The unbrella of federal corruption …

August 2, 2010

If Obama’s DOJ prevails in the courts re Obamacare, THEN it will have succeeded in undermining the 10th Amendment irreparably.

If the courts determine the federal government has the constitutional authority to force the citizens of a given state to purchase a product from a private company, THEN it can force our people to buy anything that hypothetically, theoretically, actually, or virtually, crosses a state’s border. It might even, by fiat, “deem” it to have crossed such a line.

How you ask? By default. Following such a decision, name one product which that wouldn’t fall under that umbrella?

You might suggest a product produced exclusively within the borders of a given state. I would counter, only if 100% of the product is produced in the state, not 99 44/100%. If so much as a lubricant came from another state, Then it would fall in the shade. If the plastic wrap on the packaged good came from another state … bingo!

I would really be interested in hearing your thoughts on this one.


OBAMA: Madman in Drag

April 1, 2010

A major philosophical difference exists between the worldview of the man in our White House and that of the ordinary American; it’s one thing to believe in oneself for the purpose of motivation but despotic to literally believe oneself.

Bottom-line little difference exists between a Timothy McVeigh (or Hutareans) and a Barrack Obama … only shades of gray! I believe Obama sees himself as a Pharaoh reincarnate.


Wolf to Red Riding Hood – “I am not a wolf!”

February 1, 2010

” … the things that proceed out of the mouth come from the heart, and those defile the man. For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, slanders.” Matthew 15:18-19 [see below for quote in context]

In his diatribe to the Republican Caucus (January 2010) President Obama declared, “I am not an ideologue!” (stunned silence follows with isolated chuckles) “I’m not!” He pleaded.

Well, he is free in this country (at least for the time being) to declare or deny anything he wants but truth is unchanging … ask Christ declares above.

Sorry Barak, you are what you present yourself to be … an ideologue is “One given to fanciful ideas or theories” [Webster’s Revised Unabridged Dictionary, © 1996, 1998 MICRA, Inc.]

Jesus said, “Are you still lacking in understanding also? Do you not understand that everything that goes into the mouth passes into the stomach, and is eliminated? But the things that proceed out of the mouth come from the heart, and those defile the man. For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, slanders. These are the things which defile the man; but to eat with unwashed hands does not defile the man.” Matthew 15:16-20


Vetting the American Narrative – Imperative …

January 16, 2010

Geoffrey P. Hunt, writing in the American Thinker, revealed something about our sitting president which ought to warn Americans about the men and women we allow to nurse at the public teat, regardless of their political affiliations or persuasions.

Obama doesn’t have a narrative.  No, not a narrative about himself.  He has a self-narrative, much of it fabricated, cleverly disguised or written by someone else.  But this self-narrative is isolated and doesn’t connect with us.  He doesn’t have an American narrative that draws upon the rest of us.

In this country,  as to possession of an American narrative, voters must vet those who want to serve. That, in my mind, is what electrified us about Sarah Palin. A cursory exam of President Reagan would quickly show his.

Do we really want people without a connection to the historical American family serving in public office? Nay, I say, nay!

A review of this country’s greatest political debacles would show poisonous shrubs, absent healthy roots.


BAILOUTS: They lie! They lie!

June 25, 2009

“there is nothing covered up that will not be revealed, and hidden that will not be known.”

Luke 12:2

The word on the street is that the Fed’s will not bailout the states. The state most often mentioned in these discussions is California.

I lived in California for five decades (1957-2007); twenty of those years were in or around the Silicon Valley, twenty more were in pastoral ministry all over the state. I earned an undergraduate degree and two graduate level degrees in the tarnished Golden State. It’s tarnished due to an entrenched corrosion called liberalism.

At this date the Obama White house is approaching its first six months anniversary; one thing is clear – Rush is right: “It’s not what they say but what they do that matters to Citizen Taxpayer.” [my paraphrase]

Obama says they will not bailout the states, but watch what he does. His administration will do what has been done in other unpopular areas (TARP, auto bailouts, Wall Street vs Main Street, …); he will simply dress bailouts in drag.

They won’t be called bailouts, they won’t be channeled through normal channels, there’ll be no legislative oversight, and God forbid if  there is a judicial review. It will smell like a bailout, look like a bailout, feel like a bailout, and each state’s shortfall will disappear just as they would under a bailout … but no one will be allowed to call it a bailout.

The White House budget office will simply shift numbers from credit to debit on the state’s books; a similar but opposite shifting of entries on the federal ledger will simultaneously take place with a “eureka” net flow of cash credits to each state equal to its deficiencies. Voilà!

Your state officials, both elected and appointed, won’t care about the long-term effect of this quasi-borrowing because the actual borrowing will be against the federal accounts.

However, the entanglement with the Feds will result in the same web of controls as the auto makers, insurance industry, and banking industry experienced under TARP funding.

Suddenly you state’s 10th Amendment sovereignty has been taken down a notch; those illegitimate children you elected to represent you won’t notice or care, because it was their collective butt that was saved. What’s a little sovereignty anyway? We’re all Americans in the end, right?

Mark my words: when the dust settles, it won’t be liberal entitlements providing the funds for this slight of hand, it’ll be conservative or family values programs that will cough up.


WEALTH: Since January 20, 2009

June 25, 2009

Let no man seek his own, but every man another’s wealth.

1 Corinthians 10:24

Until January 20, 2009, wealth (discretionary property in the private sector) in the United States was always viewed as under the legal control of its possessor (i.e., earner/inheritor).

Since January 20, 2009, it has become increasingly clear our federal government sees this as an anachronistic view; the former is now morphing into the view that wealth belongs to the state, regardless of source or title (e.g., AIG, GM, Chrysler, health care industry & taxpayers).

Perhaps the illegal enactment of the income tax was the true genesis of this morphing and what we now see taking place … a slow usurping of states rights and therefore individual rights.

Since its formation, Americans have understood the dangers of an untethered central government, yet, in spite of the dangers, they have persistently cooperated with it and its programs.

This predilection has set the American people up, painting them into a no-win corner by the current administration (specifically regarding their 14th Amendment rights).

Rampant ignorance of the US Constitution and the Founder’s intentions, compounded by voter apathy, has endangered us all, as well as our possessions.

This government is patently and egregiously dangerous to its people; if SCOTUS does not find a way to intervene on behalf of the American people, those people are doomed.