unprecedented compared to previous extensions during economic downturns, which averaged around 40 weeks. For instance, during the 1982 recession, the unemployment rate was even higher—10.8%. Yet, we did not have anything close to a 99-week extension for unemployment benefits.
Borro notes that during the 1982 recession, the peak mean duration of unemployment was 21.2 weeks and the share of long-term unemployment (those unemployed more than 26 weeks) was 24.5%. Contrast those figures with those of the current recession, where mean duration of unemployment last month stood at 35.2 weeks and the share of long term unemployment was 46.2%.
Borro writes, “The dramatic expansion of unemployment-insurance eligibility to 99 weeks is almost surely the culprit.”
This decision, too, lies squarely on the back of the Obama Administration.
It is even more embarrassing considering that Larry Summers had previously written that welfare payments and unemployment insurance are a significant cause of long-term unemployment.
Geithner and Summers must go.
“Our fresh start needs to begin now”
As Boehner said in his speech:
“Now, this is no substitute for a referendum on the president’s job killing agenda. That question will be put before the American people in due time. But we do not have the luxury of waiting months for the president to pick scapegoats for his failing stimulus policies. We’ve tried 19 months of government-as-community organizer. It hasn’t worked. Our fresh start needs to begin now.”
Even Democratic Congressman Tom Perriello has called for Geithner and Summers to be fired.
There could be no stronger signal from President Obama that his economic policies have not worked and that it is time for a change in direction than by replacing his economic team to get new ideas and new perspectives into the Oval Office.
Mr. President, Geithner and Summers must go.
Consider it a Labor Day gift to the American people.
In a humorous, insightful and entertaining tongue in cheek way, Andrew Klavan explains the basic purposes of the Constitution including serving to protect the American people from an ever enlarging, encroaching and powerful government. It sheds light quite effectively on the perils that we face today from our own government which the Founding Fathers had sought to protect us from.
The threats to the rights of individual Americans by Obama and his appointed czars continue to mount daily. The far left radical socialist/communist ideologies of the “president?” and his cronies seek a massive and controlling autocratic central government that severely curtails the rights, freedoms and choice of the subjugated American citizens. Of course, that is in addition to those similarly effective outcomes of legislation imposed by the Democrat controlled, filibuster proof Congress.
We are being attacked on many fronts and need to appropriately respond with a vengeance including spreading this information with others who are not informed and, of course, voting the Democrats out in November.
Unaccountable Czars Continue To Proliferate
By Phyllis Schlafly 07/27/2010
Barack Obama has appointed another czar from Chicago: the new Food Czar Sam Kass. Officially, he is labeled senior policy adviser for healthy food initiatives, but he's joining the list of more than 35 czars given broad and unaccountable power over our lives, habits and spending.
Everybody laughed when Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., asked Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan if it would be constitutional for Congress to order Americans "to eat three vegetables and three fruits every day." Kagan declined to give a straightforward answer, maybe because she knew that exactly that type of dictatorial mandate was coming soon — in both ObamaCare and a ukase issued by the new Food Czar.
Far scarier is Obama's appointment of his new Health Czar, Donald Berwick, to be the top administrator over Medicare and Medicaid. This is the most shocking of all Obama's appointments because of the life-and-death powers he will exercise, the huge sums of taxpayers' money he will direct, and the dishonest way Obama evaded the Senate's constitutional right to interrogate and reject him.
Obama told Joe the Plumber that he wanted to redistribute the wealth. We didn't realize what else Obama planned to redistribute.
Czar Berwick is on record as saying, "Excellent health care is by definition redistributional." He used this favorite Obama term in the context of praising Britain's socialized medicine system as "a global treasure" and "I love it."
Coincidentally with the announcement of Berwick's appointment, Britain's major newspaper, the Sunday Telegraph, uncovered widespread cuts in British health care that were adopted in secret and buried in obscure appendices and lengthy policy documents. These include restrictions on common operations, such as hip and knee replacements and cataract surgery, the closure of many nursing homes for the elderly and a reduction in hospital beds and staff.
