You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘obama administration’ tag.
Just recently RAND Corporation, a research arm of the U. S. military, released a study titled A Stability Police Force For The United States: Justification And Creating U. S. Capabilities. In this research RAND concluded that this new force would be a hybrid between law enforcement and military. They would create this new force from within the U. S Marshal Service. Their role in the Marshal Service would be as stated in the study, “in a range of tasks such as crowd and riot control, special weapons and tactics (SWAT), and investigations of organized criminal groups”. In the RAND study the size of the unit would be relatively small somewhere around the range of two-6,000 personnel. Yet after further reading the study we find out that this new unit could, as in their words, “could be increased by augmenting it with additional federal, state, or local police from the United States”. Wow, talk about big brother getting even bigger.
The powers that would be given to the Federal government, if this study were to become reality, would be overwhelming and unconstitutional. It is my understanding that for the most part of our country’s history (at least until President Theodore Roosevelt Supreme Court corrupted a time long understanding of State rights over Federal rights) as stated in Wikipedia, “…. Congress has limited powers granted in the Constitution, the Federal government does not have a general police power, as the states do. The exceptions are laws regarding Federal property and the military. On the other hand, Congress was granted by the New Deal Court a broad quasi-police authority from its power to regulate interstate commerce and raise and spend revenue.” So much for the 10th Amendment which basically guarantees the powers that were not granted to the federal government were therefore given to the states. Establishing a police force was never granted to the Federal Government. That power was considered best to be given to states and their local officials. In September 17, 1997 Congressman Ron Paul stated in his speech to the House Speaker in the House of Representatives in Congress over the recent broadening powers given to the Federal Government that,” Under the constitution, there was never meant to be a Federal police force. Even an FBI limited only to investigations was not accepted until this century.” It was the intentions of our founders to limit the power of government to create a more free society.
What, if anything, does the government or the Obama Administration, hope to achieve in creating such a powerful police? One can only be reminded about what Germany did before World War II. Tell me if this does not give you a moment of pause. First, in order to get Germany out of a financial depression, Hitler quickly past legislation that gave his government power to take over the banking system. Next, Hitler lead the government to take over most of Germany’s industrial industries in hopes to lessen the unemployment rate. Last, but not least, Hitler took over all police powers in the country and created the Gestapo. By doing this Hitler guaranteed his grasp over his country and the Nazi Party began its long, but failed, crusade in taking over the world. I hope that history does not repeat itself since it does cause quite a mess.
When the health care reform bill passed the House on Saturday by a 220-215 vote, it was as clear as ever that we are a country divided. The vast majority of those in favor of the bill were from the Democrat party except for one, Rep. Anh “Joseph” Cao of New Orleans, who was singled out as the one Republican that the Obama administration could sway to do their bidding. And, having received the “Obama Treatment” and oodles of political “advice” was just what Mr Cao needed to mold him into the one thing the administration needed…bipartisanship.
With the well known controversy of the Pelosicare bill surrounding the two political parties of Democrat and Republican, the one thing that was obvious was that no GOP member in their right mind was going to vote in its favor. It has been evident from the beginning of President Obama’s presidency that it was a difficult task to bring in enough support for a bill like this with the endless campaigning and lobbying on the part of the administration and it’s supporters. They were even right back on the band wagon as soon as the bill passed trying to devise their next plan to be able to forward the agenda. But the claim of bipartisanship was an obstacle that they wanted to over come, just so they could have that under their belt when arguing in defense of Pelosicare. Although, I would hardly call one measly Republican vote bipartisan.
This is why they spent so much time in the weeks before on Rep. Anh “Joseph” Cao. They saw a link that was weak enough to break. According to Fox News, Rep. Cao said that President Obama spoke with him for “a period of a couple weeks” and that Obama’s staff spoke with him “on a number of occasions.” And those talks sound a lot like flattery to me. Cao told Fox News that “We were able to sit down to talk about recovery, to talk about the needs of the district.”
The excuse for voting in favor of the health care bill in Mr. Cao’s eyes, was that his political situation is “special” due to having won in an upset election last December over Democrat William Jefferson. Cao even said to The Times-Picayune during the summer, “voting against the health care bill will probably be the death of my political career.” So, forget the Constitution, the American freedoms and liberty, the fight against more government control…just worry about your political career, because that’s what really matters in the end.
In my heart I know it probably won’t happen due to the overwhelmingly majority of democratic voters in New Orleans, but I sincerely hope that Rep. Anh Cao (and all Rhinos across America) get the boot in the 2010 elections. We do not need people in office that worry more about their political career than the future of America, and that goes for all parties. No more career politicians!
As I watched the news last night a glimmer of hope raised inside of me when I found that the Republicans had won in the Virginia and New Jersey votes. This shows that many of those who were seeking “change” with Obama are now seeing that his far left agenda is not right for America as well as with all left leaning politicians. It also reveals that the Democratic methods used to govern these states are not what the people want. And hopefully now realizing that they don’t need to be taxed through the nose to get their economy back on track, but have a leader that will simply spend frugally.
