Liberty

Queue Up for the Loyal Opposition

by Bill O'Connell on November 4, 2008

Share and Recommend:

Apologies to Yogi Berra, but it appears that Barack Obama will be the 44th President of the United States.  He displayed extraordinary political skill on par with Bill Clinton.  As commentator Juan Williams put it on Fox News, Obama was the stealth candidate.  He spoke in platitudes about hope and change, but he was flexible on the details.  In a period of just a few weeks his famous claim of a tax break for anyone making under $250,000, became $200,000 and through other allies it continued to decrease to $150,000 (Biden) and then $120,000 (New Mexico governor Bill Richardson).

Obama campaigned furiously against George W. Bush, despite Bush not being in the race.  McCain was no match for him as far a political skill was concerned.  McCain refused to mention Reverend Jeremiah Wright in the campaign, he failed to explain how his involvement during the bailout debate got the Republicans back in the game when Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid effectively shut them out of the discussions until McCain got involved.  Where else did he fall short?

  • He failed to adequately explain his health care plan leaving him open to attacks from Obama which went largely unchallenged.
  • He took a pounding from Obama and Biden who said he voted with Bush 94% of the time, but he failed to tie Obama to Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi when Congress had an approval rating about half of what Bush had

The Next Four Years

As the loyal opposition we have to be on guard and speak out against the radical positions that Obama has espoused, but are out of sync with the American people, only 27% of whom call themselves liberal.  What to watch for:

  1. The Fairness Doctrine — this is an effort to squelch our voice.  The Fairness Doctrine which was set aside by Ronald Reagan, required that a broadcaster provide equal time to present opposing viewpoints whenever a political position was expressed.  This would mean that if a radio station broadcast a popular show like Rush Limbaugh, they would have to broadcast three hours of an opposing viewpoint such as was heard on Air America, the liberal network that failed for lack of listeners.  Faced with this, many broadcasters would drop talk radio and go back to playing Top 40s.  Liberty under attack — The First Amendment guarantee of free speech
  2. Card Check — Right now if a union wants to organize a workforce there are two methods that can be used:  a secret ballot, or by having the potential members fill out a card and give it to the union.  They choice of which method is to be used is up to the company, many of whom choose the secret ballot.  Unions want that choice to be theirs and they favor the card system.  This would allow the union to apply pressure to workers at home and other places off the job.  This is even opposed by none other than George McGovern, who has run commercials opposing the union’s position.  (McGovern Interview on YouTube) Liberty under attack — the secret ballot.
  3. Redistribution of Wealth — Obama has spoken extensively, although not recently excepting the Joe the Plumber slip, about the redistribution of wealth.  Joe “Buck-a-Day” Biden, which represents how much this multimillionaire gives to charity, says that paying more taxes is our patriotic duty.  Obama scoffs at descriptions of him as a socialist, by saying that if he gave half his peanut butter sandwich to a schoolmate, he’d be called a socialist.  But sharing your peanut butter sandwich with a schoolmate is charity, having your teacher take away your peanut butter sandwich, your cell phone, and your Legos, and give them out to your schoolmates and maybe, maybe, give you half of your peanut butter sandwich back, that’s socialism.  Liberty under attack — The Fourth Amendment right to be secure in your person, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.
  4. Bankrupting the Coal Industry — The United States generates 49% of its electricity through coal.  With more and more focus on electric cars and other alternatives to using foreign oil.  Obama has said that “If someone wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can.  It’s just that it will bankrupt them.”  We are the “Saudi Arabia” of coal, with an estimated 200 year supply.  To take coal off the table, would be very dangerous and increase not decrease our dependence on foreign oil.  Liberty under attack — our economic freedom.
  5. Crisis — According to Joe Biden, we have about 6-8 months before we will have a crisis to test Obama.  Many liberals point to the budget surpluses of the Clinton Administration as proof of the prudent fiscal leadership of the Democrats.  However, they accomplished those surpluses mainly by gutting the military.  This led to some of the disasters of 9/11/2001 and what followed.  At a time like this and with Obama’s plans for massive increases in government spending, what will happen to our military and as a result what will happen to our ability to deal with a crisis.  Liberty under attack — providing for the national defense

This is an historic moment in American history with the election of the first African American as President of the United States.  As the loyal opposition, it is our duty to make clear whenever he and his followers stray from the principles on which this country was founded, those of Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. We must make sure we fight any challenges to the First Amendment and we must preserve our ability to raise our voices and speak our mind.

