Over the last several days (1/5 and 1/6), the comics posted ingeniously characterize Obama's disdain for the U.S. Constitution and the rights and will of the American people. This is consistent with his contemptuous actions over the last 2 years whereby he has sought to impose his ideologies and government control over us by whatever means possible and independent of voter sentiment.
Such are the actions of a dictator who must be removed from office. Our country and we, the citizens, will continue to experience greater suffering while relentless losing more rights and freedoms until he is no longer the "president".
The noteworthy incidents of speech, writing or thought that have met with publicized censure, humiliation or termination of employment because they transgressed some arbitrarily determined political correctness continues unabated. This has in effect resulted in a contraction of our rights of freedom of speech as guaranteed by the Constitution.
Unfortunately, it only seems to work in one direction and that is ideologically determined. Progressives and liberals get free passes on virtually all that they say (Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Michael Moore, etc.) but the converse doesn’t hold true. Much of this asymmetry can be attributed to a news media that is overwhelmingly far left and intolerant of conservative and even moderate positions.
The following case is just one more example of this absurdity.
State Legislative Staffer Suspended Over ‘Non-Racist’, Anti-Obama Chain Email
A Louisiana State Senate employee has reportedly been reprimanded and suspended without pay for sending an e-mail to hundreds of government workers with a picture that appeared to show President Barack Obama as a Caucasian. The email asked, “Do you like him any better now? No? Me neither. … Then you’re not a racist.”
Senate President Joel Chaisson announced the punishment Tuesday for Tammy Crain-Waldrop after a number of black lawmakers complained the email was offensive. “It is clear that the nature of the e-mail in question was highly inappropriate. Such actions will not be tolerated,” Chaisson, D-Destrehan, said in a statement that described Crain-Waldrop’s e-mail a violation of Senate personnel policy.
After she sent the e-mail, Crain-Waldrop immediately sent another message, apologizing for forwarding the message to the Capitol e-mail post office box by mistake.
The Associated Press reports that Crain-Waldrop can return to work Jan. 3 but for her punishment, she must send a written apology to Senate and House staffers and attend diversity training.
Conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh assessed the story Wednesday during his broadcast, outlining Ms. Crain-Waldrop’s “real crimes.”
“Ms. Crain-Waldrop‘s real crimes were opposing Obama’s policy and, two, defending her opposition as nonracist. Now, of course such thinking can’t be allowed,” Limbaugh noted. “It’s hate speech to deny that you can oppose Obama and not be a racist.”
Unbeknownst to most average honest citizens, voter fraud in America has become quite substantial, threatening our rights and liberties. This is not just individuals voting more than once in an election. It is also a sophisticated and coordinated strategy monopolized by Democrats and Progressives that devalues the individual citizen’s vote and which can affect elections. Much of the funding to the groups that perpetrate voting fraud can be traced back to the multibillionaire Progressive George Soros.
This is a largely stealth process which is difficult to detect and is engendered by laws that make it quite simple to commit such fraud. Furthermore, Democratic politicians have no incentive to investigate or follow up on these cases as they are the ones who have the most to lose. The story below illustrates just how protective of their fraudulent votes Democrats are.
Vote Fraud as a Democrat Strategy
Peter Raymond
The Democratic Party's message to politically involved citizens is unmistakably dire. For those who attempt to expose voter fraud, expect to be harassed and even sued. This is what happened to a group called the King Street Patriots (KSP) in Harris County (Houston), Texas.
So far, intimidation has failed to deter these proud and steadfast citizens. "These lawsuits are exactly the kind of abusive disrespect for citizens that got our political leaders into trouble. We will not be intimidated by partisan attacks, by the Democratic Party, or by anyone," is the defiant retort from volunteer leader of King Street Patriots, Catherine Engelbrecht.
