July 2009

Can We Recover Our Money?

by Bill O'Connell on July 9, 2009

Share and Recommend:

$18 Million for This?

$18 million folks, that’s how much the federal government is going to spend to improve the web site that tells us how they are spending the stimulus money. $18 million. They will be spending $9.5 through January, and another $8.5 million through 2014. I don’t need a calendar nor a calculator to figure out that’s five years from now. Are they trying to tell us now that this recession is going to last five years?

Stagnant Stimulus

If we remember President Obama and Vice President Biden telling us how urgently we needed the stimulus package and that there was no time to waste to avert a catastrophe. Right now the unemployment rate with the stimulus is higher than they told us it would be if they did NOTHING.

Less than 10% of the stimulus money has been spent with most of it being transfers to state and local government. The economy is showing signs of turning around on its own, and I say that because with such a small percentage of the stimulus having been spent it contributed little to the improving conditions. So naturally, the political class is starting to talk about another stimulus package. You would almost think that they wanted to drag this out.

Reminiscent of Roosevelt

Through the Great Depression, the steps that Roosevelt took didn’t turn the economy around. Unemployment remained high until World War II absorbed every able bodied man into the armed forces. Yet Roosevelt was elected to four terms in office. Why? The first three terms were through the Depression. Although Roosevelt’s policies didn’t work, he knew how to communicate on a personal level. He held “fireside chats.” He, through the radio, came into people’s living rooms and soothingly assured them that we have nothing to fear but fear itself. Trust Roosevelt, he will take care of us, he will see us through.

President Obama’s personal approval ratings continue to fly high, even as the wreckage of almost every campaign promise is strewn around the countryside. He is certainly likable and his election is historic, but will that be enough to carry him as his inexperience is laid bare at every turn. But, as the former governor of New York and Secretary of the Navy, Roosevelt had executive experience. Obama brought no executive experience with him.

Czars Aplenty

So who is running the government? Obama had 16-18 Czars, depending on who is counting, who are not vetted by the Senate like Cabinet Secretaries and a host of other appointees are. So where are the checks and balances? Even Robert Byrd is concerned that the may be violating the Constitution. If this weren’t so serious, you would think it was a pilot for a sitcom. What aspect of this administration is not out of control? Let’s hope we can all survive long enough to make it back to the voting booth.

Share and Recommend:

Comments (0)

Did Obama Lie?

by Bill O'Connell on July 6, 2009

Share and Recommend:

WASHINGTON (AP) – Vice President Joe Biden said the Obama administration “misread how bad the economy was” but stands by its stimulus package and believes the plan will create more jobs as the pace of its spending picks up.

Does that mean Obama lied? Biden lied? Where’s the outrage?

There is none, which is how it should be. But it is instructive to contrast this with what happened with President Bush. Bush relied on intelligence from the CIA, the French, the British and others. It all pointed in the same direction. The information was shared with Congress and there was overwhelming bipartisan support authorizing the use of force in Iraq with 40% of Democrats voting in favor in the House and 58% in the Senate. The senior members of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees, Republicans and Democrats saw the intelligence. When it was later determined that weapons of mass destruction could not be found, the mantra was “Bush lied.” The Democrats hid under their desks rather than refute that remark.

In the case of the stimulus, the projections of unemployment capping out at 8% rather than where it is today, prompting Biden’s mea culpa, was entirely within the control of the administration. It wasn’t corroborated by other nations’ agencies. In addition, every Republican in the House voted against it and all but three in the Senate. So in which situation would there be a more credible charge of lying?

But unlike the Main Stream Media and the statists, I am reluctant accuse them of deliberately lying about their policies. Perhaps, the aforementioned Main Stream Media and the statists will show some restraint in the future and return to the days of a spirited but honest debate on the issues? I’m not holding my breath.

Share and Recommend:

Comments (1)

The Somnambulant Press

by Bill O'Connell on July 6, 2009

Share and Recommend:

The press is sleepwalking. As I have been reading the press reports concerning the crisis in Honduras, I have been struck by the lack of interest by the press in the full picture. Other than Mary Anastasia O’Grady at the Wall Street Journal, no journalist seems to care about the facts in Honduras and whether this is truly a coup or following the rule of law and thwarting a dictatorial takeover of the government.