God Bless the United States of America

Share and Recommend:

Crushing the Fourth Estate

by Bill O'Connell on November 1, 2008

Share and Recommend:

It has been reported that Barack Obama has kicked three newspapers off his campaign plane for the remainder of the campaign.  The newspapers whose reporters have been kicked off are:

  • Dallas Morning News
  • Washington Times
  • New York Post

These are not small time newspapers.  It is also reported that these newspapers will possibly be replaced by Essence and Jet magazines.  What is the common thread among these three newspapers?  Their editorial boards have all recently endorsed John McCain.

This is the man of proclaimed even temperament, who wants to reach out, to heal the divisions in Washington.

Silence the Opposition

One of the first steps typically taken by a dictatorship is to silence the media.  One of the fundamental liberties embedded in our constitution is freedom of the press.  However this and other instances indicate that such freedom is under attack. There have been other accounts were Obama lawyers has threatened radio stations for playing certain ads or having guests with a viewpoint critical of Obama.  There are instances of videos being yanked from YouTube because they cast Obama in a bad light.  This is a very troubling side of Obama that many Americans do not see or realize.

Share and Recommend:

Liberty in Obama’s Crosshairs

by Bill O'Connell on October 28, 2008

Share and Recommend:

[the Warren Court] “didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution, at least as it has been interpreted.” — Barack Obama interviewed on Chicago Public Radio WBEZ-FM September 6, 2001

On January 20, 2009, Barack Obama may be standing before Chief Justice John Roberts, place his hand on the Bible and take the oath of office of the President of the United States and pledge to “preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution.”  Can he take such an oath with a clear conscience?

Obama’s View of the Constitution

Steven G. Calabresi writes in the October 28th, 2008 Wall Street Journal, describing how Obama’s philosophy is that justice should not be viewed by our courts in a legal sense, but rather in a social sense.  Social justice means just what he said to Joe the Plumber, spreading the wealth around is a good thing.  Not only is it a good thing, but it should be guaranteed by the constitution.

What this means is that he believes that if an individual goes to court and has a hard luck story to tell, the judge should rule in that individual’s favor, regardless of the legal merits of the case. As Mr. Calabresi writes, “Empathy, not justice, ought to be the mission of the federal courts, and the redistribution of wealth should be their mantra.”

The Threat to Liberty

How does this impact our individual liberty?  Well, liberty is defined as freedom from arbitrary or despotic control.  So if a homeless person, breaks into your house and eats your food, he should not go to jail or be punished.  Perhaps if he vandalizes your house, he may be punished, because that wasn’t necessary.  However, if you were his former boss and you laid him off or fired him, then maybe the vandalism is okay.  If you have food and can afford to buy more, then the homeless have a right, constitutionally protected, to take yours.  Now you may well say, that will never happen!  Maybe so, but then you will see the next best thing, the government will take the equivalent of your food in the form of your wealth and give it to the homeless person.  And just what is the difference between a criminal with a gun, and the government with the power to throw you in prison when the goal of both is to take your wealth.

What Did the Founders Think?

The reasons the founders incorporated what Obama calls “essential constraints” into the Constitution was their deep seated distrust of a powerful government.  They knew the power of a government that paid little heed to their liberty.  They threw off that government with the Declaration of Independence.  They were fearful of putting a similar one in its place.  They felt that individuals should be free to enjoy Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness, and that government is necessary, but should be minimal.

Listen for yourself:

Obama Redistribution of Wealth

Share and Recommend:

Is the Fairness Doctrine Fair?

by Bill O'Connell on October 23, 2008

Share and Recommend:

Republican John Boehner is challenging Senator Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico who is talking about bringing back the Fairness Doctrine.  Nancy Pelosi is on board as well as many other Democrats.  Like many laws that come out of Washington, the put a nice label on it (after all who’s against fairness?) to hide the toxic material within.

The Fairness Doctrine is really about the suppression of free speech with the fig leaf of a “Mom and Apple Pie” name.  What really would happen is that a radio station agrees to air, let’s say, Rush Limbaugh for two hours.  Ratings are great, the advertisement revenues are strong, and life is good for the radio station.  The Fairness Doctrine kicks in and the station is required to air two hours of an opposing viewpoint, say Air America.  Listeners bail left and right, ratings plunge, advertising revenue falls off a cliff, because just like the real Air America, no one tuned in.  Nobody really wants to hear two hours of dull, unimaginative, Bush bashing.

The next week the radio station says to Rush, thanks but no thanks.  You were great, but for every minute we put you on the air, we have to put the other guys on the air.  Our competitors switched to music and they are doing fine.  We will also change our format from talk radio to Top 40s.  Sorry, Rush.  Sorry, America.