Now that the election is over we are hear from the Obama administration that it was no big deal to lose. With Robert Gibbs saying, that the election of Republicans to the governorships in Virginia and New Jersey was based on “very local issues that didn’t involve the president.” They may think that downplaying their loss will work on the American people, but it was clear to see during the campaigns that the story was quite different.
President Obama spent a considerable amount of time campaigning for the Democratic candidates in the weeks and days before the elections. Obama even said at one campaign rally for Jon Corzine, “I’m going to need you to knock on doors. I’m going to need you to make phone calls,” he said. “I’m going to need you to do the same thing you did last year.” Not to mention the commercials he did for Creigh Deeds, and the extensive hours he and Joe Biden put in just talking to people and rallying for their Democrat comrades. And now they say it’s nothing, just some local stuff that has nothing to do with the President?
I beg to differ. I think it has everything to do with the President and the way that these politicians aligned themselves with him and his policies. People are finally waking up and seeing that this “change” isn’t working and want to even the playing field. Although it is faint and some what a small victory, it is still hope. Not the Obama kind of hope mind you, but the kind that the American people are becoming informed and will stand up for the liberty and freedoms that have been uniquely theirs for centuries.
Once upon a time there was a great nation built on free market and capitalism. The whole world knew you could come to America with nothing in your wallet and turn it into something prosperous. Many families of this nation have these stories of distant relatives coming from other countries with nothing and with a little hard work and some risk would make something of themselves. Well, I have to break it to you, those days are probably gone. The days of capitalism are dwindling as Washington D.C. is appearing more like Moscow in the late Soviet Union, than the United States of America that we knew and loved as under administrations like President Reagan. With big government taking control of most of the large corporations in the U.S. they are now finding it acceptable to regulate pay too. This idea is surely making our founding fathers roll in their graves!
Just recently the pay czar, Ken Feinberg, authorized the pay cuts of 50-90% for many CEOs who’s companies participated in the government bailout. This didn’t include all the companies that participated, no, it was only seven certain ones: Bank of America Corp., American International Group Inc., Citigroup Inc., General Motors, GMAC, Chrysler and Chrysler Financial. The two big ones who’s CEOs will not receive pay cuts are Goldman Sachs and GE. The reason being because these companies are going along with every major policy decision of the Obama administration.
These bought out, er, I mean bailed out companies are not the only targets though. This is also to include any business that the government, the treasury, or possibly, the fed deems is too economically important to fail. That would mean small business too, or the Chamber of Commerce who represents over 3 million businesses that engage in the free-market system. This administration wants to control your right to make money! The Federal Reserve in correlation with Ken Feinberg, has also proposed to monitor pay packages at thousands of banks, including those that never received bailout money. And this proposal covers a huge scope of nearly 6,000 banks and a wide range of employees, everything from executives to traders to loan officers.
Excuse me, but I am most positive that there is no where in the constitution that gives the executive branch the authority to regulate what privately owned businesses should pay their employees. I know some of you might say that because these companies took buy out, I mean bailout money that the government has every right to regulate their salaries. However, if that was the case instead of the administration making these decisions it should be the people whose money was used for the stimulus, but even that is not constitutional.
So here we are again looking at the Obama administration making anti-capitalist decisions leading us down the road of socialism to the town of communism. Which in essence is when the government is in charge of the economy. Is this the true intentions disguised by President Obama? And is this really what those who voted him into office had in mind when promised a new kind of politics? I would like to think not. Like it or not, capitalism is what has made this country strong. Like a family to be formed starting with a Mother and a Father, in a successful society there must be those who make enough money to pay those whom they employee. A classless society where there is no wealthy may sound Utopian to some, but it can not, has not, and will not ever work.
Capitalism- an economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market.
Communism- a : a doctrine based on revolutionary Marxian socialism and Marxism-Leninism that was the official ideology of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics b : a totalitarian system of government in which a single authoritarian party controls state-owned means of production c : a final stage of society in Marxist theory in which the state has withered away and economic goods are distributed equitably d : communist systems collectively. ( Like Health Care Reform)
Marxism- the political, economic, and social principles and policies advocated by Marx; especially : a theory and practice of socialism including the labor theory of value, dialectical materialism, the class struggle, and dictatorship of the proletariat until the establishment of a classless society.
Glenn Beck Show 10/23/09
Many of us consider freedom of speech an absolute right and to be one that we hold dear in the United States of America. That right, given by the first amendment is still allowed, however, it seems to be only when it is aligned with the Obama Administration’s agenda. Here is an article of how the White House tried to exclude Fox News from the press pool on October 22, 2009 as a disciplinary measure for their conservative take on news: http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2009/10/escalation_white_house_tries_t.asp
And here is a great article from Wall Street Journal on how this is not all about Fox News, it’s about the media as a whole, or in other words, the freedom of press:
Talk about your Chicago politics. What is this, the White House or the basement of a Mafia social club?
