A politician that "gets it" when it comes to American freedom and how Obamacare destroys it:

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 12:21 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 24 words, total size 1 kb.

Finally! A Politician that has really read the Constitution, and wants to conform to it ! You people in Vermont should consider giving Mr. Maslack a promotion and buck him up to the Congress or Senate, where he may be able to help the rest of the Nation regain it's roots.

Vermont State Rep. Fred Maslack has read the Second Amendment to the
U.S. Constitution as well as Vermont 's own Constitution very
carefully, and his strict interpretation of these documents is
popping some eyeballs in New England and elsewhere. Maslack
recently proposed a bill to register non-gun-owners and require them
to pay a $500 fee to the state. Thus Vermont would become the first
state to require a permit for the luxury of going about unarmed and
assess a fee of $500 for the privilege of not owning a gun. Maslack
read the "militia" phrase of the Second Amendment as not only
affirming the right of the individual citizen to bear arms, but as a
clear mandate to do so. He believes that universal gun ownership was
advocated by the Framers of the Constitution as an antidote to a
"monopoly of force" by the government as well as criminals

Vermont's constitution states explicitly that "the people have a
right to bear arms for the defense of themselves and the State" and
those persons who "conscientiously scrupulous of bearing arms" shall
be required to "pay such equivalent." Clearly, says Maslack,
Vermonters have a constitutional obligation to arm themselves so
that they are capable of responding to "any situation that may
arise". Under the bill, adults who choose not to own a firearm
would be required to register their name, address, Social Security
Number, and driver's license number with the state. "There is a
legitimate government interest in knowing who is prepared to defend
the state should they be asked to do so". Maslack says Vermont
already boasts a high rate of gun ownership along with the least
restrictive laws of any state - it's currently the only state that
allows a citizen to carry a concealed firearm without a permit. This
combination of plenty of guns and few laws regulating them has
resulted in a crime rate that is the third lowest in the nation.

This makes sense! There is no reason why gun owners should have to
pay taxes to support police protection for people not wanting to own
guns. Let them contribute their fair share and pay their own way.

Mr. Maslack IS more historically accurate... ...many citizens opted to pay a "war tax", for someone to fight in their place, in both the Spanish-American and Civil Wars, rather than be conscripted themselves to fight for the US.

If you are not going to serve "in the Militia", then you SHOULD have to pay a "tax" to "hire someone to take your place", and "be armed for the State" on your behalf, if you choose not to serve.

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 05:34 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 490 words, total size 3 kb.

Here's an idea whose time may just have come; in North Carolina, congressional candidate Will Breazeale has made a $250,000 promise to the voters.

He has put up $250,000.00 of his own money into what he calls a "bonded term limit". The money is held out of his control by a third party (bonding company); if Mr. Breazeale holds office for more than three terms, the money is given to a charity(s) to be named by the company.

"I see [bonded term limits] bringing about the largest power shift in this country since we became a country," Breazeale in a telephone interview shortly after the press conference. "This will be the standard one day. If you don't put up personal net worth, then you will not be elected."

I wish I resided in N.C. just so I could work for this guy to get elected...now if I could find I need to find a candidate like him here in IN !

Our nation needs to return to the citizen legislatures expected by our Founders and retire the career politicians and their "overlord" type of politics, it is up to us, the Electorate, to ensure that this occurs, and soon. Tyranny inevitably follows any other course taken.

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 11:41 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 213 words, total size 1 kb.

Here's a song about Obumble's actions to "save" the economy ...look around, do YOU see anything to be cheery about in this Administrations effort so far ?

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 02:28 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 39 words, total size 1 kb.

Thanks to Loyal Citizen Krondax at the Rott, we now have a visual scorecard of just WHAT Obumbles really has achieved so far...

As noted in an earlier post, even the Commies are smarter than Ear Leader and his merry band of cohorts.

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 08:48 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 49 words, total size 1 kb.

This is from Pravda, the Russian newspaper.
This guy is smarter than our own leaders.

H/T Rurik

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 08:36 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 29 words, total size 1 kb.

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 03:37 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 22 words, total size 1 kb.

In a representational Republic such as the United States was founded to be, it is imperative that the general population has at least some idea what their Representatives are proposing in the legislature.

Bringing 1000+ page bills up for a vote before even the representatives, much less their constituents, have a chance to study them should never be the order of the day.