So it’s not about fairness, it’s not about improving the exchange of ideas, it’s about suppressing one of the few media outlets that liberals don’t control.  Liberals have the main stream media, they have most of the newspapers, they have NPR, they have the broadcast stations, but they haven’t found a way to silence talk radio, which is the loudest voice that calls them to account on positions and challenges them.

It a way to consolidate their power.  Win the Presidency, control both Houses of Congress, with veto proof majorities, nominate liberal justices to the Supreme Court, tip the balance of the electorate so that the majority don’t pay taxes, and to make sure it is almost impossible to speak out, suppress talk radio.

What do you think?

Share and Recommend:

Dismal Debate

by Bill O'Connell on October 16, 2008

Share and Recommend:

Watching the third and final Presidential debate I can best sum it up by saying A pox on both your houses! In the midst of a very precarious financial situation both candidates talked about how they were going to get more deeply enmeshed in all of our lives.  The tenth amendment of the constitution states:

“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

In other words if it’s not spelled out in the constitution, it is not a federal function.  Seems like a pretty good idea, no?  Keep government as close to the people as possible.  What we are witnessing is a massive gathering of all government at the federal level.  Where in the Constitution does it say that education, health care, teacher’s salaries, and pension plans are the responsibility of the Unites States?

In 2006, the IRS took in $1.3 trillion in taxes from individuals and last night the candidates said that government wasn’t big enough!  We need to add more programs. We need to take more tax revenue (but only from the rich).  Both candidates will balance the budget.

What we need to do is print out the tenth amendment, laminate it, and require every politician carry it in his or her wallet and then read it aloud before voting on any bill or law.  The way out of this mess is to put together a plan to disassemble the New Deal, The Great Society, No Child Left Behind, cut taxes massively, and let the States, the counties, the cities, the towns and the villages address the issues that lie within their borders and be accountable to the citizens that live therein.

Liberty is not about more government to run every aspect of our lives.  It is about the minimal amount of government that is necessary so that we can have the right to live our own lives as we see fit.

Share and Recommend:

Save Me, I’m Drowning!

by Bill O'Connell on October 14, 2008

Share and Recommend:

What brings someone off the sidelines and into the game?  I have always enjoyed history and politics.  I savor a meaty conversation with both conservatives and liberals.  Up until now those conversations have been private.  I generally kept my views concealed from strangers.  As the 2008 Presidential election draws near I have become more concerned about the loss of our liberty.  Both candidates have, to one degree or another, taken liberties with our liberty.

Government has grown enormously and shows no sign of abating.  The larger our government becomes, the less liberty we enjoy.  The more complex it becomes, the less it is a government of the people, by the people, for the people and more a government of, by and for the bureaucrats.

One of the primary arguments against term limits is that it takes time to understand the complexity of government and if we employ term limits the politicians would be forced out of office just as they were starting to understand it.  Does that scare you?  It certainly scares me.  I see a permanent underclass of bureaucrats who really run the government, and our representatives and we are just dragged along for the ride.

Consider the financial emergency we currently face.  When Treasury secretary Hank Paulson came up with his $700 billion rescue plan it was said to consist of 3  pages.  When the House of Representatives crafted that into legislation it became 110 pages.  That was voted down and then the Senate produced their version.  That one weighed in at 450 pages.  Think about it.  Suppose you are a Senator.  You have to vote on this critical issue and time is perilously short.  Do you have time to sit down and read a 450 page document?  Not only read it but comprehend it and all of its implications?  Or do you rely on staffers and lobbyists telling you what it says and how you should vote?  From 3 pages to 110 pages to 450 pages in about a week and a half.  That is simply staggering.

As I watched this debacle unfold, I envisioned Lady Liberty sinking into New York Harbor, struggling to tread water.  The turning point for me was reading that Christopher Buckley, son of the conservative icon, William F. Buckley, Jr., was going to pull the lever for Barack Obama.  Before Lady Liberty slipped beneath the waves I felt compelled to heave a lifeline to the ol’ gal and dive in.

It is my strongly held belief that to a great extent we have forgotten what liberty means.  We have forgotten the principle upon which this nation was founded and the ideal for which hundreds of thousands of Americans shed their blood to protect and defend it.

It is my purpose and intent, in my own meager and humble way, to reignite that spark and, rekindle that flame so that Lady Liberty’s torch can continue burning brightly as a beacon for the world rather than a remain on the sidelines, sadly shaking my head as the torch flickers out.

Share and Recommend:
© 2008 Liberty's Lifeline. All Rights Reserved.