Berwick admits that redistributing health care means rationing health care, which is why he has been called a one-man Death Panel. Last year he admitted in an interview, "The decision is not whether or not we will ration care — the decision is whether we will ration with our eyes open."
Note the imperial "we." That's the way czars talk.
Like a typical arrogant totalitarian socialist, Berwick assumes that smart bureaucrats should make life-and-death decisions and spend the money belonging to those they disdain as dumb, ordinary citizens. Berwick said, "I cannot believe that the individual health care consumer can enforce through choice the proper configurations of a system as massive and complex as health care. That is for leaders to do."
Berwick even promises that he will train young doctors and nurses to understand "the risks of too great an emphasis on individual autonomy." To eliminate individual health care choices, Berwick's bureaucracy will have a budget that is larger than the Defense Department and is 4% of our GDP.
Berwick's paper trail of "baggage" is why Obama gave him a recess appointment. He wanted to avoid the Senate's advice-and-consent power altogether and keep Berwick's damaging statements out of the news.
The term czar has come to mean a presidential crony appointee who was never vetted by the Senate and who exercises sweeping regulatory authority without congressional oversight. But let's not lose sight of the vastly increased regulations issued by established agencies.
ObamaCare's 2,000-plus pages created about 160 new agencies and boards with regulatory power. The Department of Health and Human Services just published 864 pages of regulations to govern electronic medical records.
President Obama just signed the 2,300-page Dodd-Frank financial reform bill. Its implementation will require at least 243 new regulations by 11 federal agencies, several of which do not yet exist.
Obama's Secretary of Energy, Steven Chu, brags that under his leadership, the Department of Energy (DOE) has "accelerated the pace" of regulation and "placed new resources and emphasis behind the enforcement" of new regulations which "increase the stringency" of "minimum conservation standards" for all sorts of home appliances. Look out! The energy police are invading our homes.
In April, DOE issued a new rule that gas fireplace logs can't use more than 9,000 BTUs per hour, which is about one-tenth of what current gas logs require. This rule will wipe out the gas fireplace industry, and the gas log in my home would become illegal.
In May, DOE effectively banned showerheads with multiple nozzles by ruling that all nozzles combined will be permitted to deliver no more than an anemic 2.5 gallons per minute. This rule will destroy upscale showers and handheld sprays used by the disabled and elderly, like the one I use.
Obama wasn't kidding when he promised to "fundamentally transform the United States." He has figured out how to bypass Congress and rule us by czars and a tsunami of regulations.
Unfortunately though not unexpected given Obama’s past, his Presidency has increased rather than decreased racial discord. He was anointed as the racial healer by the media and many politicians and even voted for by millions of credulous voters who were deceived by his rhetoric on the issue rather than scrutinizing his unalloyed history of racism.
His twenty year close association with the vitriolic, racist, anti-white Reverend Jeremiah Wright and membership in a church that preached black nationalism philosophy, anti-Semitism, anti-Americanism (“Goddamn America”) as well as revered and formally honored Louis Farrakhan, should have served as more than fair warning of his sentiments.
Obama’s verbatim assessment of his church which was that “"I don't think my church is actually particularly controversial", should have further substantiated his racist philosophy. Of course, there are numerous other examples which came to light both before and after he was elected President.
By “promoting” racism in his discourse and overtly inappropriate selections, Obama is feeding black racism against whites (and others) and even against other blacks – those that don’t toe the black victimization and dependency agenda. If an Afro-American speaks out for conservative issues or is against demagogue preached policies (such as Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, etc.) then they are labeled “Uncle Toms” or “traitors”. This is abhorrent. No ethnic or racial group is or should be considered to be monolithic in its beliefs, morals, likes, etc. By demanding this of all blacks, they are being intra-racially racist and intolerant.
Exacerbating the problem, Obama could rein in this destructive behavior from his bully pulpit as the President but he won’t (because he clearly agrees). This is recklessly irresponsible and contributes to the political racist slandering by Democrats, especially by the politicians, news media and black demagogues against "non-compliant" blacks, conservatives and the Tea Parties.
Black Tea Party Activists Called 'Traitors' Black conservatives are really taking heat for their involvement in the mostly white tea party movement — and for having the audacity to oppose the policies of the nation's first black president.