It seems like Honduras is lined up on one side and all the world on the other, and the uncontested facts on the ground tilt in Honduras’ favor. Castro, Chavez, and their leftist brethren, the OAS, and the Obama administration all seem to be backing the dictator wannabe Zalaya. It is quite a contrast to how the Obama administration dragged it’s feet in supporting Iran and now it is standing shoulder to shoulder with Hugo Chavez. And the main stream media lazily goes along.

With Fidel Castro at the end of his life perhaps some thought the leftest threat to the hemisphere coming to a close. However there is a new threat in Hugo Chavez. The difference is that Castro’s Cuba was a ward of the Soviet Union and once they could no longer afford to support him, Castro’s relevance began to wane. But Chavez has oil and does not need handouts and so is much more dangerous.

“This is a moment when the U.S. ought to be on the side of the rule of law, which the Honduran court and Congress upheld. If Washington does not reverse course, it will be one more act of appeasement toward an ambitious and increasingly dangerous dictator.” – O’Grady, WSJ, 07/06/2009

The World is Watching

The world is watching and taking the measure of Obama, and when push comes to shove they will choose where their best interests lie. If we will not stand behind democracy in our hemisphere, then other countries will try to cut the best deal they can with Chavez. North Korea gets bolder by the day. Iran kills its citizens and Obama wants to keep the door open to dialog. Weakness abounds and everyone can see it.

Share and Recommend:

Comments (0)

Beware the Barracuda

by Bill O'Connell on July 4, 2009

Share and Recommend:

If anyone thinks that Sarah Palin is beaten and is about to become a footnote in history, I would say to them, “don’t bet the rent on it.” In her address where she announced she was stepping down, she used a basketball analogy. After all, it was on the basketball court where she got the name “Sarah Barracuda.” She said what a good point guard does when facing a full court press is protect the ball, keep her head up with her eyes on the basket and she passes off at the right opportunity. What she didn’t say was what happens next. If anyone who watched Michael Jordan play knows, after passing off they don’t go sit on the bench. They maneuver into position to make the big play and if you take your eye off of them, they’ll kill you every time.

The Full Court Press

In the last year Sarah Palin has been hit with eighteen ethics complaints. Her record so far in these complaints is 15-0, with three still pending. The results of these complaints have been a lot of needless time and money spent by state employees investigating these complaints and clearing her name every time. The concern she expressed yesterday is that these are a distraction, a waste of state time and money robbing the people of Alaska of the limited government they deserve and it is also costing her family a fortune to defend. As you can see below, one of the ethics complaints is that she is raising money to pay her legal fees. So the full court press is throw every frivolous ethics complaint you can at her, complain if she tries to raise money to defend herself, bankrupt her if you can, and later you can complain that she spent too much time on these issues rather than on state business. Here is a summary of the complaints:

Troopergate — this one is the well known case where a state employee was fired for not doing his job. It also involved her sister’s ex-husband. The firing was deemed lawful.
Palin was accused of helping someone get a job in state government. I’m shocked, shocked that someone in politics actually helped someone get a job. Complaint dismissed by state personnel board.
Palin was accused of taking a public position on a mining ballot initiative days before the vote. Wow, she actually took a position. How refreshing for a politician. Any issue about it taking place within days of a vote is our misguided “campaign finance reforms” that curtail our First Amendment rights in the name of better government. Complaint rejected by the Alaska Public Public Offices Commission.
Palin filed “self disclosure” to get the Troopergate issue resolved once and for all.
Complaint filed by employee union over the firing of Mike Wooton, the trooper in Troopergate. Complaint dismissed.
Monagan, the individual fired in the Troopergate ethics complaint against Palin asked for a hearing to clear his name. The panel said there was no legal basis or jurisdiction for such a hearing.
Complaint filed with the Federal Election Commission about the $150,000 the Republican Party spent for her wardrobe. FEC said the expenditure was not banned.
Palin charged with abuse of power for charging the state when her children traveled with her. The personnel board found no wrongdoing. Palin agreed to pay $10,000 to the state to cover the costs.
Palin was accused of conducting an interview in the Governor’s office about the Vice Presidential campaign. Complaint dismissed by the state personnel board. I guess she should have conducted the interview outside. Let’s see, November in Alaska outside, perfect!
Palin accused of violating ethics law for campaigning for Georgia Senator Saxby Chambliss. Dismissed by state personnel board.
Complaint that Palin misused funds of the Alaska Seafood Marketing Institute to promote her political ambitions by using advertisements featuring her. Her crime was that she allowed the board to use her image and did so before she was picked by John McCain. Complaint dismissed after a personnel board investigation.
Complaint alleging interference in job hiring by an individual whose identity could never be verified. The name used was that of a character in a British soap opera. Palin’s attorney said that no one in the state of Alaska could be found with that name and the filer refused to use a real name so the case was dropped.
This and 14 allege that two employees on Palin’s staff worked on state time to help Palin before and after her Vice Presidential campaign. This complaint is still pending.
Same as 13 covering the other employee. Pending.
Complaint Palin improperly used state property, time and equipment for partisan political purposes, including posting on the Governor’s web site that she was running for Vice President. Dismissed as lacking merit by the state personnel board.
Palin accused of a conflict of interest because she wore clothing with an “Arctic Cat” logo on it because Arctic Cat sponsored her husband’s team. Dismissed.
Complaint alleged that Palin’s work with a PAC violated ethics laws by misusing her position and accepting outside employment. Dismissed as lacking merit by the state personnel board.
Complaint alleging Palin is misusing the governor’s office for personal gain by accepting money from the Alaska Fund Trust. The fund was established by supporters to help Palin defray her $500,000 in legal bills run up by fighting all these ethics claims she keeps winning. Brilliant strategy. Hit her with baseless ethics claims and then fight her ability to pay her bills. This is still pending.

Add to this the personal attacks by the likes of David Letterman, the recent Vanity Fair article and her enemies standing at the ready to file ethics complaints every time she tries to defend herself, let’s her opponents set the agenda. If allowed unchecked for the next three years, no one could recover from that. On top of that is her personal focus to do what is best for her state. She does not want to waste state money and time on dealing with ethics complaints rather than governing, but these complaints have to be dealt with and they seem to be coming at a rate of about one every three weeks. She defeats everyone of them but it is a drain.

An Unconventional Move

The pundits are saying this is the end of her career. But let’s look at this.

By stepping down, the ethics complaints will stop.
The people of Alaska can have a government that is not wasting time on these issues.
Her legal bills will stop climbing
She can probably make $50,000 to $100,000 per speech on the speaking circuit and quickly pay off her legal bills
She can hit the campaign trail for Congressional and Senate candidates in 2010. She is still very popular and a very successful fund raiser. This will pile up political IOUs for 2012
She can speak out forcefully against the reckless policies of the Obama administration, raising her profile without complaint (ethics and otherwise) that she is neglecting her state duties.
She can work on burnishing her foreign policy credentials. Remember she was only on the campaign trail for about 60+ days, trying to get in sync with John McCain’s positions while being mishandled by his staff. Now she can stake out her own positions, carefully and thoughtfully

Is this a risky move? Sure. But to continue the basketball analogy, how conventional was Michael Jordan’s style of play? He did things that no one ever saw coming.

The 2012 Campaign

Some pundits are saying that Mitt Romney probably can’t stop pinching himself with his new found good fortune. Is that premature? After all, he and Sarah Palin are basically in the same position. They are both former governors. Yes, it can be said that Romney finished his term in office while Palin is stepping down. However, Romney as governor of liberal Massachusetts has some things on his resume that he would probably like to live down. Palin accomplished a lot in a short time in office without the same albatrosses. She is doing what she thinks is right for herself and for Alaska, not following some tired political playbook. Her approval/disapproval rating among Republicans is 73/17 compared to Romney’s 57/18.

Brand New Ballgame

Not being in office allows her to set the agenda rather than having to react to other people’s agendas. She doesn’t have to hold back. Consider how Dick Cheney came out forcefully so speak against Obama’s policies when others in the Republican party were trying to find their voice. His poll numbers rose dramatically.

Sarah Palin can speak with conservative principles that win elections. When Republicans stick to their conservative roots they win. When they try to be moderate they lose. It will be interesting to see how this unfolds, but I can see Palin having just passed off the ball driving to the basket while her opponents watch the ball, and soar into the air for the ally oop and the score.

