Victory Institute Action Alert

January 9, 2009

Print this page (.pdf)

In September, Navy SEALs captured Ahmed Hashim Abed – a most-wanted al Qaeda leader – during a nighttime raid. Abed is the suspected mastermind of a 2004 ambush that brutally murdered four Blackwater security contractors – including a former SEAL – in Fallujah, Iraq. The contractors were burned, mutilated, and suspended from a bridge. According to the terrorist himself and conflicting statements from another sailor, these SEALs might have hit Abed in the stomach.

The objective of Operation Neptune’s Fury is to exonerate the SEALs, who should be honored as heroes, not tried as criminals.

The charged SEALs are:

• SO2 Matthew McCabe, 24, of Perrysburg, Ohio
• SO1 Julio Huertas, 28, of Blue Island, Ill.
• SO2 Jonathon Keefe, 25, of Yorktown, Va.

All are from SEAL Team Ten in Little Creek, Va.

The Navy has just over 2,000 SEALs, and it takes years of training to become one. These men are some of the most elite warriors in the world. They accomplished their mission, yet could face discharge because the man responsible for the Fallujah ambush could have received a fat lip?

"How long before America’s front-line troops begin to wonder if the country really has their backs?" asked Lt. Col. Ralph Peters in a New York Post op-ed.

Unfortunately, they already are. As a SEAL officer told me in an interview, "SEALs are tired of having to watch their back – not only from the enemy – but also from our own leadership." These warriors clearly need our help. This is a battle that they cannot win.
Take Action!
Let the SEALs know that the United States does have their backs. Admiral Eric Olson is the Commanding Officer of Special Operations Command; he is a SEAL himself and has the authority to stop the trials. Politely inform him that the charges against the SEALs must be dropped. These elite warriors have went above and beyond the call of duty when it comes to securing our freedom, and deserve to be treated as heroes rather than tried as criminals.

Remember, what you communicate could either help or hurt these men’s careers.

1. Call Admiral Eric Olson at               (813) 826.5100         (813) 826.5100
2. Or Fax (813) 825.5109
3. Or Email: olsone@socom.mil
4. Then Forward this to as many people as possible

Sign up to receive Victory Institute Action Alerts here.

Donate to the SEALs’ Legal Defense Fund

I encourage all of you who can do this to express your opinion and your support for these men in honor of the sacrifices they make in the name of our safety and protection.  In my opinion, these men are heroes and Abed is lucky to still draw breath.  His fate has been far more kind than the fate of the men that he captured, tortured, murdered and then hung their desecrated bodies on display for the entire world to see.  Enough is enough.

It is a well know fact that once elected politicians almost immediately forget the very promises that got them elected in the first place.  This administration has been no different.  Of course they have kept some of the promises that they made, but those are only the ones that serve their purposes and drive their agendas. 

What promises have they kept?  Well that is easy, we were promised justice for those held in Guantanamo Bay, they have certainly delivered on that.  In fact those who are now held at Gitmo can rest assured that they will have far more legal rights then the very soldiers that captured them on a foreign battlefield.  You see the Obama administration promised them justice and they shall have it in the form of the American civil legal system, something actually denied our brave men and women who serve and die for this nation.  No, military tribunals or courts martial was not good enough for the illegal enemy combatants who fought our soldiers overseas.  They must have far superior legal rights, attorneys paid for by the American tax payer and access to all the case law, precedence and jurisprudence afforded each and every American citizen.  Who cares that our brave servicemen and women do not get this luxury, those terrorist suspects certainly deserve it.  You see when you become a soldier, airman, sailor or marine in service to this nation, you not only pledge your life to the defense of this nation and her Constitution from enemies both foreign and domestic, you also waive your right to the very guarantees provided by the document that your are duty bound to protect.  You swear to surrender your rights and be governed by the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).  However, now those who fight against American troops on the field of battle do not have to worry about such details.  Now they can have the same rights as any other American criminal, including the right for some sleaze ball attorney to find a legal loop hole to let them go free, because some bureaucratic bookworm did not fill out some piece of paperwork in triplicate or some soldier was insensitive to the cultural needs of a detainee.  Not to mention the fact that in their utmost lack of wisdom, the Federal government has decided to try some of these terrorist just miles from the scene of the ‘crime’.  I be New Yorkers will welcome any verdict that comes out of these trials that they will be forced to host, even if it is an innocent one, so long as the rights of these terrorist who killed 3,000 innocent New York citizen were not violated in even the slightest way.  Yes, ladies and gentlemen, this is one promise that the Obama administration has kept: Far superior legal rights and proceedings for terrorist suspects than is afforded our very own soldiers, all at the expense of the American taxpayer.