KSP received national attention earlier this year when their initiative, True the Vote, discovered "numerous incomplete, inaccurate or false voter registrations." KSP volunteers pored over voter rolls "double-checking all registrations" and even photographed vacant lots and non-existent addresses given on voter registration forms to validate their findings.
The reaction from the leftist goons has predictably followed the Saul Alinsky playbook for radicals. Texans Together Education Fund and the Texas Democrat Party sued KSP while Texans for Public Justice filed an ethics complaint in an attempt to "bind and gag" KSP volunteers. At the same time, progressive bloggers and websites launched a malicious smear campaign to discredit KSP efforts.
Voter fraud has become a pivotal strategy for the progressives. This is why they are coordinating such vicious attacks against honest citizens working to combat electoral corruption. Only with chicanery can collectivists successfully implement their social justice agenda rejected by most Americans. The uprooting of voter fraud jeopardizes the left's delusional aspirations, so they feel justified in using every despicable trick to thwart the efforts of groups like KSP.
It should come as no surprise George Soros, through his Open Society Foundation, funds Texans for Public Justice and Texans Together Education Fund. The benefits of controlling election outcomes are just too much of an enticement for an egomaniac who dreams of global tyranny.
By now, astute citizens understand that without direct participation by an engaged citizenry to purge voter rolls, corruption will fester and inevitably destroy a free society. Because of their abysmal performance, wholly trusting elected officials to accomplish this vital function seems unrealistic. According to a 2009 study, there are nearly 16 million dead or ineligible voters on registration rolls in the United States. This is the result of unethical activist groups, bungling and possibly complicit election officials, and the persistent dismantling of commonsense safeguards.
The "Yankee Pankey" events in Connecticut are a reminder free and fair elections are under growing risk from mismanagement and fraud. Voting rights laws and court rulings have only compounded the problem by encouraging misconduct that undermines the democratic process. Engelbrecht was correct when she said, "If our elections are not fair, we are not truly free."
To make matters worse, the now infamous Secretary of State Project (SOS) was specifically designed to manipulate elections. Soros openly boasts that financing the campaigns of far left ideologues was one of his better "political investments." Gloating over his brainchild is not unfounded since it has proven to be highly effective in winning key secretary of state seats and advancing the progressive agenda.
SOS cofounder Becky Bond of San Francisco revealed the SOS's objective in 2006 when she said, "Any serious commitment to wrestling control of the country from the Republican Party must include removing their political operatives from deciding who can vote and whose votes will count." It certainly does not sound like free and fair elections were part of her calculus.
The Soros/Bond scheme worked flawlessly in 2008 when SOS alumnus and ACORN endorsed Secretary of State Mark Ritchie dismissed a request to conduct an investigation of the 261,000 duplicate registrations and 63,000 voters who had listed non-existent addresses just prior the Franken fiasco in Minnesota. At the conclusion of the highly controversial election, Ritchie falsely claimed his office "received no reports whatsoever of fraudulent voting occurring."
After months of stonewalling by the Secretary of State's office, Republican lawmakers joined a citizen's action group called the Minnesota Majority and sued Ritchie in 2009 claiming the state's voter registration system had "not been adequately updated." The claimants also alleged, "Vote totals from canvassing boards exceed the stated number of registered voters by 406,398."
On their website, the Minnesota Majority list discrepancies they found with the registration records. These revelations alone should have triggered a thorough review and overhaul of the voter records, but Ritchie supposedly "ignored or dismissed" repeated calls for action.
Not surprisingly, issues resurfaced in the recent mid-term election when the GOP sued the State of Minnesota on November 17 over ballot tallies in a close gubernatorial race. Yet again, there were unanswered questions about precincts reporting "more votes than voters."
Much of today's registration fraud can be attributed to the National Voter Rights Act (NVRA). This seemingly innocuous legislation signed into law in 1993 by Bill Clinton was designed to make it "easier for all Americans to register to vote and to maintain their registration." Instead, it has turned into another civil rights inspired boondoggle.