Feb. 10: Angela McGlowan announces at the Tupelo, Miss., City Hall, that she is running for the 1st Congressional District as a Republican.
ALBANY, N.Y. – They've been called Oreos, traitors and Uncle Toms, and are used to having to defend their values. Now black conservatives are really taking heat for their involvement in the mostly white tea party movement — and for having the audacity to oppose the policies of the nation's first black president.
"I've been told I hate myself. I've been called an Uncle Tom. I've been told I'm a spook at the door," said Timothy F. Johnson, chairman of the Frederick Douglass Foundation, a group of black conservatives who support free market principles and limited government.
"Black Republicans find themselves always having to prove who they are. Because the assumption is the Republican Party is for whites and the Democratic Party is for blacks," he said.
Johnson and other black conservatives say they were drawn to the tea party movement because of what they consider its commonsense fiscal values of controlled spending, less taxes and smaller government. The fact that they're black — or that most tea partyers are white — should have nothing to do with it, they say.
"You have to be honest and true to yourself. What am I supposed to do, vote Democratic just to be popular? Just to fit in?" asked Clifton Bazar, a 45-year-old New Jersey freelance photographer and conservative blogger.
Opponents have branded the tea party as a group of racists hiding behind economic concerns — and reports that some tea partyers were lobbing racist slurs at black congressmen during last month's heated health care vote give them ammunition.
But these black conservatives don't consider racism representative of the movement as a whole — or race a reason to support it.
Angela McGlowan, a black congressional candidate from Mississippi, said her tea party involvement is "not about a black or white issue."
"It's not even about Republican or Democrat, from my standpoint," she told The Associated Press. "All of us are taxed too much."
Still, she's in the minority. As a nascent grassroots movement with no registration or formal structure, there are no racial demographics available for the tea party movement; it's believed to include only a small number of blacks and Hispanics.
Some black conservatives credit President Barack Obama's election — and their distaste for his policies — with inspiring them and motivating dozens of black Republicans to plan political runs in November.
For black candidates like McGlowan, tea party events are a way to reach out to voters of all races with her conservative message.
"I'm so proud to be a part of this movement! I want to tell you that a lot of people underestimate you guys," the former national political commentator for Fox News told the cheering crowd at a tea party rally in Nashville, Tenn., in February.
Tea party voters represent a new model for these black conservatives — away from the black, liberal Democratic base located primarily in cities, and toward a black and white conservative base that extends into the suburbs.
Black voters have overwhelmingly backed Democratic candidates, support that has only grown in recent years. In 2004, presidential candidate Sen. John Kerry won 88 percent of the black vote; four years later, 95 percent of black voters cast ballots for Obama.
Black conservatives don't want to have to apologize for their divergent views.
"I've gotten the statement, 'How can you not support the brother?'" said David Webb, an organizer of New York City's Tea Party 365, Inc. movement and a conservative radio personality.
Since Obama's election, Webb said some black conservatives have even resorted to hiding their political views.
"I know of people who would play the (liberal) role publicly, but have their private opinions," he said. "They don't agree with the policy but they have to work, live and exist in the community ... Why can't we speak openly and honestly if we disagree?"
Among the 37 black Republicans running for U.S. House and Senate seats in November is Charles Lollar of Maryland's 5th District.
A tea party supporter running against House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., Lollar says he's finding support in unexpected places.
The 38-year-old U.S. Marine Corps reservist recently walked into a bar in southern Maryland decorated with a Confederate flag. It gave his wife Rosha pause.
"I said, 'You know what, honey? Many, many of our Southern citizens came together under that flag for the purpose of keeping their family and their state together,'" Lollar recalled. "The flag is not what you're to fear. It's the stupidity behind the flag that is a problem. I don't think we'll find that in here. Let's go ahead in."
Once inside, they were treated to a pig roast, a motorcycle rally — and presented with $5,000 in contributions for his campaign.
McGlowan, one of three GOP candidates in north Mississippi's 1st District primary, seeks a seat held since 2008 by The National Republican Congressional Committee has supported Alan Nunnelee, chairman of the state Senate Appropriations Committee, who is also pursuing tea party voters.