You want an American trial for these jihadist?  Well, I agree.  Here is my idea.  Dress them in bright pink jumpsuits, pick a day and time to release them in Hoboken or Queens, broadcast the location and time of release to everyone in the Tri-State area, then let them go.  If they can make it out of the city alive, they are free to go.  It is a hell of a better fate than the three thousand innocent civilians that burned to death or were buried alive in the rubble so many years ago.

What other promises have they kept?  Ah, yes, healthcare.  They told us they would ram a Federally controlled healthcare plan down our throats whether we liked it or not.  Almost a year later they are close to succeeding, but here is where some of the broken promises come in.  Now I am not talking about the one we would have plainly been fools to believe, like that he would not have any activist or lobbyist as his advisors or that he would not sign any bill with a single piece of pork attached to it.  No, I am talking about those that he repeated over and over again that gave all the naive liberal votes hope that we would see the shining light of democracy from the unprecedented transparency promised by the Obama administration.  You see he knew this healthcare thing was poisonous.  He knew that the American people would not willingly sacrifice their choices, their rights and their control over their medical decisions if they really knew what was being planned.  No secrecy would be key to the success of this agenda.  The American people could not really find out what what in this healthcare bill or they would resist, but if he promised us that we would get to see each and every deliberation about this  live on CSPAN it sounded awfully good for the campaign.  Complete transparency, it seems, is just a bit more opaque than we thought.  Where has this CSPAN coverage been?  Why now that people are demanding that he live up to his promises is he hemming and hawing about allowing his bumbling press secretary to blurt out one half-witted excuse after another?  It is funny how those promises that you never meant to keep, come around and bite you in the ass, Mr. President.

On to other promises, how about that unemployment rate?  Hey, I know this one personally.  Both my wife and I had good productive jobs to start off 2009.  Nine months later neither of us did.  So what was this about if we passed the TARP bill, or was it the Omnibus, that we would not go over 8% unemployment?  What about the transparency promised with all of these bailout an stimulus programs?  Oh, sure there was a website created and job loss numbers spewed about, but then we find out that those numbers were complete bullshit.  They included thousands of jobs that had not even started yet and did you know that almost one billion dollars, that is right $920 million of your dollars cannot be adequately accounted for from the funds that were spent in the first six months.  Oh and did you also know that much of this money did not even go to create jobs?  Well that is of the money that has actually been spent of the staggering amounts allocated for these travesties that were voted into law.  That is another thing that apparently was just a flat out lie or just something that this administration does not care much about.  You see, for weeks we were told that we had to act now to avert a crisis.  We had to infuse the economy with these staggering trillions of immediately of face collapse.  Funny, that, because as of today only about 20% of the funds for first $890 billion so called stimulus packages has been spent with another 20% or so in process to be spent within the next six months.  That does not sound like a shot in the arm, but more like a long term prescription plan.  So why the rush if we are going to sit on more than $600 billion dollars until well into 2010?  Why did we have to pass this massive bill in its entirety right then?  Could we not have slowed down and voted to spend the roughly $160 billion dollars that we have so far, then taken our time on the rest?  Hell, now there is even talk of another stimulus package, because the first one was ineffective and the economy has not recovered.  Well no shit, Sherlock.  If $890 billion dollars in funds immediately injected into the American economy was the real answer, then spending $160 billion over six months won’t have the same effect.  That is the difference between a shot and a slow drip IV, not anywhere close to the same thing.

You know there is a question that I always hear thrown around at election time.  Are you better off today than you were four years ago?  It seems that is how we are to judge the effectiveness of our leaders, most pointedly the President.  Well, Mr. President, I am not better off that I was four years ago, nor even two for that matter.  Two years ago, my wife an I both had very profitable jobs in solid industries, hers in the middle of a growing boom.  We were making significant salaries, had good future prospects, good health insurance, large life insurance policies, a healthy stock portfolio and plenty of money in the savings.  Yeah, uhm, we don’t have any of that anymore.  My wife has spent the last nine months unemployed because her industry freaked out about Cap and Trade and I joined her for two months as the economy wore into my job as well.  Hell I even worked for a government contract regulatory lab.  People HAVE to have done what we did, but it still cut into our business enough that I am not even sure my former company will survive after being in business since it was founded in 1976.  No, Mr. President I am far, far worse off now than I was before you were elected and there are many Americans who are right there with me.  You have had a year and all your policies have done is make worse an already bad situation.  You have three years left.  The clock is ticking.

Since I am in an analogy mood, this evening I will give you another one.   Let’s say you take your car into a mechanic and he charges you $890 dollars to fix your engine.  A week later you have to take it back to him for the very same problem.  This is when you discover that he only spend $160 dollars to fix your car the last time, hides the invoice when you try to look at it, can’t explain to you what some of it was spent on and tells you that it should be running better because the flux capacitor is now in synch with the primary phase coil, but he promises that if you will give him another $1,000 he will make sure it runs right.  Now, ask yourself, how likely would you be to let this man work on your car again, provided you do not punch him out straight away and take your money back forcibly.  Now ask yourself how likely would you be to let him recommend a doctor for you and your family, or decide what medical procedure you need or do not need?  Scary thought isn’t it?