To encourage voter enrollment, NVRA requires states to provide individuals with the opportunity to register to vote at the same time they apply for or renew a driver's license. Also, state run public assistance offices must offer and may assist in completing and returning voter registration forms. Both appear to be acceptable policies, but the Act also requires states allow citizens to register to vote by mail using mail-in-forms with no identification needed. This opens the door wide open to fraud and abuse.
In 2004, John Fund describes in a National Review article how NVRA establishes "fraud-friendly rules" which makes "fraud and foul-ups in election counts possible." Fund cautioned that continuation of this policy "accelerates our drift toward banana-republic elections."
Regrettably, Fund's prediction appears to be accurate.
To illustrate the documented abuse that has already occurred as a result of the "Motor Voter Act" Fund wrote, "CBS's 60 Minutes created a stir in 1999 when it found people in California using mail-in forms to register fictitious people, or pets, and then obtaining absentee ballots in their names."
In an odd twist of irony, Mexico has much tighter controls in place than the US. Every voter must present a tamperproof picture voter card, submit to thumbprint verification, and give their signature before they can cast a vote. These are all policies that advocates for illegal immigrants and progressives vehemently denounce as discriminatory, amount to voter suppression, and are a "threat to the Progressive Agenda."
On November 15, KSP filed a counter lawsuit against the Texas Democratic Party.
"It is outrageous that a group of American citizens who simply volunteered to get involved in the political process are forced into court by the Texas Democratic Party," said Kelly Shackelford, president and chief counsel of Liberty Institute, who is helping to defend KSP. "Using a political party to sue and attack citizens, and to try to reduce the Constitutional rights of all Americans, is a disgrace."
The Democratic Party may regret picking a fight with these Americans.
Page Printed from: http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/12/vote_fraud_as_a_democrat_start.html at December 12, 2010 - 11:42:07 PM CST
It doesn’t take much insight to notice the rapidly accelerating outrage and disgust that the general public is feeling and expressing regarding the Obama Administration’s handling of the TSA screenings and the overall despicable disdain and arrogance that it has for the American people (and which is toxically spewed daily). These are some of the reasons for the formation of the Tea Parties and their subsequent electoral successes.
The present tenor of the dialogue regarding Obama’s attitude, legislation and general modus operandi reveals that the elections were only the beginning and much more needs to be done to oppose and defeat such malevolent intentions. It is infinitely clear that Obama’s vision for America is that of a police state ruled by an autocratic, elitist government that disrespects, ignores and abrogates the rights and freedoms of its citizens. The U.S. Constitution is only an antediluvian document of little significance.
We must relentlessly fight every day and night to repeal Obama’s legislation and oust his corrupt, incompetent and racist cronies and czars.
And we need to have him removed from office … ASAP – before it may be too late!
Obama's police state Now private parts are public province
Jeffrey T. Kuhner The Washington Times November 26, 2010
Illustration Obama boot by Greg Groesch for The Washington Times
President Obama is engaging in a relentless assault on our freedoms and constitutional government. The growing backlash against the new
Transportation Security Administration (TSA) airport screening procedures signifies that Americans finally may have had enough.
There is a grass-roots revolt against state-sanctioned sexual harassment. And who can blame the protesters? Children are stripped of their shirts, and their private parts are touched. Nuns and old ladies are groped by intrusive TSA agents. Breasts have been fondled.
Men's crotches have been patted down. Full-body scanners show images of people naked - a clear violation of privacy and civil liberties.
The administration insists that the enhanced procedures are vital for national security. The rationale: Last year's underwear bomber nearly blew up a plane flying over Detroit. Hence, everyone's private parts are now the property of the federal government - at least when flying.
This is wrong and dangerous. Airport screening procedures have been a huge experiment in mass political correctness. For fear of insulting Muslims, the U.S. government has insisted that all Americans take off their shoes, pull out their belts and walk through metal detectors at airports. Americans have patiently put up with these inconveniences. But now, for many, enough is enough. "Don't touch my junk" has become a national rallying cry.
