Proletariat Blog

The ‘War on Terror,’ under Bush, is now the ‘Awareness Campaign against Man-Caused Disasters’ under Obama. The A.C.M.D., (‘Achmed’) is the quintessential liberal strategy for eradicating Islamic terror… semantically rather than in reality. Obama is all about the easy fix and reaping reward for words not work.

Obama: Our Protection

We are no longer ‘at war.’ War is just another word for the politics of fear. Obama is our protection now. Didn’t he just  receive a Nobel Peace Prize for bringing about world peace a few months ago? His mere existence as President has changed world opinion and  assuaged the anger of radical Islamic Terrorists against the United States. Obama is the transformational President who understands that they hate us because we elected Bush. They hate America because, until now, America has been a hateful and evil country. We deserve terrorist attacks and if we were to ‘go to war’ with radical muslims by profiling them on airplanes that would just make them madder and justify further attacks on us.

As Obama’s pastor pointed out 9/11 was merely, “America’s chickens coming home to roost:”

In addition to damning America, he told his congregation on the Sunday after Sept. 11, 2001 that the United States had brought on al Qaeda’s attacks because of its own terrorism.

“We bombed Hiroshima, we bombed Nagasaki, and we nuked far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon, and we never batted an eye,” Rev. Wright said in a sermon on Sept. 16, 2001.

“We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans, and now we are indignant because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought right back to our own front yards. America’s chickens are coming home to roost,” he told his congregation.  ~abcnews.go.com

This is the foundation of Obama’s foreign policy. Obama’s America has no role in defending the defenseless or opposing dictatorships in the world: “No despot fears the president, and no demonstrator in Tehran expects him to ride to the rescue.”

The system worked

The attempted destruction of Flight 253 proves that the Obama policy is working flawlessly. No muslim’s feelings were hurt by crass American profiling until the last moment when unthinking rascist passengers tackled a defenseless radical muslim attempting to ignite a harmless explosive.

The TSA subsequently sprung into action. Swiftly swooping down on the nefarious perpetrators: TSA subpoenas bloggers, demands names of sources. Bureaucratic justice strikes! The system does work people. Criticising or revealing internal memos will not be tolerated!

Obama is right, we are on the precipice: of a disaster; of an achievement of premeditated destruction.

“…it’s clear we are on the precipice of achievement that’s eluded Congresses, presidents for generations — an achievement that will touch the lives of nearly every American,” Obama said. ~foxnews.com

The fact that it will touch the lives of every American is undisputed. The manner of that touch is what every American has the right to question.

Like Lennie’s loving yet lethal embrace in Steinbeck’s Of Mice and Men, the government tends to strangle and smother what it means to protect and cherish. The Federal government is a blunt and wholesale tool.

The uninsured: soon to be felons

The Democrats National Healthcare plan, aka Obamacare, demands that you be covered by health insurance. If you are not covered you are required to buy it or face fines and penalties. The IRS may be the agency enforcing this mandate. How soon after American citizens are considered felons for not purchasing health insurance will Obama be impeached?

Why would Democrats do this to Americans? What happened to the nurturing parent?

More important, an individual mandate crosses an important line: accepting the principle that it is the government’s responsibility to ensure that every American has health insurance. In doing so, it opens the door to widespread regulation of the health care industry and political interference in personal health care decisions. The result will be a slow but steady spiral downward toward a government-run national health care system. ~cato.org

‘DMV efficiency with IRS compassion’

Until the Federal government, including the IRS, swears to the hippocratic oath perhaps they should stay out of the Health Care business. Using the iron fist of the IRS (for our own good, of course) is monstrous.

The Senate bill imposes a new requirement that all persons who provide health care coverage to others must file a return with the IRS listing the names, addresses, social security numbers, and the coverage period for each person, and “such other information as the Secretary [of Health and Human Services] may prescribe.” (Section 161(b) starting at page 107). The bill does not limit what information the Secretary may request, so it is conceivable and likely that information as to the nature of the coverage, the family members included, and other details will be reported to the IRS.