When do we realize that our system of government has failed to live up to the promises of our forefathers?  At what point do we fully comprehend just how far from that vision we have come?

Is it when our government completely fails to understand that it’s own power is derived from the consent of the governed and not by some ordained right for it to exist?  We can see plenty of examples of this today, be it the idea that the government has the right to demand, control and ultimately decide healthcare choices for each and every citizen or the false presumption that the will of the American people and the massive resistance to this idea is somehow irrelevant.  How do they respond to the demand by an even increasing segment of the population that the Federal government stay out of our healthcare and eliminate the public option from this reckless push to reform?  They pretend that we are idiots and simply change the name to something that sounds less ominous and more capitalist.  Now it is the consumer option!  That is better right?  Yeah, consumerism promotes capitalism, right?  Surely the unwashed masses will like that better, right?  Nah, none of them will actually read the changes and figure out that this new consumer option is basically the same damn thing as the previous public option.  They aren’t that smart. 

The problem is that we do read and understand far more than given credit for.  We do realize that, to quote our great leader, “putting lipstick on a pig, still makes it a pig”.  Our government honestly believes that the millions of people showing up at these TEA Party protests and 9/12 rallies are just common simpletons, spurned on by Fox News and a couple of conservative talking heads.  They are incapable of seeing that this is an underlying movement across this nations composed of average, everyday citizens who are finally finding their voices and who have had their fill of a bloated, inefficient, expansive and detached government who is no more in touch with the people that they govern than King George was with the Colonies.  Here in Texas, we do have some hope.  Our governor has already stated that Texas will not participate in any Federally back or controlled healthcare system to the point that the State of Texas will withhold her Federal tax contributions should she be forced to.  Our House of Representatives has already passed HCR 50 declaring Texas’ sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, hopefully our Senate will have the wisdom to follow course and our governor the strength of will and conviction to sign it into law.  We are not alone.  Many states have already passed such legislation and are demanding that the Federal government cease its interference with the governing of the States.  Should Texas decide to resist this healthcare option, others will surely follow.  Many have expressed similar objections and warnings directed towards Congress in the passing months.  What will happen if this comes to pass?

It is at this point that I grow concerned.  Texas is a fairly conservative state except for select pockets of liberal ideology.  We as a people in general value our traditions, our rights and our way of life free from the interference of others.  Yet recently we have seen them come under almost direct assault from the Federal government.  The opposition to the bailouts, the Federal manipulation of the free market, the refusal to allow domestic drilling, the re-investment act, the gun and ammunition control measures and the healthcare initiative has been powerfully strong here in Texas.  We will not take many more direct assaults on our freedoms.  Any one of these issues could be the straw, but issues like the Blair Holt’s Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009, various iterations of the Ammunition Accountability Act and nationalized healthcare are ones that I fear might push Texas to say enough if enough.  Should Texas finally stand its ground what will happen then?

If Governor Perry’s promise of refusing to participate in a Federally mandated healthcare system come to fruition and Texas attempts to withhold its Federal Income Tax contributions, what will be the consequences?  There is no possible way that the Federal government could allow this to occur.  Some states might get away with such threats, but not Texas.  Texas is a donor state.  This means that we pay in more Federal Income Taxes than we receive back from the government, and we are a large donor state at that.  If you compared the Texas economy against other nations in the world we would rank the 12th largest even in these poor economic times.  The Federal government could never allow the withholding of such a significant chunk of its income.  What if other states followed suit?  What then would Washington do if say just ten states refused to participate and threatened to withhold Federal tax dollars should they be forced to?  Would the Federal government finally come to grips with the fact that the States hold the power to be governed or would it come down to another civil war?  Would the Federal government try to take by force the funds withheld by states resisting such overarching legislation that is directly in contravention to Tenth Amendment? 

Had you asked me that question ten or twenty years ago, I would have automatically assumed that the Federal government would never even consider the possibility of force to strong arm a state to participate in a nationalized healthcare system.  Today, however, I am not so sure.  A friend of mine asked me an interesting question while we were discussing the foolish cancelation of the F-22 program earlier today.  The question was simply this, “What do you think we will see first, another civil war or another world war?”  Again, had this question been asked years ago, the answer would have automatically been that we are far more likely to see another world war, than we were to see another civil one.   When I was asked today, I honestly had to stop and consider the question before giving my answer.  My answer ended up being, “I am not sure.”  Unfortunately, I find that both are as easily possible in the world that we face today.  There are still serious threats outside our borders and as America continues to weaken it status and power across the globe, the likelihood that a major conflict between large nations could erupt and spread into a global one will continue to increase.  However, there is just as likely a chance that if our Federal government continues to grow and expand as it has been doing for far too long, makes reckless, wasteful decisions with our tax dollars, continues to interfere with the free market and continues to attempt to usurp rights from its citizens and its States, that some States will finally decide that they have had enough and refuse to comply.  What then?