McGlowan believes the tea party movement has been unfairly portrayed as monolithically white, male and middle-aged, though she acknowledged blacks and Hispanics are a minority at most events.
Racist protest signs at some tea party rallies and recent reports by U.S. Reps. John Lewis, D-Ga., and Barney Frank, D-Mass., that tea partyers shouted racial and anti-gay slurs at them have raised allegations of racism in the tea party movement.
Black members of the movement say it is not inherently racist, and some question the reported slurs. "You would think — something that offensive — you would think someone got video of it," Bazar, the conservative blogger, said.
"Just because you have one nut case, it doesn't automatically equate that you've got an organization that espouses (racism) as a sane belief," Johnson said.
Hilary Shelton, director of the Washington bureau of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, suggested a bit of caution.
"I'm sure the reason that (black conservatives) are involved is that from an ideological perspective, they agree," said Shelton. "But when those kinds of things happen, it is very important to be careful of the company that you keep."
Cass Sunstein, Obama’s Information and Regulatory Affairs czar is in the news again for a radical article he had written recommending Big Brother Government infiltrating and manipulation groups whose ideas are not in concert with the “Government’s”. His proposed oxymoron(ic) “libertarian paternalism” in its extreme form translates into having the “Government” purging you of your impure opinions and then teaching (indoctrinating) you the correct ones (what the Government wants you to think).
Another radical Obama appointed nut job czar who must be outed, neutralized and ousted!
John Stossel January 18, 2010
An obscure 2008 academic article gained traction with bloggers over the weekend. The article was written by the head of Obama's Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Harvard Law Professor Cass Sunstein. He’s a good friend of the president and the promoter the contradictory idea: "libertarian paternalism". In the article, he muses about what government can do to combat "conspiracy" theories:
...we suggest a distinctive tactic for breaking up the hard core of extremists who supply conspiracy theories: cognitive infiltration of extremist groups, whereby government agents or their allies ... will undermine the crippled epistemology of those who subscribe to such theories. They do so by planting doubts about the theories and stylized facts that circulate within such groups, thereby introducing beneficial cognitive diversity.
That's right. Obama's Regulation Czar is so concerned about citizens thinking the wrong way that he proposed sending government agents to "infiltrate" these groups and manipulate them. This reads like an Onion article: Powerful government official proposes to combat paranoid conspiracy groups that believe the government is out to get them...by proving that they really are out to get them. Did nothing of what Sunstein was writing strike him as...I don't know...crazy? "Cognitive infiltration" of extremist groups by government agents? "Stylized facts"? Was "truthiness" too pedantic?
Salon.com's Glenn Greenwald explains why this you should be disturbed by this:
This was written 18 months ago, at a time when the ascendancy of Sunstein's close friend to the Presidency looked likely, in exactly the area he now oversees. Additionally, the government-controlled messaging that Sunstein desires has been a prominent feature of U.S. Government actions over the last decade, including in some recently revealed practices of the current administration, and the mindset in which it is grounded explains a great deal about our political class.
... What is most odious and revealing about Sunstein's worldview is his condescending, self-loving belief that "false conspiracy theories" are largely the province of fringe, ignorant Internet masses and the Muslim world.
It's certainly true that one can easily find irrational conspiracy theories in those venues, but some of the most destructive "false conspiracy theories" have emanated from the very entity Sunstein wants to endow with covert propaganda power: namely, the U.S. Government itself, along with its elite media defenders. Moreover, "crazy conspiracy theorist" has long been the favorite epithet of those same parties to discredit people trying to expose elite wrongdoing and corruption.
It is this history of government deceit and wrongdoing that renders Sunstein's desire to use covert propaganda to "undermine" anti-government speech so repugnant. The reason conspiracy theories resonate so much is precisely that people have learned -- rationally -- to distrust government actions and statements. Sunstein's proposed covert propaganda scheme is a perfect illustration of why that is. In other words, people don't trust the Government and "conspiracy theories" are so pervasive precisely because government is typically filled with people like Cass Sunstein, who think that systematic deceit and government-sponsored manipulation are justified by their own Goodness and Superior Wisdom.