Share and Recommend:

Comments (0)

$787 Billion Porkulous Bill Breakdown

by Bill O'Connell on July 3, 2009

Share and Recommend:

Baby's Not Happy About the Stimulus Bill She's Stuck With

The colorful brochure arrived in the mail today titled, “Fighting For Long Island.” In it Congressman Tim Bishop extols the virtues of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, and how much bacon he brought home for the district. Inside the folder is a map of the 1st Congressional District with callout balloons showing all the locations where stimulus money will land. On first blush one is tempted to think, good job Congressman! But then I reached for the calculator.

By the Numbers

If you take the $787 billion and divide it by the 535 members of Congress (425 Congressman and 100 Senators) the stimulus bill works out to $1.47 billion per member. That’s a lot of dough. I then took out my calculator and tallied up all the monies on the map that “CONGRESSMAN TIM BISHOP Delivers Economic Recovery Funds To Long Island.” Just to be sure, I checked my numbers three times and the projects added up to $274 million. That’s not good. That means that our Congressman brought home less than 19% of his share, which means that a lot more backslapping members of Congress got more than their share. Throw into the mix that every Republican voted against the bill and probably were not considered too kindly on the receiving end, then we really got short changed.

Money In vs. Money Out

Although there are many people who like to believe that Uncle Sam is really some independently wealthy tycoon who showers his nieces and nephews with his largess, the sad reality is that the money all comes from us. So I wondered how much do we send to the Treasury?

The federal government does a pretty good job of concealing how taxes are broken down by congressional district, which is understandable as accountability at election time can be problematic. In 2004 the First Congressional District in New York ranked 60th in the nation in average income tax liability per tax return, at $8,310 per return. What percentile is that? Let’s see 60 out of 435 comes out to be about the 14th percentile, well above the midpoint. How much stimulus did our esteemed representative bring home? Somewhere around the 81st percentile well below the midpoint. So the bottom line is that our Congressman voted to have his constituents pay a very large share of stimulus money that will go to every other part of the country, while we spend years working off the debt. Brilliant!

Historically, New York gets about $0.79 from the federal government for every $1 that New Yorkers pay in taxes. So why do New Yorkers keep overwhelmingly electing Democrats to Congress who love to increase taxes that ultimately end up being sent to other states? Who are they working for (perhaps themselves)?

The Stimulus Was Really About Jobs

So let’s not get bogged down in costs when it’s jobs we’re really talking about. After all, passing the stimulus would keep the unemployment rate at 8% instead of 9% without it. Oops, it’s already at 9.5% and climbing.

Of all the projects identified on the map of the district, one had an actual figure, in bold, stating that it would create 1,000 jobs. That’s a nice figure, but let’s put it in perspective. There are about 233,000 people employed in the district. At a 9.5% unemployment rate that would mean about 22,135 jobs have been lost in this recession. So creating 1,000 jobs equates to about 0.4% employment. The particular project that was identifed with creating these 1,000 jobs was getting $184.3 million in stimulus money or two-thirds of all the stimulus in the district. That works out to us spending $187,300 per job created. Call me a conservative, but somehow I think that if we cut taxes by $184.3 million we would create a lot more than 1,000 jobs. But what we will have to do is raise taxes to cover the $184.3 million that we are spending to create these jobs which will probably turn right around and kill them or an equivalent number.

What Federalism Means to Me

Here is a “top ten” list of stimulus projects compiled by Senator Tom Coburn [R-OK]:

“Free” Stimulus Money Results in Higher Utility Costs for Residents of Perkins, Oklahoma
FutureGen: The Stimulus Earmark that Wasn’t, Becomes the Costliest Pork Project in History
Little-Used “Shovel-Ready” Bridges in Rural Wisconsin Given Priority Over Widely Used Structurally Deficient Bridges
$800,000 for little-used Johnstown, Pennsylvania airport to repave a back-up runway; the “Airport for Nobody” Has Already Received Tens of Millions in Taxpayer dollars
$3.4 Million for Wildlife “Eco-Passage” in Florida; Project Still May Take Years to Finish
Nevada Non-Profit Gets Weatherization Contract After Being Fired For Same Work
Non-Existent Oklahoma Lake in Line for Over $1 Million To Construct a New Guardrail
Taxpayers Taken for a Ride: Nearly $10 Million to be Spent to Renovate a Century Old Train Station that Hasn’t Been Used in 30 Years
Ten Thousand Dead People Get Stimulus Checks, Social Security Administration Blames a Tough Deadline
Town of Union, New York, Encouraged to Spend Money It Did Not Request For a Homelessness Problem It Does Not Have