I honestly do not know which is more likely for us to see in the future; a major world war or one bound within our own borders.  Human history has taught us that we will suffer long before finally deciding that we have had enough.  I see signs of it today.  Never before have so many States passed legislation declaring their own sovereignty and demanding their rights to govern themselves be restored, but never before have those rights been under assaults as they have been for the past fifty years.  Never before have the States been forced to watch their own power, individuality and sovereignty wither away under a slow, but persistent assault by a detached, distant central government.

So, enough…  When is it really enough and what will become of us then?

Allow me to apologize for not posting at all this past week. Some things have drastically changed in my personal life and that has restricted the free time I have had. On Monday of last week I was notified by my company that they were eliminating my department. Frankly, I think this is insane on their part as our entire business is predicated on the acquisition, collection, analysis and delivery of data to our customers, through a complex Access / SQL hybrid database that frequently has issues. However, it is not my decision and no longer my concern.

Therefore, the past week I have been spending what spare time I had applying for jobs. If there is anyone in the Fort Worth area that is looking for a seasoned IT professional, let me know.

While I have not been able to post an article, I have been trying to keep up with events and comments as best I could. An interesting conversation developed on the ELCA article I posted the other day. As I knew would be the case, someone came on to flame me for my intolerance and hatred. Now, I think I was plainly clear in my posting that I would never deny someone access to the word of God by telling them that they could not attend church, but I felt it wholly inappropriate for someone openly living in sin and against the will of God, to give instructions to others in His word. How that is hateful, I do not know. How it is intolerant I acknowledge, but make no apology for.

This posting is not about the issue of homosexuality in the church at all. This one is a broader examination about tolerance. We hear this word used an awful lot today. We are told that we must be tolerant of others. We must be tolerant of their behavior and their beliefs. We must be tolerant of ideas that we oppose and opinions that we do not share. What I want to know is where this comes from and why that tolerance is never offered in return. There is no tolerance for the Christian faith. It is continuously under assault and forced to change to the will of others. Christian churches have been forced to perform same sex marriages, Christmas events have been banned or relabeled to not offend others and there is now talk of hate crimes legislation against speaking the word of God. How is this tolerant? I thought Congress was to make no laws governing religion or the free exercise thereof? Was that not clear enough?

We are expected to understand when the effigy of Bush was burned in protest while people screamed offensive appellations against a sitting President. We were expected to be tolerant of people rights to protest as they called our soldiers murderers and our leaders criminal. We were expected to understand when our own political leaders betrayed the men and women serving this nation for their own political needs. We were expected to be tolerant.

Now we see people amassing to protest their rights to individual freedoms and government by their states and we are called racists, tea baggers (a sexually derogatory appellation), unruly mobs and terrorists. We protest for lower taxation, responsible spending and less government intervention in our lives and we are made out to be nothing more than angry dissenters who simply hate having a black man as our President. Where is the tolerance now? Oh, and I have some news for you… I can quickly name about five black men and one black woman that I would easily take as my President. Barack Obama is simply not one of them.

Where did this idea of tolerance come from? Were we tolerant of the British when we rebelled in Boston over a 2.5% tax on tea? When did this nation start down this path? Did we suddenly decide that it is not appropriate to speak out when we see something we believe is wrong? What exactly does tolerance mean? Should we have been tolerant of the South and their belief in slavery? Should we have learned to accept that they believed differently and that the North had no right to impose its morality upon them?

The issue of tolerance is often used as a club to stifle debate on an issue that one side does not want to face. What I find interesting is that most often though, it is those who preach tolerance the loudest who are the most intolerant of all. Just as the commenter showed in the previous post, there is absolutely no tolerance allowed for the Christian faith decide to follow the word of God and not allow certain people to instruct other in His word. There is no tolerance at all for our beliefs or what we see is right when it differs from others.

tol⋅er⋅ance – noun
1. a fair, objective, and permissive attitude toward those whose opinions, practices, race, religion, nationality, etc., differ from one’s own; freedom from bigotry.
2. a fair, objective, and permissive attitude toward opinions and practices that differ from one’s own.

So where in this definition does it say this only works one way. Furthermore, I do not like the use of the word permissive. Should I be tolerant or permissive of something I believe to be wrong?

What if I see someone stealing money from a vending machine? Should I be tolerant of this behavior because the person stealing might think that there is nothing wrong with theft?

What if I discover that my neighbor disciplines his children in a dangerous manner that I think might be abusive? Should I be tolerant of this because he thinks it is appropriate?

Why are liberals not tolerant of my desire to own an automatic weapon? I would absolutely love to own an M4 Carbine, an FN P90, an M107 SAS .50 cal or one of the new H&K MP7s. My ownership of those weapons would affect no one but me. I am a law abiding citizen who just happens to like firearms. So where is the tolerance for my desire to own them?