….This information is to be provided to the IRS for good reason. The House bill provides for a tax on people who do not have acceptable coverage at “any time” during the tax year. House bill section 401 provides for a new section 59B (at pp. 167-168) of the Internal Revenue Code:

(a) TAX IMPOSED.—In the case of any individual who does not meet the requirements of subsection (d) at any time during the taxable year, there is hereby imposed a tax equal to 2.5 percent of the excess of—
(1) the taxpayer’s modified adjusted gross income for the taxable year, over
(2) the amount of gross income specified in section 6012(a)(1) with respect to the taxpayer. ~legalinsurrection.blogspot.com

Cost of congressional caring

They do care, don’t they? Yes, they care. In the trillions! All this spending will, of course, reduce costs. Really?

The proposals now before Congress would require just about everyone to buy health insurance or to get it through their employers — which would generally result in lower wages. In other words, millions of people would be compelled to spend lots of money on something they previously did not want, at least not at prevailing prices.

Estimates of this burden vary, but for a family of four it could range up to $14,000 a year over the next decade, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Right now, many Americans take the gamble of going without insurance, just as many of us take our chances with how much we drive or how little we exercise.

The paradox is this: Reform advocates start with anecdotes about the underprivileged who are uninsured, then turn around and propose something that would hurt at least some members of that group. ~nytimes.com

Health Insurance Mandate Includes ‘Tax’ Despite Obama Denial

Dem’s Nationalized Health Care Plan Still Requires a Monthly Abortion Fee

Video: Baucus Admits Obamacare Costs $2.5 Trillion

How much ObamaCare costs the average family

ObamaCare’s Cost Could Top $6 Trillion

The point is that the cost of everything the government mandates is always, yes always, much more than originally estimated. The cost to individuals and families will be far more than anyone now thinks or believes it could be. (With the possible exception of myself who thinks that it will utterly bankrupt the country.)

Slow but Steady Spiral Downward

As the government asserts control over healthcare choices its entanglement will engender more entanglement. The real danger here is the politicization of health. When Health care decisions become acts of congress we are all in real trouble. Why would we want to make individual health decisions collectively? Why would we want to take a decision that should be based on science and your individual health and turn it into a decision that must be made in a political arena based on political criteria and all the vageries of ideology, bad logic, campaign contributions and payoffs?

I predict that this bill will destroy the Democrat party and repealing this abomination will be the central platform of the next majority party.

Wow. Stunning. The only people who you would think would consider Fidel Castro a, “world hero,” in any sense would be communists themselves. Communists who would look forward to putting the whole world under the same kind of rule that Cuba has endured under the reign of Castro… Oh, wait it’s the UN!

The UN has declared Fidel Castro, the longtime Communist dictator of Cuba, the “World Hero of Solidarity.” Castro killed thousands and thousands of people during his rule, torturing some to death (including a few American citizens), and Cuba remains an oppressive dictatorship even today. ~examiner.com

So rejoice comrades, surely these same people will declare Obama a world hero as well in the coming years (if they haven’t already).

Is it surprising that the president of the United Nations General Assembly is handing out “world hero” awards to all the prominent leftist/communists of the world? Cause I’m not surprised. The UN is essentially a tool of leftists who work toward the future day when we will all live under regimes practicing the same sort of, “social justice,” and equal distribution of wealth.

“What we want to do is present these three people to the world and say that they embody virtues and values worth emulation by all of us,” said D’Escoto, who like the socialist Morales is a staunch critic of U.S. foreign policy in Latin America. ~examiner.com

…”I remain indebted – I think all humanity remains indebted – to Fidel Castro, who has dedicated his life to the tireless practice and promotion of SOLIDARITY with  oppressed people throughout the world. More than a hero, Fidel is as close to a saint as we can find in our troubled world.” ~un.org

The data that underpins all the arguments for human induced climate change are a baseless concoction of lies. We now know this for a certainty since someone did us the favor of releasing internal documents from the central scientists involved in this, “greatest lie ever told.”

According to liberal scientists we must have total faith in their conclusions. We can’t check their data, we can’t check their models or the statistical algorithms upon which their conclusions are based. The programming of their software is off limits. In fact, we now know that the underlying raw data for their conclusions no longer exists! It was destroyed. How convenient.