Now if someone in Florida (No. 5) want to spend $3.4 million for a wildlife “eco-passage” (i.e., roadway tunnel for turtles) project, fine. The good people of Florida can pay for it. If the people of John Murtha’s district want to spend $800,000 (No. 4) to repave a backup runway in Johnstown, fine. Let those folks pay for it.

If it doesn’t cross a state line, or have a benefit for ALL Americans, it’s not the federal government’s business. That is my litmus test for federalism. There is nothing more idiotic than having me pay for your project while you pay for mine. Because it comes down to a perpetual power grab where those who stay in the government the longest get everyone to pay for their projects (so their constituents will re-elect them) and everyone else gets the bill. Just ask yourself how many federal functions have been moved to West Virginia (Robert Byrd 50+ years in the Senate). How much pork goes in to John Murtha’s district (38 years in Congress).

Spinning it for All it’s Worth

So look for the brightly colored brochure from your Congressman crowing about how many stimulus dollars they brought home, but just remember, if your Congressman hasn’t been serving for 20 years, he or she probably got fleeced and you got screwed. Enjoy holding the bag.

Share and Recommend:

Comments (0)

Stay on the Plantation

by Bill O'Connell on July 3, 2009

Share and Recommend:

On this Fourth of July weekend we will have many opportunities to celebrate the genius of the founding fathers who created this country. There is no other country like ours nor has their been. It was and is a beacon of hope for people around the world who we welcome, those who come here legally, to help continue to build this great country. Here is how Emma Lazarus described the new Statue of Liberty.

Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame,
“Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!” cries she
With silent lips. “Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore,
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

by Emma Lazarus, New York City, 1883

Liberals vs. Conservatives

The most stark difference, I see, between liberals and conservatives is that conservatives believe in the individual and their right to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness, while liberals believe in groups. And God help you if you stray from the Plantation of your group. Groups, like blacks for instance, have “leaders”. For years if you wanted to know what blacks thought about an issue you asked Jesse Jackson. He would tell you what blacks thought and then he would tell blacks what they are supposed to think. If your skin was black, you belonged in the group called “blacks” and Jesse Jackson was your leader, no independent thought, no dissension, he was it. He would collect the money from the coffers of the guilt ridden whites, take his fair share, and preside over the distribution of the rest. In return to access to power he would tell blacks to always vote Democratic. It was a very lucrative career for Jesse Jackson. For blacks? Not so much.

If you were so bold as to be a black with an independent mind such as Clarence Thomas, Condoleezza Rice, Larry Elder, Walter Williams, Michael Steele, Janice Rogers Brown, J.C. Watts, and many more, watch out. You were to be condemned in the vilest language imaginable for your failure to surrender your soul and pledge your fealty to the black leadership.

But this country was built on individual rights, the Pursuit of Happiness, not the guarantee of Happiness. This country was not founded on the principles of taking from the successful and giving handouts to those who are not, either through misfortune or sloth. Those suffering from misfortune were cared for by organized religion and charity. Liberals believe that government should use its enormous power to steal from successful individuals and give to whoever they deem to be needy. There is no clearer demonstration of this than in who gives to charity.

– Although liberal families’ incomes average 6 percent higher than those of conservative families, conservative-headed households give, on average, 30 percent more to charity than the average liberal-headed household ($1,600 per year vs. $1,227). — RealClearPolitics

Consider for example, “Buck-a-Day” Biden, who gave an average of $1 per day to charity, although being a millionaire, with an annual salary of $174,000 per year. In a formulation that liberals like to use, Joe Biden earns that much money before his head hits the pillow on New Year’s Day. But he keeps virtually all of it and from his seat of power tells us how it is patriotic to pay more taxes to fund pork projects for his favored groups.