I welcome any serious discussion on this or explanations of why this tolerance aspect seems to only be a one way street.

Now that the veil has begun to lift and the public is opening its eyes to the massive assault on our healthcare industry that is occurring in Washington, it seems that a new movement has been spurned in the style of the TEA Parties. This past weekend at town hall meetings across this nation, common citizens shouted their dissent at politicians over the issue of nationalized healthcare. America is finally rising up and her citizens are demanding to be heard. The odor in the air that you smell if fear and it is coming from Washington, D.C.

Even the Democrats in Congress have started to feel the sting of public opinion, but they still fail to grasp the reality of this message. As if they were alcoholics in denial, they have begun to deny the validity of these protests, claiming they were staged by insurance companies who fear the passage of healthcare reform. They have gone so far as to accuse the people protesting of being paid plants, who were bused in and given instructions on how to appear that they were not together. They cannot come to grips with the reality that the American people do not want, need or trust the Federal government to control our healthcare.

In Austin, Texas this weekend, one of the embarrassments of our state, Representative Lloyd Doggett (D-Tex) held a poor excuse for a town hall meeting in the parking lot of a supermarket. It quickly became clear that the citizens at the meeting were far better informed about the healthcare issue than Doggett himself was. When he was pressed with someone asking him if he would support this bill even if he found the majority of his constituents strongly opposed it, he admitted that yes he would. Suddenly a voice arose from one of the many protestors carrying signs opposing socialized medicine and this Obamacare initiative, yelling, “Just say no!” The cry quickly rose across the group turning the meeting into an ad hoc political protest.

This was not an isolated event. In Philadelphia this weekend both Senator Arlen Specter (D-Pa.) and Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius were met with vociferous protests shouting “Read the bill!” Of course, the Democrats were not having it. Sebelius coyly chastised the crowd saying, “Excuse me… Excuse me! We can either stand here and shout at one another and then we can leave the stage, or we can have a conversation. It’s really up to you.” However, when the crowd engaged them in conversation, asking specific pointed questions about the bill, they were not impressed with their answers. When she talked about making sure Americans receive the best healthcare, they shouted “We already do!” When Specter spoke of the supporting Obama’s healthcare program he was quickly shouted and booed down. At one point a man shouted to Specter a simple question, “Will you sign up for it?” All Specter did was avert his gaze and continue prattling on about government run healthcare. At the mention of a single payer system, it almost seemed the crowd was about to set upon him. Shouts calling him a liar and demanding to know where the constitutional authority for this was could be heard among the continuous booing

Again, this was not an isolated incident. These happened everywhere, all around this nation. Yet, it seems that it is not enough to penetrate the stupidity and arrogance that permeates Washington, D.C. Today the Democrats are ignorantly claiming that all these events were staged. They seem to actually believe that the American people could not possibly be this passionate or have this much will to fight over the matter of healthcare.

I find this argument so odd coming from the Democrats, until you remember that this is not at all about healthcare, but about power over the individual. Most Democrats support a woman’s right to choose by claiming that it is her body and it should be her decision alone as to what to do with it and what medical procedures can be performed on it. Following that logic, it should be safe to assume that the right to decide what medical procedures can be done would extend to every American citizen, not just a woman attempting to use abortion as a form a birth control. However, with this plan that is not the case at all. Apparently, your right to choose is only important when you want to kill an unborn child, not when you want to determine which doctor you go to or what treatment you or your children receive to treat an illness. It seems that this warped form of logic makes perfect sense to Democrats, but it is completely lost on me.

As I have stated before this is a struggle for life and death and our ability to control both aspects personally. This is potentially one of the most threatening pieces of legislation that the American public and our individual liberties have ever faced. This must be defeated at all costs, or we lose the very ability to make decisions of a very personal nature.

I have not had much time to write over the past few days. Some changes are taking place in my personal life that have had me quite busy and I have been working on getting a project off the ground that has taken some of my time as well.

However, I have been keeping a close eye on this healthcare debate and it is scaring the hell out of me. I cannot believe that this is even under consideration, until I look at those pushing this agenda. There is so much subterfuge and deception surrounding this issue that it is almost impossible for the average American to get their minds around and understand what is really occurring. This administration and many in Congress are trying to shove this legislation down the throat of the American people, yet do so with coercion and deception.

Lie Number One – 47 Million Uninsured

For starters, the number of uninsured Americans in this country is greatly inflated. The 47 million that the President claims he is trying to cover is not as clear as you might think. Within that 47 million exist around 10 million illegal aliens, around 17 million that make well over the median income of $46,300 annually who could afford health insurance but choose not to have it and a small percentage of people who lacked health insurance for short periods of time only. Even if you just take number of illegal aliens and those who could afford insurance, but choose not to, you more than cut the 47 million figure in half, leaving only 20 million Americans uninsured, just 7% of the population. Some estimated put the number of critically uninsured as low as 8.2 million or 3% of the total.