Yet, Congress is fighting even the least opportunity to give those affected by upcoming legislation to even have a chance to read the proposals before they may be enacted into law.

Reps. Brian Baird, D-Wash., and Greg Walden, R-Ore., are circulating a petition among House lawmakers that would force all pending legislation be posted on the internet at least 72-hours before a vote on the legislation could take place.
I believe that this should be the bare minimum.

We are SUPPOSED to be a participatory form of government, but such participation is impossible if the contents of proposed legislation is unavailable prior to a vote; thus giving over great power to those in positions of leadership in both the House and the Senate.

This is not a political Party issue, at least it shouldn't be, unless those in the current majority Party don't want input from the minority Party or their constituents.... if that is the case, then I fear that we have taken one long step away from being a Republic and heading towards a tyrannical form of government our Founders would certainly not recognize.

Resident Obama ran on the statement that his would be "the most open Administration ever", it's time for him to back that statement up with action.
72 hours of reflection is not too much to ask when it is the life of every being in this country that will be affected.

It behooves all Patriots to take heed of what is going on, for the day may be coming sooner that we would like to believe to have to use the reset button of the Second. Amendment.

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 04:33 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 340 words, total size 2 kb.

One of the mantras continually coming from the Left side of the aisle about how EVIL the Big Health Insurers are is how they continually refuse to pay for procedures of their claimants to maximize their profits...

Two things to remember:

1) The HIGHEST net profit made by ANY Insurance company in 2007 was 3%...name any other business that operates on that low a profit margin. (most grocery stores operate on at least a 4-5% margin, if they want to stay in business)
The MSM and the Leftists trying to take control of our health care system always report the profit made by a particular company, but unless that figure is expressed as NET PROFIT MARGIN (ie, that profit that is left after total expenses,expressed as a percentage of funds risked) that figure can highly misleading. Saying company X "made $3Billion in profits" means nothing unless you also consider how much company X RISKED in that same time span to earn that profit. Remember that Government does not EARN one red penny itself, it can only tax YOU to get revenue to spend; and if it falls short of it's needed operating capital (UNLIKE an Insurance company, which would be forced out of business BY LAW if it's on hand assets fall below a mandated level), it simply raises the taxes you are required to turn over for it's use.

2) Just WHICH insurance entity carrier refused payment for treatment the greatest amount? According to the AMA, in 2008 it was Medicare...by a margin of almost DOUBLE (1.7%) of ALL other major Insurance entities COMBINED:

So the next time you hear about a politician pontificate about a "heartless Insurance Company", remember that to be TRULY "heartless"; you need the power of Government to REALLY achieve it.

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 04:42 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 302 words, total size 2 kb.

The following is an analysis of what the Health Care Bill as it currently stands contains. Even if your not a fan of Newt Gingrich, you have to at least consider the points he makes in this opinion piece.

The Democrats are proposing that government gains at least some measure of control over what amounts to 1/6th of our national economy;and in a manner that will affect EVERY single Citizen (and probably most Illegals too), it behooves every single one of us to become informed and keep an eye on what is being proposed and the probable effects of those proposals.

Don't take ANYONE'S word on it;do your own homework and use some common sense when you think about what the probable results of any particular legislation will be.

Will President Obama Veto Health Reform?
by Newt Gingrich

With the Senate Finance Committee poised to pass health care legislation, the final contours of the bill that could come out of Congress are starting to come into focus. The bill will contain new taxes on the middle class. It will add to the deficit. And it will put government bureaucrats between Americans and their doctors, among other things.

So it's not too early to ask the obvious question: Will President Obama veto health care reform?
It's worth asking because so many of the costs to taxpayers the President has repeatedly promised won't be in the legislation are, and so many of the benefits are not.
What follows is a list, in no particular order, of the contradictions between the President's promises and the reality of Democratic health care reform. Add them up and it's hard to see how President Obama doesn't reject the bill Congress seems likely to send him.

Contradiction #1: From a Promise Not to Raise Taxes
on the Middle Class to $2 Billion in "Penalties"
As far back as the campaign, President Obama promised he wouldn't raise taxes on Americans making less than $250,000.

But an analysis by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) found that at least 71 percent of the individual mandate penalties in Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus's (D-MT) bill would be paid by Americans earning less than $250,000. In fact, the nonpartisan analysis found that, of the $2.8 billion in penalties the bill imposes on those who do not purchase health insurance, a full $2 billion will be paid by taxpayers earning less than $120,000 for a family of four.

