Rep. Joe Wilson and Liberal Hypocrisy

Much to the Democrats’ delight, this story is grabbing lots of attention. When a political party (or a faction within that party) wants to ram through drastic legislation with virtually no specific plan, fishy numbers that don’t add up, and rhetoric that masks the real agenda, one of the best things that can happen is for the debate to shift from the horrific fallacies of the legislation to “what a lesser known congressman yelled during the President’s Speech.”

Should have South Carolina Rep. Joe Wilson yelled, “You lie!” during the President’s speech last night? No. (He should have waited till the speech was over.) Click here

Are the Democrats being hypocritical in their attempt to make political hay out of the situation? Yes.

Why?
Links below.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/0909/Reid_called_Bush_liar_stood_by_comment.html

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2009/09/10/flashback_democrats_boo_bush_at_2005_state_of_the_union.html

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/06/02/obama-accused-clinton-telling-bald-faced-lies/

http://www.moralgroup.com/NewsItems/Politics/p8.htm

http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/0909/Dems_heckled_Bush_but_Wilson_was_different.html

http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/4976/

http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/0909/Dem_leaders_renew_push_for_Wilson_censure.html

"We need laws to make me give my money away"

One of my complaints against many of the wealthy politicians pushing for universal health care is that they say “rich people like themselves” should pay higher taxes and should help others with healthcare because they can afford it, but there is nothing keeping them from giving their money to those causes right now. If they truly believed in the cause, they would not need the government to pass laws to take their money away. Many of them give almost nothing! Joe Biden is one of the best examples of this. He said during the campaign it was time the rich paid higher taxes to help the less fortunate, but his tax records showed he gave virtually nothing to charity.

The main issue goes to the role of government. I simply do not believe it is morally right for the government to excessively take from those who earned it to give it to someone else.

Glenn Beck: One Thing 8-10-09

I almost gave in . . .

I can see how easy it is to get trapped in a welfare state. I realized a while back that since my current income is so low, I qualified for certain things, and for a moment I thought, “It will be nice to have those things (from the government) and I won’t even have to pay for them (or they will be discounted).”

Then I realized that if I get the job I’m currently pursuing, I would be making too much money to qualify for those things and for a brief moment, I wondered if I should just stay where I’m at. That’s when it hit me. So many people have chosen not to pursue a better life, because they risk losing government assistance. The mass number of people still receiving government assistance after decades attests to this.

It is human nature to become dependant upon it.

Classroom socialism

I did a little experiment in some of my classes last year-
I told my students that those making above a 90 would have a few points taken off their averages to go to those making below a 70 and in need of assistance so they could pass. Needless to say those who commonly made above a 90 didn’t think that idea was very fair so they protested, and those making below a 70 didn’t necessarily think it was fair either, but they didn’t care- they loved the idea.
In my opinion, that scenario illustrates what happens when the government takes money away from those who “have more than enough” and gives to those who “don’t have the means.” It destroys the incentive to achieve. It destroys the A students incentive to achieve an A because they realize, “What’s the point in trying to get an A? It will simply be taken away.” And it destroys the incentive of the failing student to attempt to improve, because he realizes, “What’s the point? I’m going to get some of the A students points anyway.”

Universal Healthcare

If a person is making $100,000 a year, most people would probably say they can afford to help pay for the health care of someone making $20,000 a year. But what if a person is only making $40,000? What if they have 6 kids?

Universal health care leads to a complex and complicated web of government regulation attempting to determine who “has the means to pay for his own health care.” I hope the person making $100,000 would give money to charity, a church, or friends in need of health care, but regardless of whether they can afford it or not, it's still wrong to take their money and give it to someone else.

Taxpayer funded abortion

We give the government our money do many things. No one agrees with everything the government does with our money, but this issue is more than just a simple disagreement over how taxpayer money is spent. This is as serious as it gets, and I can not stand by silently faced with the prospect that part of my income may be used to end the life of an unborn child.

Abortion ends a life.

Obama and Government control

Does it bother anyone that if one examines the political actions of President Obama, it appears that he would have the best chance to be elected in a Marxist country than any other President in U.S. history?

The Cycle of Democracy

Prophetic Words Concerning America?