Lie Number Two – The Government is the Solution

While I acknowledge that some healthcare reform is needed in this nation, I flatly reject the notion that it is the right, duty or business of the Federal government to mandate or control it. Constitutionally, not only does the Federal government lack any and all power over this issue, but it is explicitly barred from action on matters such as these via the 10th Amendment. Not to mention that what they are currently proposing will be drastically harmful to the healthcare industry in this nation. Just look at the example that the government provides in Social Security, Medicare and the Veterans Administration. All dismal examples of government waste, corruption and bureaucracy at one time or another. Now we are told that the government can reduce healthcare cost, improve quality and not reduce services. Even when the Congressional Budget Office releases report after report disagreeing with this claim and greatly expanding the projected cost of this program, it is just ignored. Even when the very sections of the bill that point out planned cuts to Medicaid and Medicare are pointed out, excuses are made and those calling foul are branded as cold hearted obstructionists. The plan currently in the House would create twelve additional government agencies just to deal with this massive undertaking, creating more inefficiency, waste and bureaucracy.

Lie Number Three – You Will Still Have a Choice

This is one of the most grievous fallacies of this entire fiasco. You will lose your ability to choose, period. For starters, the President has already made it clear that you will be forced to have health insurance whether you want it or not. No choice there. Now we hear that doctors will be rated and paid based on how well they treat an illness, not per patient or per procedure. Really? I want to know who in the hell decides by what benchmarks to gauge my doctor? What if I think my doctor has performed admirably, but some distant, detached bureaucratic moron in Washington, who has no clue about me or my doctor, decided that he is not as ‘efficient’ as they would like and decides not to pay him? How to I have a choice in that? When my personal physician that I have had for well on twenty years has to quit his practice because he cannot afford to function on his government allowance, where is my choice?

Now we discover the horrible truth about other aspects of this bill such as end of life care. After a certain age you will be compelled to meet with a ‘counselor’ every five years to discuss your future healthcare needs. Really? Discuss what about them? Why would I need a counselor at the age of 65 and beyond to discuss my healthcare requirements, unless you are planning on restricting the services available to me due to my age and failing health? You see once you pass the age of 65, you are not as good of an investment as when you are young and healthy. You have less time to live and you consume more resources via the healthcare system, therefore it only makes sense to a cold, calculating government bureaucracy that they not spend money on you. Sure they will offer to make you comfortable, but will not approve the procedure that might extend your life because the return on investment will not be enough.

Lie Number Four – Not a Single Payer System

While this statement may be true at this point, it will not be so for long. As Barney Frank openly admitted a few days earlier, this is a gateway to a single payer system.

“If we get a good public option it could lead to single payer,” Frank said. “The best way to get single payer — the only way — is to have a public option and demonstrate the strength of its power.”

You notice the words he chose there? Power. This is after all what this is really all about. Power. Power to control. Power to have millions depending on the government for their very health and survival.

The other part of this lie is that the private insurance companies can survive this ‘public option’ when it is more likely that it will cause the failure of most major insurance companies, costing this economy precious jobs and destroying the healthcare industry as we know it. The government option could be as much as 20% lower in cost for private business, since it will use taxpayer money to support the implementation of this program. How many businesses do you think would love to get a 20% reduction in the cost of benefits they provide to their employees? Suddenly, millions of people will be shoved onto this government program, taking critical market share away from the private insurance companies. Without the monthly premiums, these companies will not be able to provide for their remaining insured parties and will quickly fold, leaving even more people with nowhere else to turn but the government. Of course, that it the real objective of this, not healthcare at all.

Those are just four obvious ones. There are multitudes of more that I could expound upon, but these should be enough to wave us off of this destructive past. With the example of failures in the States where these single payer models have been tried such as Wisconsin and Massachusetts, we should be scare to death of even discussing any government run options at all. I sincerely hope that the governor of my great State meant what he said early last week. Governor Perry stated that if the Congress was foolish enough to pass this destructive legislation, Texas would assert her right under the 10th Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, and flatly refuse to conform or participate in any way. God bless that man and give him the strength to stand his ground should this disaster find its way into law. Should Texas refuse Federal interference and further usurpation of her citizens right by the Federal government, I believe that others would follow her lead.

This is a battle of life and death. Either you control your life or the government will control both it and your death.

Welcome to the USSA.

Allow me to post a an article titled Flipped Flag Signals Distress found in Weatherford Telegram, a smaller community oriented publication by its parent paper the Fort Worth Star Telegram. I am not exactly sure I approve of the tone that the very first sentence sets up for this article. To me it is no joking matter that one of the most patriotic people I have ever know has been pushed to the point that he feels it necessary to fly the flag upside down that he laid his life on the line for. It almost seems as if this poor attempt at humor is being made at this man’s expense. I sincerely hope that is not the case. I would hope that a serious reporter for the Star Telegram would be above making fun of a man whom this nation should be eternally grateful to.