SCIENTISTS at the University of East Anglia (UEA) have admitted throwing away much of the raw temperature data on which their predictions of global warming are based.

It means that other academics are not able to check basic calculations said to show a long-term rise in temperature over the past 150 years.

The UEA’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU) was forced to reveal the loss following requests for the data under Freedom of Information legislation.  ~timesonline.co.uk

The global warming threat to humanity is exactly what it seems to be, scare mongering. Scare mongering with a political purpose. It is meant to part us with our liberty and property. The political hacks pushing this agenda already have mountains of laws ready to enact upon us which will have the effect of controlling every aspect of our lives. After all, if all human activity is to blame for destroying the planet then all human activity will have to be regulated in order to save the planet.

With the release of these emails and some of the data included we are finally seeing some peer review of this fraudulent science.

Anthropogenic Global Warming is a complete fraud and a swindle. It has been used purely as a vehicle to advance a radical agenda. Now we have proof that the ‘scientists’ whose entire career is based on fraudulent science have in fact been cooking the books, making up numbers, suppressing evidence, and silencing dissent. Billions of dollars are now being funelled into climate science research with the sole purpose of proving the already decided verdict of implicating human activity. This is not science.

Besides the fact that legislation based on fraudulent science, like cap and trade, will destroy our economy and severely limit the freedom of every citizen there are a great many people invested in pushing this agenda forward.

Climate change: this is the worst scientific scandal of our generation

Former NASA climate scientist pleads guilty to contract fraud

Researcher: NASA hiding climate data

There will be opposition. The progressive leftist vision of America that the Democratic Party is attempting to force onto Americans will be resisted. Obama’s attempt to transform America into Jeremiah Wright’s America is not something that most Americans view favorably.

Houston Tea Party rally draws more than 10,000

More than 10,000 people turned out Monday night for a North Houston Tea Party Patriots gathering to protest proposed health care reform and what they called big government spending and overzealous government leadership, according to preliminary attendance figures.  ~chron.com

This kind of grassroots opposition to the Obama-Pelosi-Reid government is ridiculed, insulted, dismissed, impugned, and maligned but it can’t be ignored and it is likely to grow as the left grows impatient to implement it’s policies in the face of it.

Democrats are not very tolerant of opposition or criticism. Witness the White House war against Fox News. Isolate dissent. This is evidence of an inability to tolerate opposing views. Obama’s Attorney General is described as having, “walked up to former DC Councilman Kevin Chavous at an event and told him to pull an ad criticizing the administration for its opposition to the DC school voucher program.”

Obama, as President, has so far advanced more vigorous campaigns to eradicate Rush Limbaugh, Glen Beck, and Fox News than they have against the Taliban in Afghanistan. After campaigning on uniting America it appears that what he meant was that he would do so by eliminating all his domestic opposition. Unity means no dissent.

There are signs here that point to a dangerous proclivity.

The desire for government monopoly is a dangerous one. And make no mistake, it is government monopoly which is desired by the left. Whether it is always the primary motivation or merely the believed means to an end government monopoly is the solution that progressive policies are designed to implement.

“This isn’t about ‘I can’t stand Barack Obama’ — this is about ‘I can’t stand a government that will tread on me,’” said Houston radio talk show host and TV anchor Joe “Pags” Pagliarulo to a rousing burst of applause from the audience.

“Taxes are going up because we have to pay for health care for people who are here illegally,” Pagliarulo said. “We have to pay for health care for people who don’t want health care … We’ve got a government that’s run amok — we’ve got a government that doesn’t care about you or me. It cares about power, it cares about control.” ~chron.com

The best thing for America is for the left to ram their risky healthcare scheme through as quickly as possible.

The sooner America sees how horrible the leftist policies of Obama, Reid, and Pelosi  are the sooner we can get them out of power.

The Obama Healthcare putsch is almost the perfect example of an ideologically driven agenda disregarding any sense of reality or practicality in legislation. Every scheme, every bill, seems to get worse than the last. From the specter of IRS enforcement to mandates with draconian fines, every new Democrat bill gets deeper into the quagmire of everything Americans hate about government. Which is why Healthcare keeps dropping in the polls; Americans are expressing their disagreement with what Democrats are bound and determined to pass no matter how much opposition there is.