“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the public treasury. From that moment on the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most money from the pubic treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy followed by dictatorship. The average age of the world’s great civilizations has been two hundred years. These nations have progressed through the following sequence: from bondage to spiritual faith, from spiritual faith to great courage, from courage to liberty, from liberty to abundance, from abundance to selfishness, from selfishness to complacency, from complacency to apathy, from apathy to dependency, from dependency back to bondage.”

Where in this cycle would you put the United States of America?

One of the most profound segments of this quote is "From that moment on the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most money from the pubic treasury."
This is obviously what is happening in our Country.

We will complete our return to bondage if we don't find a way to break this cycle.

Obama says no earmarks . . .

. . .but that was during the campaign. Read story here

Promises. Promises.

Even Barack Obama turns out to be susceptible to the corruption of D.C.

Surprise. Surprise.

"Yes we Can" . . . (be afraid)

Is the Administration Winging It?

WSJ Op-ed by Karl Rove

Socialism?

Is this socialism? Is our government doing the right thing? Can we "stimulate" our economy out of this mess? Can we spend our way back into growth? Only time will tell, but in my opinion the fact that we are even having a debate over whether or not these are socialist ideas is a telling sign.

Corruption Killing America

FBI Probing 530 Corporate Fraud Cases

We are cheating and deceiving ourselves into destruction.

If Americans (and most importantly leaders- i.e. business executives, clergy, teachers, politicians) don't value honesty and integrity we will sentence our Nation to death.

Related:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2008/12/12/dirty-bakers-doen-political-scandal/

Obama: "Only Government"

FOX NEWS: Obama: 'Only Government' Can Break Cycle of Job Loss, Economic Downturn

Unfortunately, government is not the answer and never will be. Spending more money to help our economy get out of debt is not the answer. Printing more money is not the answer.

Government is too involved in Americans' lives. Government needs to get out of the way. Less regulation, lower taxes, and less spending. Haven’t we already tried that you ask? Tax cuts, yes, but spending has been out of control for many years, and until we lower all three to the appropriate levels, we will not see the ingenuity and growth we had during President Reagan’s administration.

When you have to remind people you are in charge . . .

. . . you're not.

FOX NEWS: In Stimulus Debate, Obama Drifts Into Campaign Mode
President Obama faces criticism about the style of leadership he's taking in his defense of the contentious and costly economic stimulus bill.

Baby Thrown Away Alive

Lawsuit: Florida Clinic Botched Abortion, Threw Out Live Baby

If these allegations are true, a murder occurred.

A proper analysis of this situation (and numerous others like it) reveals a heartbreaking irony-

If the abortion procedure had gone according to plan, I doubt this story would have made the news. (Millions of “normal” abortions never make headlines.)

But something allegedly went wrong, and this baby purportedly left the womb and began breathing. Therefore, people are outraged, and rightly so; however, this simple fact remains: regardless of whether or not this particular abortion procedure was botched, the ultimate fate of this pre-born baby did not change. Her life still ended. That was the plan all along.

If you are like most people, the thought that this baby may have been alive when she was thrown away tears at your soul. Something within you cries out in adamant objection protesting the clear violation of law that not only recognizes the intrinsic value of her life but calls for the protection of her life as well. Perhaps you are thinking, “If that baby was alive after she was born, she deserved to live!”

I humbly ask, “If the baby was alive before she was born, did she still deserve to live?”

Something within us should recognize that simply because the location of this defenseless baby changed, it should not change the value of her life, or the level of protection she should receive.

Update: Fla. doctor loses license after botched abortion

Stickin' it to 'em

Pass my bill or this is the end

Washington Post

Obama Train wreck . . .

From Fox News:
Tom Daschle has withdrawn his nomination for health and human services secretary, after fielding mounting criticism over his failure to pay more than $130,000 in taxes.
Obama's pick to be the White House's first performance officer, Nancy Killefer, also withdrew her nomination on Tuesday because of her own tax liabilities, namely a $946 tax lien imposed by the D.C. government for failure to pay $298 in unemployment compensation tax on household help.
Noting the importance of the post, Killefer wrote in her withdrawal letter to the president that "my personal tax issue of D.C. unemployment tax could be used to create exactly the kind of distraction and delay those duties must avoid."

From Breitbart:
Daschle was the third high-profile Obama nominee to bow out. Obama initially had tapped Bill Richardson to be Commerce secretary, but the New Mexico governor withdrew amid a grand jury investigation into a state contract awarded to his political donors.