Weatherford’s most profound patriot and staunchest supporter of the American flag has flipped (his flag).
 
Chuck Katlic, Battle of the Bulge survivor and American Legion Post 163 chaplain, is flying his flag upside down to draw attention to what he perceives as the USA’s distressed circumstances.
 
“Section 8 Article A of the United States Flag Code says to display the flag upside down when there is dire national distress,” Katlic said. “Our Congress and president are not obeying the Constitution. The first step was taking the gold standard off our money. Roosevelt started it, Johnson continued it and Nixon closed the door. Everyone who feels our nation is in dire distress should fly their flags upside down.”
 
Katlic said he believes that President Obama is imposing Marxist, Socialist rule on Americans.
 
“At the suggestion of Russia and China, Obama said he would consider one world currency,” he said. “They’re taking away states’ rights. They’ve made schools a government cabinet position, limiting what public schools (I call them government school, now) can teach.”
 
Katlic also believes that such people in Congress as Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, Representative Barney Frank and Senator Ted Kennedy want to “take away our guns.”
 
Admitting that “Nothing personally has been done to me,” Katlic said that “what’s being done to our citizens is that they’re being taxed to death, losing their homes. [Congress is] violating people’s Fourth Amendment rights, stopping them and searching their cars without warrants.”
 
Katlic said that he also fears that because the federal government allows abortions, “next they will be euthanizing older people. This is to reduce the population.”
 
Another concern Katlic expressed is that concentration camps are being built in Arizona “to put us in when we misbehave.”
 
Katlic said that every president after George Washington wanted to be a dictator, and that all politicians care about is power. His daily front-yard gesture is intended to raise awareness.
 
“I’ll fly my flag that this until Obama and Congress obey the Constitution, or they’re out, even if I have to do for the next four years,” he said. “I pledge my life, my fortune and my honor to do my part to turn our nation back to the founding fathers’ principles that have preserved our nation for 250 years. I call on all my fellow Parker County residents to fly their flags upside down, too.”

I know this man. I have gone to church with him since I was a child and my children adore him. He is not your normal run of the mill citizen of this nation. He is one of the few surviving young men that saw such horrors in Europe that we can scarcely imagine. He survived the frozen forests near Bastogne and held out through one of the toughest sieges our armed forces have ever faced. He is a patriot through and through, caring greatly for his God, his country, his fellow soldiers and his fellow citizens.

Some may try to dismiss him as a radical, right wing nut and I guess under this administration’s definition of such I would be one too. After all I believe in the rights of the State’s and the individual. I believe in the principles of the Declaration of Independence and of the founding of this nation. I believe that the Constitution means exactly what it frakking says and needs no manipulation or interpretation. I believe that this is and always has been a nation founded on and rooted in Christian principles, so much so that our first President warned us against straying from this religious bedrock.

I believe that I will be following suit with Chuck and I encourage you all to do the same thing. This most definitely is a nation under duress and distress. What better way to show it that by following the lead of such a great patriot as Chuck Katlic and sending a clear message to our government. I will turn my flags this weekend. I hope that you will do the same.

This weekend we celebrated our Independence Day once again. For miles around you could hear the detonation of fireworks that dotted the night sky with brilliant displays of color. Driving around our relatively small community, you could smell the grills cooking up the traditional 4th of July cuisine and see many boats being hauled out to local lakes for a cool foray on the water.

As we did on April 15th, our community hosted a TEA Party. Being the dutiful advocate of this concept, I decided to attend. After the tremendous response we got at the first one having only weeks to prepare and get the word out, I was expecting a massive turnout for this event since it had been planned months in advance.

If you recall, the first TEA Party in our small community drew a crowd of over a thousand people which for such a small community was able to rival many of the larger cities in the Dallas / Fort Worth area. We hosted that even at the intersection of two main roads in our town and marched to the courthouse square with hundreds of people holding signs bearing slogans that declared our disgust with government waste and demanding our rights be restored. It was a highly visible event that could be seen by many people not involved with the protest itself. I was extremely impressed with the turnout of the April 15th, TEA Party. Not so much with Saturday’s event.

While it was nice to have a live band to perform and wonderful to have Phil King, our Texas State Representative, and Michael Williams there to speak, the event was held at our local community college, far off of any main roadways and not visible to any who did not know to attend the event. It was even held in a small turnabout on the campus, surrounded by buildings that effectively shielded any passersby from seeing the event. The turnout was disappointing as well. At the high point of the event, the campus police were estimating a crowd of only 300 people, far below the 1,100 that was estimated at the last TEA Party. This could have been due to the time that was chosen for the event. I understand wanting to host this event on July 4th, but to host in from 5:30PM to 7:00PM might have been ill thought out. Many people were attending family events or heading out to see fireworks displays and having the event set so late in the day probably cut down on the attendance quite a bit. If you are going to go see any of the larger shows in our area, you have about a thirty minute drive and would probably already want to be there by this time if you intend to get any good parking spots. I know we would always get to Granbury by no later than 6:00PM to watch the display over Lake Granbury, else we would never find a decent place to park.