The central problem with modern airport security is that it falsely assumes that every person - each of the 7 billion people who inhabit the planet-is an equal terrorist threat. The 80-year-old Irish Catholic nun, the 3-year-old toddler, the 61-year-old bladder cancer survivor whose urine bag was punctured by TSA apparatchiks - all of them, according to Mr. Obama, are potential suicide bombers. They're not. To pretend they are is to engage in leftist multicultural fantasy. It embodies the triumph of ideology over reality - the deranged belief that anyone at any time is a lurking jihadist.
Islamic terrorism is not an open-ended, universal characteristic. Rather, it is a specific, narrowly defined phenomenon. It is fueled by Muslim extremists bent on waging a holy war against the West. Its perpetrators tend to be young adults from the Middle East, North Africa, the Arab world and the Muslim ghettos of Europe. Most jihadists fit this profile. What is needed is not more groping, crotch-grabbing or nude screening, but better intelligence-gathering, random checking and targeted profiling.
Washington insists on perpetrating the illusion that a Christian grandmother in Iowa poses the same possible national security threat as a 19-year-old Yemenite exchange student majoring in Islamic studies. Hence, America is squandering precious resources and manpower, as well as abrogating basic civil liberties and humiliating its population, in order to appease the sensitivities of the Muslim lobby.
Moreover, the new TSA procedures mark another major step in Mr. Obama's drive to impose state socialism. If anyone else did what TSA agents do regularly, they rightly would be charged with sexual assault. Mr. Obama has done the unthinkable: He has extended the federal government's reach into our most private, intimate body parts. Big Brother not only watches us in the nude, he can routinely molest us at will.
The administration is not restricting its unprecedented power grab to airports. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano recently said that trains, boats and subways also may implement the same screening procedures. If the White House has its way, Americans will be getting felt up on the Metro and Amtrak every day - morning, afternoon and night.
Ultimately, these measures are not only degrading and wrongheaded. They are profoundly illiberal, reflecting a deep-seated contempt for individual rights and civil dignity. They also reveal a radical leftist outlook that views Americans not as self-governing citizens, but as subjects of a nanny state.
Like many on the progressive left, Mr. Obama is an anti-American political thug. He despises the Constitution and capitalism. He bristles under the restraints of democratic governance and the system of checks and balances. From Vladimir Lenin to Fidel Castro to Hugo Chavez, socialist leaders have masked their will to power by portraying themselves as visionary thinkers - sophisticated intellectuals seeking social justice. In reality, they have one goal: revolution.
Mr. Obama has embarked America upon that perilous path. He has de facto nationalized health care, the financial sector, the insurance industry, student loans and major automakers. He has appointed numerous policy czars with vast Cabinet-level powers who have not been confirmed - or even vetted - by the Senate. His administration violated parliamentary procedures and repeatedly bribed and arm-twisted members of Congress to ram through Obamacare - against the expressed will of the people. His surrogates sought to directly manipulate and interfere in primary elections on behalf of pro-Obama candidates - likely committing several felonies. His Interior Department falsified scientific reports to justify the temporary ban on oil drilling in the Gulf Coast. His Justice Department has refused to prosecute blatant voter fraud and intimidation. Mr. Obama has referred to his critics as "enemies" who must be "punished."
He is seeking to use the lame-duck session of Congress to pass more unpopular, sweeping legislation - a $1.1 trillion omnibus spending bill; the DREAM Act, which effectively grants amnesty to illegal immigrant students; and repeal of the "don't ask, don't tell" policy regarding homosexuals in the military. Hence, an unrepresentative Congress, in which the House Democratic majority was defeated and replaced in the Nov. 2 election, thinks it has the right to circumvent the electorate.