The Hunt for the Latest Escapee from the Plantation

Lieutenant Ben Vargas is a New Haven Connecticut firefighter. He had the audacity to pass a test for promotion and fight for the promotion he won when the city of New Haven invalidated the test because no blacks made the cutoff. You see, Ben Vargas is Hispanic and as such liberals have assigned him to the group that includes all Hispanics. When not protesting how not every Hispanic is successful, Hispanics are required to fight for other groups if they are not all successful. Ben Vargas stood up for his rights and was assaulted by a black man in the bathroom of Humphreys East Restaurant and ended up in the hospital. Having wandered off the plantation, the Hispanic firefighters association publicly refused to back him up.

Lieutenant Vargas, who posted the sixth-highest score on the exam, was ridiculed as a token, a turncoat and an Uncle Tom — all of which, he said, “made my resolve that much stronger.” — NY Times, July 3, 2009

This case has achieved notoriety because of the nomination of Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court. This case came before her and was dismissed with little explanation. The Supreme Court just overturned the decision 5-4. Now Lieutenant Vargas is set to become Captain Vargas. Here are his views:

“I consider myself an American — I was born and raised here,” he said in an interview on the porch of his home in the wooded suburb of Wallingford. “I love my people. I love my culture. I love our rice and beans, our salsa music, our language — everything my parents raised us with. But I am so grateful for the opportunity only the United States can give.”

That’s the American Dream.

Share and Recommend:

Comments (4)

Honduras: Coup or Rule of Law?

by Bill O'Connell on July 1, 2009

Share and Recommend:

Brothers in Arms

When I first heard the news of a “coup d’etat” in Honduras I thought, “This isn’t good.” America cannot be a champion of democracy if we only support democracies where we like the outcome. Recall the coup in Venezuela that ousted Hugo Chavez for a couple of days, and we got behind it. But he was elected and to avoid being hypocrites we have to support the process.

Not So Fast

As more news came out about exactly what happened in Honduras, it became clearer that the military was following the democratic process not subverting it. The bad news is that while President Obama kept silent or tepid at best regarding Iran, he came out forcefully on the side of Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez condemning the military’s action in Honduras.

Here is a rundown on what is going on in Honduras as reported in the Wall Street Journal on June 29 and June 30:

Honduran President Manuel Zalaya is term limited. He wanted to put a referendum on the ballot to change the constitution and lift the limits on his term so that he could be re-elected.
While Honduran law allows for a re-write of the constitution the power to do that does not lie with the president but with its Congress.
Zalaya declared the vote on his own and got the ballots to distribute from Hugo Chavez in Venezuela
The Honduran Supreme Court ruled that the referendum was illegal because such referendums are forbidden by the constitution within six months of an election.
The military followed the Supreme Court ruling and refused to distribute the ballots which is its usual role
Zalaya fired the chief of the army and planned to proceed with the referendum against the Supreme Court ruling
The Supreme Court ordered the general be reinstated, Zalaya refused
The Honduran Attorney General and the Supreme Court said Mr. Zalaya would be prosecuted if he followed through
Zalaya decided to proceed. Supporters broke into where the ballots were being held and distributed them against the Supreme Court order
Zalaya was arrested and is in exile in Costa Rica
The Honduran Congress met in emergency session and named the President of Congress as the interim president of the country. They further stated that the elections would proceed on schedule in November. The military was no longer in control. The Supreme Court said the military acted on its orders

A Disturbing Pattern

Maybe it’s just me, but I see a disturbing pattern here. In Iran where democracy is being clearly trashed, President Obama was extraordinarily restrained in criticizing the mullahs, while they shot their people in cold blood for exercising free speech and free assembly. In Honduras, the government is carefully following the rule of law and its constitution while its president tries turn it into a dictatorship along the lines of Venezuela, and they are roundly condemned by President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton. President Obama lines up with Ahminedinjad, Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez, and against democracy.

Here at home he is orchestrating a massive expansion of government power and intrusion into every last detail of our lives. Our liberty to live our lives as we choose is draining away. I’m concerned. Are you?

I’ll see you at the Tea Party tonight in New York.

Share and Recommend:

Comments (0)

Next Entries →

July 2009

Can We Recover Our Money?

Did Obama Lie?

The Somnambulant Press

Beware the Barracuda

$787 Billion Porkulous Bill Breakdown

Honduras: Coup or Rule of Law?

Recent Posts

Archives

Blogroll