Furthermore, this just did not seem like what the event was meant to be. If this was to be a community 4th of July celebration, then it was a fine one, but this was to be a protest of government waste and excessive taxation. There were a scarce amount of signs bearing the style of slogans that we saw before. There was no march to display the message to the rest of the community. There was good music and great speakers, but something was definitely missing.

I do have to comment on one highlight of the event. When Phil King was talking about this nation’s economy, he highlighted how well Texas had survived the recession and how over 70% of the new jobs created last year were created right here in this state. At one point, he began to comment that if Texas were its own country it would have the 12th largest economy in the world above that or Russia or even India. He only got as far as “If Texas were its own country…” before being drowned out by cheering and applause. The response of the crowd even prompted him to add that he was not sure that it should not be. That was the only moment that I felt the real sentiment that was felt throughout the original TEA Party, the sentiment that we are fed up with what our federal government is doing and are not willing to stand idly by while our nation is destroyed from within.

Other than that one moment, I was disappointed in the event. I ended up leaving a tad early since my youngest son was not feeling well, but I am fairly confident that the last twenty minutes of the event would not have changed my opinion too much. Maybe I am partial to the first event, since I was involved with organizing it from its inception in our community, but I was just not impressed with the turnout, the location, the scheduling or the feel of the event in general. I left disappointed.

However, I do have some pictures that I will post up tomorrow…

Edit: It was noted that I did not include one important key note speaker. That omission was unintentional and has been corrected.

Once again we see the intolerance, violence and hatred of the left. There have been many leftists that I have disagreed with, vehemently at times. However, I can recall not one single incident where I actually wish physical harm to come to one, especially not publicly or to such a vicious level at to completely demean the subject.

Here is your tolerant left. Here are your champions of women’s rights. No. The sarcasm fails me. They are nothing of the sort.

Today, Playboy Magazine published a list a list called So Right, It’s Wrong. This is a list of the top ten conservative women that they would like to hate f*ck. You heard me right. I did not coin that term, it was used many, many times in the vile article posted on the Playboy website. That is until the cowards pulled the article due to the outrage it caused. If you want to view some of the postings, I found a website that captured screen shots of the insulting article before the spineless scum at Playboy pulled it. You can view the comments on these professional women and the abhorrent languages used to describe how they would like to have violent sex with them, on RedState (Caution: Content Possibly NSFW).

What I find so infuriating about situations such as this is that when it is a leftist showing their complete intolerance of, hatred of and violence towards others it is somehow acceptable. There has been no mainstream media condemnation of this vile assault against these women. None on the left have come forward to condemn the actions of these petulant children for their assault on these women. Just as when that complete waste of skin Perez Hilton assaulted Carrie Prejean because she gave an honest opinion that he did not share, the left can call these women horrible names and suggest vile actions against them and it seems acceptable.

However, we are not to criticize a judicial nominee based on her racist comments or horrible record from the bench, when the Democrats schemed to prevent Miguel Estrada from being nominated to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals based solely on the fact that he was Hispanic, ignoring that he was one of the most well respected trail lawyers and was supremely qualified.

We are told to be nice and not criticize President Obama’s dishonest, appeasing, apologetic speech where he panders to those who would just as well see us dead, when the left spent the last several years calling multiple members of the Bush administration everything from murders to Hitler himself.

We are said to be the sexist, racists, intolerant, ignorant rednecks, clinging to our guns and religion, but when you look for intolerance and hate, you only need to look to the left to find abundant examples. I will not stand for this hypocritical double standard bullshit any longer. Every single one of the people responsible for this article should be immediately terminated from Playboy. That means authors, producers, editors, researchers, etc. Everyone needs to be gone for this abomination against these women. I mean if Don Imus gets canned for a nappy headed ho comment, then these guys have to hit the pavement and hit it now.

No longer will I stand for the racist, sexist, hateful, bigot claims of the left. I dare anyone to bring that argument to me. I will bury anyone who does in multiple examples of bigotry and hypocrisy from the left. I am done with this hateful bullshit. I will stand for it no longer.

In a surprising decision this morning, the California Supreme Court ruled that the Proposition 8 definition that marriage is between a man and a woman and the subsequent ban on same sex marriage would stand. In a break with its traditional way of doing business, the Supreme Court in California upheld the will of its people and denied the attempt to circumvent the will of the people and the constitutionally legal process under which the proposition was made into law. It did allow that existing same sex marriages could stand, but no more would be allowed or recognized in the state according to the law.