Mr. Obama's regime has abused its power and fostered anti-democratic behavior. He is slowly erecting a soft police state. It is not one with a fascist jackboot on your face but with a unionized TSA bureaucrat in your crotch - all in the name of public safety. Say hello to Big Brother Barack.
Jeffrey T. Kuhner is a columnist at The Washington Times and president of the Edmund Burke Institute.
It appears that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) with the blessings of the Obama Administration will seek to impose “net neutrality” policies using the Thanksgiving and Christmas recesses when Congress is out of session to facilitate this. Encouraged by the far left and aided with financial assistance from George Soros, this change will provide the federal government with much greater control of various aspects of the internet as opposed to the companies that spent billions of dollars constructing and operating the networks and fiberoptic lines.
“Net neutrality” is a euphemism for legislated government control of internet communications with the pernicious ability to affect free speech. This legislation has been fervently supported by progressives in order to have the ability to silence conservatives and the opposition who use this avenue such as Fox New, Rush Limbaugh, etc.
This is another attack on our rights and freedoms that is supported by the Obama Administration, progressives and communists and funded in part by Soros.
“Net neutrality” laws and regulations must be stopped or reversed if implemented!
Seizing the Internet
The Prowler 11/24/10
Staffers at the Federal Communications Commission with ties to the commission's chairman, Julius Genachowski, coordinated media and strategy planning with senior Free Press and MoveOn.org officials in the run up to Genachowski's announcement that he would be seeking an FCC vote on imposing so-called "net neutrality" rules on broadband and the Internet, and doing so when Congress is out of session during the Thanksgiving and Christmas recesses.
"Net neutrality" is a policy proposal that would essentially strip the control and traffic management of broadband networks from those companies that deployed them and make them run properly, and transfer much of that oversight to the federal government. Under the proposal rumored to be under consideration by the FCC, network operators such as AT&T and Comcast would not be allowed to offer consumers prioritized service or quality of service guarantees for such things as movie downloads and video streaming.
"It essentially turns the networks into dumb pipes, so you have billions of people going online and no one is really managing the traffic in a way so that consumers have a good experience," says an FCC staffer for a Republican commission member. "People don't realize how much video and communications comes over their broadband lines. This is the left's attempt to rein in things like Fox News, Pajamas Media, Internet radio broadcasts for Limbaugh and Levin -- anything that is data-related or video-related that requires some high-tech network management would be degraded or limited by the imposition of net neutrality."
Congressional Republicans (and even some Democrats) have stated that they do not believe the FCC has the statutory standing to impose such rules -- which would reclassify broadband and Internet services as "telecommunications services" and bring them under rules that were developed for the rotary phone back in the 1930s -- without guidance from Congress. More than 100 members from both parties formally requested that the FCC take no action until the House and Senate had had a chance to weigh in on the matter.
But with the Obama Administration quickly losing its own standing with its radical base as it prepares to surrender to Republicans on the Bush tax cut renewals and possible budget cuts, "We need to give our people a win, and right now, [net neutrality] is the only win we will probably be able to give them for at least the next six to eight months," says a White House official.
About a week ago it appeared that nothing would be done at the FCC, and Free Press, the leftist group founded by Marxist Robert McChesney and financed by George Soros, was due to host a media call to demand FCC action. But that call was canceled without explanation and rescheduled for Monday, November 22, at which point Free Press was able to tout news to its membership that the FCC appeared prepared to act on the neutrality policy.
"We were told [last week] to hold our fire and reschedule our call," says a Free Press media aide, who requested anonymity for fear of reprisals. "We have friends inside the FCC and they told us that if we just waited a few days, there would be good news for us to announce to our membership. More senior people knew what was happening over there and even had the dates for the ruling circulation and the FCC meeting schedule so we could plan events to support Genachowski and the Democratic commissioners."