The Senate Finance bill also levies $215 billion in new taxes on employers and health insurers for offering high-value insurance benefits, which will surely be passed onto all consumers.

Republicans tried to ensure that President Obama's words would not ring hollow by offering an amendment that said: "This amendment provides that no tax, fee or penalty imposed by this legislation shall be applied to any individual earning less than $200,000 per year or any couple earning less than $250,000 per year." Democrats defeated it.

Contradiction #2: From a Promise to Reject a Bill That "Adds One
Dime to the Deficit" to $239 Billion Added to the Deficit
In his speech to the Joint Session of Congress, the President was adamant: "I will not sign [a bill] if it adds one dime to the deficit, now or in the future, period."

And yet House bill H.R. 3200 will increase the deficit by an amazing $239 billion over the next decade.

The Baucus bill pretends to be deficit neutral but it's an accounting gimmick. "It pays for itself" by forcing a new $250-300 billion unfunded mandate on the states. And it doesn't include nearly $300 billion that will be spent to adjust physician payments in Medicare.

Contradiction #3: From a Promise That "If You Like Your Current Plan
You Can Keep It" to Half of Medicare Advantage Benefits Being Cut
In his speech to the Joint Session of Congress last month and elsewhere, the President has reassured nervous Americans that if they like their current coverage, his reform will let them keep it.

Unless you happen to have Medicare Advantage, that is.

Or employer provided insurance.

The director of the nonpartisan CBO testified before the Senate that, under the Senate bill, the benefits of seniors under Medicare Advantage would be cut in half.

And an analysis of the House bill found that 88 million people will lose their current insurance under government health care.

What's more, both bills would disrupt vision care for more than 100 million Americans.

Contradiction #4: From "If You Like Your Current Doctor
You Can Keep Your Doctor" to Squeezing Doctors and
Hospitals Until They Reduce Patient Access
Here's what three doctors who are former chairmen of the American Medical Association (AMA) say about the cuts to Medicare in Democratic health reform bills:

"Now the government is saying that additional Medicare cuts are coming-thus forcing doctors to try and make up the difference in volume, by seeing more patients. If you ask patients about this, they understand that more volume means less time with the doctor. That's something that all patients and doctors should oppose. In time, it will be difficult to find a physician."

And here's what the executive director of the Mayo Clinic said: "We will have to violate our values in order to stay in business and reduce our access to government patients."

Contradiction #5: From a Promise that No Government Bureaucrat
Will Stand Between Patients and Doctors to a Medicare
Commission With the Power to Deny Treatment
Just this week, in a speech to doctors gathered in the White House Rose Garden, President Obama reiterated his pledge not to let a Washington bureaucrat get between a patient and their doctor.

But the Senate Baucus bill creates an "Independent Medicare Commission" with the ability to deny benefits to the elderly or the disabled based on a government calculation of the costs versus the benefits.

Contradiction #6: From a Promise to "Slow the Growth of Health
Care Costs For Our Families" to a New Tax on Hearing Aids,
Wheel Chairs and Breakthrough Drugs
In his speech to the Joint Session of Congress, the President pledged to "slow the growth of health care costs for our families, our businesses and our government."

But the Senate bill contains a tax on medical technology companies and drug makers that will raise the cost to American families for thousands of drugs and devices, including pacemakers, eyeglasses, hearing aids and powered wheelchairs.

Contradiction #7: From a Promise that Health Care Reform Will
Fix the Economy to New Taxes on Small Businesses
One of President Obama's main rationales for health care reform is that it is necessary for economic recovery.

Working against this promise is the provision in the Senate bill that will tax small businesses - the engine of American economic growth and job creation - that can't afford to purchase health insurance for their employees. It's hard to see how the economy recovers when small businesses are prevented from hiring new workers by a new government tax.

Contradiction #8: From Insuring All Americans to Leaving 25 Million Uninsured
One of President Obama's three basic goals for health care reform is to provide insurance to those who don't currently have it.

That's the promise. The reality? The CBO has determined that the Senate bill will leave about 25 million nonelderly Americans uninsured.

I could go on, but I think the point is made. The differences between what Americans have been promised from health care reform and what they are getting go beyond the usual give and take of Washington.

A Congress controlled by the President's party is producing health care legislation that blatantly contradicts his most basic, often repeated, promises.

What will the President do? Will President Obama veto health care reform?

Stay tuned.