This is a video discussing the White House trying to exclude Fox News. Even the self proclaimed liberal is just astounded by the actions of the Obama administration towards this news agency.
When does the pursuit of peace become a threat to national security? One would think that allowing another country, one with a history of hostile intent, to take inventory of your nuclear arsenal would be at the top of that list of things not to do to cross that line. In order to maintain peace you have to maintain strength, according to the Reagan administration, which kept America safe for the entire term of Reagan’s presidency. To maintain strength, you must be able to have the upper hand in the possible event of a dispute taking place. For your enemy to know where you keep your top secret weapons gives them the advantage and the knowledge to take out your defense before or during the attack. What is there to keep your opponent from taking you out? If they know your moves, your weakness, your ability, they can prepare for combat and dramatically increase the likely hood of their success.
This is the scenario that the Obama administration is trying to carry out right now. President Obama is allowing Hillary Clinton to meet with Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov to form a treaty between the US and Russia. This treaty would allow the Russians to visit nuclear sites in America to count missiles and warheads. As put in the Fox News article, this “would constitute the most intrusive weapons inspection program the U.S. has ever accepted.” I do not know if Obama is keeping in mind that a favorite revered Russian past time is the strategic game of chess, lining up all their pieces perfectly before the irrevocable strike to debilitate their adversary.
Surly, being elected as President, Obama is not that naive. I would bet that he knows fully that this is another move to weaken America as we have seen in past actions by this President. He has weakened America by crippling our military by cutting out top weapons and funding, plunging the U.S. into staggering debt and unemployment, bowing to foreign leadership, releasing interrogation techniques, shutting down missile defense in Poland which left our east coast vulnerable to missile strikes, and showing our allies that the U.S. is no longer one that can be trusted. This latest atrocity, allowing Russia access to our Nuclear missiles and warheads, seems to be yet another step in the direction that the Obama administration has laid out in their agenda of the once great United States of America.
***Just a little note, upon researching this, most news articles have this story somewhat hidden in titles like “Clinton Arrives In Russia For Talks On Iran, Nuclear Arms” and “Clinton To Focus On Iran, Arms Reduction During Russia Visit”. It seems that most everyone is tip toeing around it and barely touching the story when it really is a big deal.***
We hear little on the news now of the declining economy here in the United States, in fact, we hear that the Stimulus has gone as planned. We hear that the economy is slowly picking up again and that consumer spending is growing. But how can this be when the jobs are being lost at record rates, homes are still being lost, and government is still trying to “spend” it’s way out of a recession? It’s not true, that’s how. And the whole world can see it, and they can see that the tactics of the Obama administration are only making matters worse.
Click here to read a very eye opening article about the current economy of the United States of America.
More US Economic News:
With such a heavy focus on health care, the nuclear threats of Iran and North Korea, and the supposed severity of the H1N1 virus, there have been legislation bills slipped into the Senate and House with few taking notice in the media. Gun rights advocates, however, have kept a watchful eye on these bills and have been getting word out about the propositions at hand.
The more well known of the bills right now is H.R. 45, which not only would make it illegal to own a firearm if you do not provide a driver’s license and Social Security number, but also would require you to provide fingerprints to own a gun. In addition, H.R. 45 would demand that before purchasing a firearm you would have to submit to a physical and mental evaluation. This piece of legislation would expect guns be secured from access by children under age 18, and would empower law enforcement officers to come into your home to make sure that you are complying with the requirements.
Now, the less publicized gun control legislation that has been slipped under the radar is called S 1317. This would allow the attorney general the right to stop gun sales to anyone on the terror watch lists. Doesn’t sound too bad, huh? But wait, there is also H.R. 2647 that contains a companion clause to S 1317 that gives the attorney general the authority to determine who belongs on terrorist watch lists.
This would not be so alarming a few years back, but now the definition of a terrorist in the eyes of the Obama administration is much different than that of the Bush administration. It isn’t the Taliban, or car bombing extremists alone, no, it also includes what many believe to be patriots. Or, as has been said, right wingers, conservatives, anti-abortionists, religious “nuts”, gun rights advocates, those who oppose Obamacare, and more. Those who stand by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights as the law of the land are, in the new administration’s eyes, more dangerous than those mass murders that we have been fighting over seas for the last 7+ years.
Those of us who are “terrorists” in these times are in good company though. George Washington and the patriots known as the Sons of Liberty were viewed by Britain as rebels, or what patriots are being called today, terrorists. Had it not been for this organization, the United States of America, would likely remained under Britain’s tyrannical rule.
So, as history shows, it takes those willing to stand up for their rights to move a country in a good direction and to maintain freedom. Make sure your state’s representatives in the House and Senate know that you will not tolerate these gun restriction bills to be passed in any way, shape, or form. That if they support these pieces of legislation, that they will not be voted back into office.