In fact, rather than addressing the underlying issues leftists like Pelosi think that the public are just too stupid to understand what’s good for them. If the people are rejecting ‘the public option’, then let’s just rename it. The public can’t possibly be smart enough to know that there’s no difference between the plan labeled, “public option,” and the same plan labeled, “consumer option.”

SUNRISE, Fla. (AP) – A government-sponsored “public option” for health care lives, though it may be more attractive to skeptics if it goes by a different moniker, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Monday.

In an appearance at a Florida senior center, the Democratic leader referred to the so-called public option as “the consumer option.” Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla., appeared by Pelosi’s side and used the term “competitive option.”

Both suggested new terminology might get them past any lingering doubts among the public—or consumers or competitors. ~breitbart.com

Incredible.

I’m actually a little surprised at how tone deaf, partisan, and ideological Democrats have turned out to be with total one party control of the Federal Government. Especially after getting elected by campaigning as moderates and centrists. Which also explains why many moderates are now leaning conservative just as they were back in 1994. (Just keep attacking Fox News guys.)

The Ultimate Purpose of ObamaCare

The purpose of any bill that they eventually come up with is to create the conditions for a public-only option. After listening to two liberal commentators on NPR discuss the evils of Walmart and how they put “mom-and-pop” stores out of business by lowering prices (!$?), I realized that this is the strategy Democrats are trying to implement with Healthcare. The Federal Monopoly comes in with a low-cost public option, heavily subsidized, with a fine on individuals and small businesses if they don’t provide the kind of coverage dictated, and thus nearly everyone has no choice but to go with the public option. The out of pocket costs might seem lower, but our entire society will pay, and pay, and pay.

The cost of this ideological white whale will drag down the US economy even more. (Think Obamavilles all across America.) Costs will go up, not down, and in the end we will all have worse healthcare quality with even worse service than we have today. Which, with the low quality of healthcare service today would be saying something. But if anyone can bring the service level down by taking over an entire industry it would be the Federal Government.

Exhibit A, in the case against our current ruling political philosophy, is this quote from Sen. Thomas Carper (D.-Del.): “I don’t expect to actually read the legislative language because reading the legislative language is among the more confusing things I’ve ever read in my life.”

Since our congressional masters won’t let us read the text of the bill in question before they pass it I guess we won’t be able to judge the relative reading comprehension of Senator Carper. But this isn’t the only congressman who says he can’t read the bills he votes on.

“I love these members, they get up and say, ‘Read the bill,’” said Rep. John Conyers. “What good is reading the bill if it’s a thousand pages and you don’t have two days and two lawyers to find out what it means after you read the bill?” ~blog.sunlightfoundation.com

The Rule of Law

If those who write these bills can’t understand them how are they to be enforced or implemented? How are they to be interpreted and by whom? How can the people be expected to obey them?

The principle of the Rule of Law is literally at stake here.

One, the laws should be very transparent and clearly worded so that all mature citizens would clearly understand what are strictly prohibited and the penalties associated with violating the laws. And two, the laws and prohibitions should be as few as possible. Both citizens and law enforcers can easily remember them and people can grow in freedom, in an environment of very few restrictions and prohibitions.

Rule of law can also be viewed as a general legal maxim according to which decisions should be made by applying known principles or laws, without the intervention of discretion in their application. This maxim is intended to be a safeguard against arbitrary governance. The word “arbitrary” (from the Latin “arbiter”) signifies a judgment made at the discretion of the arbiter, rather than according to the rule of law. ~en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_law

Are we playing Russian Roulette with our legislation?

Carper described the type of language the actual text of the bill would finally be drafted in as “arcane,” “confusing,” “hard stuff to understand,” and “incomprehensible.” He likened it to the “gibberish” used in credit card disclosure forms. ~cnsnews.com

It is the job of a Congressman or Senator is to understand and make laws. Any legislator who cannot understand that “gibberish” has no business holding the job.