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 09:09 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 1301 words, total size 8 kb.

From the "we've been here before" file:

"Do not blame Caesar, blame the people of Rome who have so enthusiastically acclaimed and adored him and rejoiced in their loss of freedom and danced in his path and gave him triumphal processions. ... Blame the people who hail him when he speaks in the Forum of the 'new, wonderful good society' which shall now be Rome's, interpreted to mean 'more money, more ease, more security, more living fatly at the expense of the industrious.'" --Roman statesman Marcus Tullius Cicero (106-43 B.C.)

Think of this quote the next time Teh One makes a public policy speech...

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 06:44 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 110 words, total size 1 kb.

Subject: Economic Stimulus Payment

Sometime this year, we taxpayers may again receive an Economic Stimulus payment.

This is a very exciting new program. I will explain it using the Q and A format:

Q. What is an Economic Stimulus payment?
A. It is money that the federal government will send to taxpayers.

Q. Where will the government get this money?
A. From taxpayers.

Q. So the government is giving me back my own money?
A. Only a smidgen.

Q. What is the purpose of this payment?
A. The plan is that you will use the money to purchase a high-definition TV set, thus stimulating the economy.

Q. But isn't that stimulating the economy of China ?
A. Shut up.

Below is some helpful advice on how to best help the US economy by spending your stimulus check wisely:

• If you spend the stimulus money at Wal-Mart, the money will go to China .
• If you spend it on gasoline, your money will go to the Arabs.
• If you purchase a computer, it will go to India .
• If you purchase fruit and vegetables, it will go to Mexico , Honduras
and Guatemala .
• If you buy a car, it will go to Japan .
• If you purchase useless stuff, it will go to Taiwan .
• If you pay your credit cards off, or buy stock, it will go to management bonuses and they will hide it offshore.

Instead, keep the money in America by:

1 spending it at yard sales, or
2 going to ball games, or
3 spending it on prostitutes, or
4 beer or
5 tattoos.

(These are the only American businesses still operating in the US .)
***
I'm going to go to a ball game with a tattooed prostitute that I met at a yard sale, and drink beer! Yay!

Maybe Obamanomics ISN'T so bad!

CARPE DIEM !

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 06:00 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 325 words, total size 2 kb.

Let's get this straight,

Obama's health care plan will be written by a committee whose head says he doesn't understand it.

Passed by a Congress that hasn't read it, and whose members will be exempt from it.

Signed by a President who smokes.

Funded by a Treasury chief who did not pay his taxes.

Overseen by a surgeon general who is obese.

And financed by a country that is broke.

Now, what could POSSIBLY go wrong?

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 10:24 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 78 words, total size 1 kb.

Mostly Cajun has a great post up that flies in the face of the apologies the Pretender in Chief has made to the world recently about how badly the developed nations, notably Britain, treated the world in the past, and the effect that had on those nations.

Kipling had it right in his poem The White Mans Burden. As bad as conditions indeed may have been in the subjugated areas in the Colonial Era, those conditions WERE ultimately vastly improved upon by the presence/actions of those Colonists.

H/T Rurick

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 05:58 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 97 words, total size 1 kb.

Bobby Earl has a good Op-Ed piece demonstrating the blatant double standards applied in our political system today.

Rep. Joe Wilson shouted "You Lie!" during an Obama address to Congress on health care (yes, it was rude; but demonstratively true), and in spite of a sincere apology, Rep. Wilson is being brought up for censure; meanwhile Rep. Alan Grayson (D-FL) states on the Congressional record that Republicans want Americans to "die quickly" if they get sick. In his "apology", Grayson states that he is sorry that "he and other Democrats didn't do enough to prevent their death" to some of those that have recently died and their families. Some apology - NOT!

WHEN will we see a censure motion against Grayson? (here's an offer for you; if you believe that there WILL be a movement for censure placed against Grayson, I have a great bridge I'd love to sell to you, cheap)

JUST ONCE, I would like to see parity in the treatment of politicians of both Parties when they do idiotic things...

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 05:08 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 179 words, total size 1 kb.

Unlike any other President I can recall of, The current pResident seems to be the focus of an almost religious type of adulation by his supporters...The MSM media discounts this view, but ZoNation demonstrates this with video proof that it is indeed so:

This is indoctrination heretofore only seen in such egalitarian societies as North Korea, Cuba, and the former Soviet Union...

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 04:37 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 68 words, total size 1 kb.