Government Take Over

The Democrats now realize they are going to lose control of congress but are determined to do every bit of damage and private sector acquisition they can.

Since Obama has taken office they have voted to take over Auto companies, Banks, Health Care, college loans, they are working on total control of industry through the EPA, without even passing legislation, and now they are trying to take control of the internet.

Was the federal government ever meant to own any part of the private sector or businesses? Does the Constitution give them any permission to have control over any of these things? We seem to be forgetting the lessons and warnings of our founding fathers.

Doesn't it concern anyone that they tell constant lies through the media, a practice every other nation calls propaganda but we just call bias?!!

No we would never give up our freedom. We would always listen to the warnings of our founding fathers. That's why we wanted to make Washington a King only a few short years after getting out from under just such a situation with England. We were willing to do that because Washington was a good man. Too few people were considering the long term.

We are more than happy to look at or at least pretend to look at the long term concern ecology and global warming (though no one considers how those laws will devastate the nation or they just don't care) but we seem incapable of consider what giving the government so much power will ultimately lead to.

Our congress and president have already shown us that they don't mind lying right to the faces of the American people. The most transparent process in the history of congress on health care???

Even our representatives didn't know what was in it. This is why they told us they needed to pass it to find out what was in it? How about just reading it to find out what was in it?

Pelosi
Barbara Boxer,
Lynn Woolsey,
Dianne Feinstein

and most of the other democrats never seemed to consider this to be a possibility. But then to try to read and understand the legal spaghetti of a 2400 page bill, that started out as 300 pages is understandably daunting. Let someone else worry about putting all that stuff into place. The Congress's job is to pass bills as many, as big, and as quickly as possible. The democrats have never seen a regulation that they wouldn't agree to sign, except of course if it restricts them in any action whatever.

Why did they specifically exempt themselves and their staff from any application of the health care bill to themselves?

We have come to think of these people as more than citizens. They are no different than we are! They are NOT above the law! They are too be held accountable for what they've done!

They are passing everything they can now and depending on presidential veto to prevent any repeal.

They will grab every bit of power we allow them too. They know the danger of the internet and of allowing people to state their views in opposition to the government here so this will be the next target.

Consider these words from our founding fathers.

On every question of construction [of the Constitution] let us carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or intended against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed.
— Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826), letter to Judge William Johnson, (from Monticello, June 12, 1823)

Do not separate text from historical background. If you do, you will have perverted and subverted the Constitution, which can only end in a distorted, bastardized form of illegitimate government.
— James Madison

The people are masters of both Congress and courts, not to overthrow the constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert it!
— Abraham Lincoln

[E]very act of a delegated authority, contrary to the tenor of the commission under which it is exercised, is void. No legislative act, therefore, contrary to the Constitution, can be valid. To deny this, would be to affirm, that the deputy is greater than his principal; that the servant is above his master; that the representatives of the people are superior to the people themselves; that men acting by virtue of powers, may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid.
— Alexander Hamilton, Federalist #78

Liberty cannot be preserved without a general knowledge among the people, who have a right, from the frame of their nature, to knowledge, as their great Creator, who does nothing in vain, has given them understandings, and a desire to know; but besides this, they have a right, an indisputable, unalienable, indefeasible, divine right to that most dreaded and envied kind of knowledge; I mean, of the characters and conduct of their rulers.
— John Adams, Dissertation on Canon and Feudal Law,

It is maintained by the advocates of the bank that its constitutionality in all its features ought to be considered as settled by precedent and by the decision of the Supreme Court. To this conclusion I cannot assent. Mere precedent is a dangerous source of authority...[and] the opinion of the Supreme Court...ought not to control the coordinate authorities of this Government. The Congress, the Executive, and the Court must each for itself be guided by its own opinion of the Constitution. Each public officer who takes an oath to support the Constitution swears that he will support it as he understands it, and not as it is understood by others. It is as much the duty of the House of Representatives, of the Senate, and of the President to decide upon the constitutionality of any bill...presented to them for passage...as it is of the supreme judges when it may be brought before them for judicial decision.
— President Andrew Jackson observed, in his 1832 veto message rejecting a bill extending the charter of the Bank of the United States

Birthers - Name Calling Not Reason

There are many people out there in the media who are engaged in the same name calling they accuse others of. If you ask them if Anyone has seen Obama's birth certificate, not one can document a case of it. They only point to the electronic form of it put on the internet. Even Glenn Beck (who has many good things to say) seems to defy common sense where the natural born status of Obama is concerned.

Is it common sense for a man who has already proven he is natural born to hire and army of lawyers to protect his birth certificate and school records from any access? Is it common sense to say we don't need to see the original certificate because certainly he would not have gotten as far as he did unless someone vetted him?

It is assumed he was vetted, but there is not one shred of evidence to support this. There are certainly plenty of things to indicate otherwise.

Where would be the harm in having the lawsuit go forward and actually having a judge require him to prove that he was natural born. It would be over and the "conspiracy" would be over. yet there is no demand for this. Wouldn't this end all doubt? So why oppose it and make fun of it and ridicule it?

I hear Beck speak all the time about how the left uses ridicule rather than reason and common sense to argue their point yet isn't that just what he's doing with the birthers? Why not simply join the demand for Obama to prove his status.

The birthers are almost always compared to the "truthers" (those who believe the attack on 9/11 was done by our government. These two things are nothing at all alike.

There is a simple and concrete PROOF available in the case of Obama's birth certificate. With the twin towers we have no towers to examine, we have only a few films and videos to work from and a lot of conjecture which cannot be proved. This makes the truther conspiracy one that is impossible to prove or disprove. Common sense tells us that it is far less likely that we did it. There would need to be too many people involved if it were the government and the chances of all those people staying quite would be very difficult. It would have taken weeks, months or even years to plan all the charges necessary for a planned demolition without anyone noticing.

In the case of Obama certainly the Hospital still has his records, but they have been forbidden from giving anyone access. Again I say WHY? if he's already shown them online why not people see the real thing?

An electronic copy on line is something even I could produce and due to resolution it would be nearly impossible to prove or disprove its authenticity either way.

I HAD to produce my real birth certificate in order to get a job with just the county government for law enforcement. Many jobs require this. It is plainly stated in the constitution that the most powerful man in the land must be a natural born citizen and as such I do not have the slightest problem with compelling such a person to produce the evidence. Further I cannot imagine why anyone would have a problem with compelling him to do so. I can't imagine why anyone would ridicule those who want him to produce such evidence.

Consider for a moment that if it turns out he doesn't meet the requirements for his position that none of the laws or executive orders he's signed mean anything.

This would surely be the fastest road to getting rid of health care as well as restoring the confidence of the American people in our process and respect for the constitution.

I still believe it is well past the time that this issue was resolved and not merely brushed aside as being an issue raised by loons.