Speaking with outside public interest groups or industry officials is not forbidden at the FCC, though in the case of an issue like "net neutrality," FCC staff involved at any level with the decision making process are required to publicly file an ex parte notice about any discussions related to the policy issue they have with outside groups. To date, no ex parte filings have been filed related to any contact a senior FCC official might have had with senior officials at Free Press. A number of current FCC officials have ties to Free Press, including Jen Howard, currently spokesperson for Genachowski, who formerly was a spokesperson for Free Press.
In the past year, Free Press has been caught in several ethics missteps related to its claims of not lobbying Democrats on Capitol Hill or at the FCC. In one instance, the group was caught drafting letters to be published under the names of liberal Democrats addressed to the FCC and intended to influence that decision-making body. Republicans on Capitol Hill have already made it clear that oversight of the FCC will be a priority for the House Energy and Commerce Committee.
As it stands, the FCC will release the planned rulemaking for net neutrality while Congress is out of town on Thanksgiving recess, and would vote on the rules on December 21, when Congress is on Christmas recess. "In short, they are doing this in such a way that it is rubbing our noses in it," says a Republican staffer on House Energy and Commerce. "Unless folks just rise up and make noise about this, there isn't much we can do until after the new year when we get back and have control of the committee."
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 following video is somewhat chilling and haunting as a shrewd and insightful Ronald Reagan expounded upon the evils of a large and powerful government, one that deceives the public by using "comfortable" words. The end result is that the individual American has far fewer rights and freedoms and corporations are thwarted.
The ideological radicalism and arrogance of and abuse of power by Obama and myriad Congressional Democrats is typified by one of its premier practitioners, Democrat Pete Stark of California. A poster child elitism and what the Founding Fathers feared, he stated recently in a town hall meeting that "the federal government can do most anything in this country." Furthermore he noted that "there are very few constitutional limits that would prevent the federal government from rules that could affect your private life."
Representatives like these are cancers to our Democracy and must be eradicated or our nation as we know it will succumb, our freedoms and liberties largely destroyed.
These evil, arrogant, power-hungry, self-serving, elitist malignancies must be permanently removed from office and replaced by individuals who respect individual freedoms, rights, equality and a non-intrusive government.
Vote them all out in November!
Stark Raving
Investor’s Business Daily 08/02/2010
Democrat Rep. Pete Stark of California
Power: The federal government, according to Democratic Rep. Pete Stark, can do anything it wants. If there are indeed no checks on the state's power, as the congressman claims, then the state is a tyrant.
Stark, who represents San Francisco's East Bay area, let the left's secret slip when he told constituents at a July 24 town-hall meeting in Hayward that he believes "there are very few constitutional limits that would prevent the federal government from rules that could affect your private life."
His response came in reply to a constituent's thoughtful question about the federal health care overhaul. She merely wanted to know how Washington gave itself the authority to declare health care a right if implementing that right "necessarily infringes the unalienable rights of other people."
"How can this law be constitutional?" she asked. "But more importantly than that, if they can do this, what can't they?"
Stark, as arrogant, dismissive and evasive as always to the people he's "served" for 37 years, said that "the federal government can do most anything in this country."
His opinion on government power is shocking enough.
But even more surprising is that the congressman would be so forthcoming in a public forum. The political left, which is grounded in progressive ideology, has long worked to hide from the public its agenda to use the government to impose its will on the country.
This thinking is not forward-looking. Progressivism is a regressive framework of ideas based on some of man's worst urges. It seeks to control others through an administrative system of central planners who, backed by lawmaking and executive bodies that believe their authority is unlimited, can do most anything they want.
In their core, progressives believe they have the answers to society's problems and are eager to force them on the state's subjects, even if doing so violates the natural rights that the Constitution guaranteed would be protected by a republican style of government.
Stark is right: Washington has the power to do whatever it wants. But it doesn't have the moral authority, either in constitutional law or in the realm of human decency. When it crosses into the dark region where it does most anything it wishes, it's become a tyrant.
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.
Print This Post
Subscribe to Our RSS Feed
Follow Us on Twitter
Comments