Evil is not an abstract concept. It is not some ephemeral quality difficult to define or subject to the whims of relativism. It is not just an act, but the intent behind the act.

It is evil to steal the fruits of labor derived from the sweat of the body or the effort of the mind and give it to another. This is not liberty; it is not freedom; it is not American. I choose to give to those less fortunate. In doing so, I exercise my right to decide the distribution of my efforts. I reject the very idea of a few who would lord over me, full of such contempt and drunk on power their twisted logic excuses and rationalizes their actions. Only a sick mind belongs in such a pit of malfeasance.

Should I ever be held in contempt of such vultures, I proudly would stand up and identify with a shout the charge to be fact, for indeed I have nothing but contempt for the leeches. They do not own me, though they will try. They do not honor my rights, though they claim to. They are, to their very core, evil.

It is those who practice that act of theft in the pursuit of power, those that enslave the populace to their so-called charity, who need us. We are free. We live in the spirit of liberty. We do not need them. I deem their actions unlawful and abhorrent. Even their might will not frighten me into submission.

Who are these lowly thieves they should defy the wolves of liberty? Do not fear them, for even in their sickness they are aware of our power and are afraid. They can break neither you nor I, and this fact troubles them and defines them by their fear of us. Right is on our side, our spirits bright with the shining light of liberty. Their darkness cannot withstand even the smallest of candles among us. Together, the evil of socialism they represent will perish, and all signs of their foulness swept into the dustbins of history. By will, by conviction, and by moral rightness shall we prevail. They are like leaves and will blow away with the slightest wind – the smallest of breezes. No arms will be required, no martial weaponry, but only the weapons of the mind. Our enemies are feeble. If we recognize and own this fact, their weakness will be no match for our resolve.

I hereby swear to work tirelessly in the effort to vanquish the ideology of thieves, the evil of socialism, and the enemies of liberty; to aspire to bring this nation back to its constitutional foundations where the power lies in the individual. I vow to honor the ideas of empowerment and independence, to make them terms of common use and action, understood in their original context and intent. I vow to buttress such thought through sheer will and determination, and in doing so drive the vultures far away. I vow to set the foundation of such thought so when evil dares to return in any guise, its unsightly countenance will be turned away once again by those who come after me.

Newsworthy:

Obama to sign the Demcare House of Cards

Meet Bart Stupak’s Republican challenger

If you want to go fast – go alone. If you want to go far – go together.

Update: Nullification resolution with teeth: ResistDC: The State Authority and Anti-Racketeering Act:

If teeth is what you want, you need to go no further than Georgia. House Bill 880 (HB880), introduced by Representative Bobby Franklin, is called the “State Authority and Anti-racketeering Act.”

Unlike the many 10th Amendment Resolutions that have been introduced around the country since 2008, HB880 is legally-binding legislation…

…that state governments not only have the right to resist unconstitutional federal acts, but that, in order to protect liberty, they are “duty bound to interpose” or stand between the federal government and the people of the state.

House Bill 880 includes strong language to assert this principle:

Any actions taken by the federal government through its agents or employees that are not authorized by the Constitution of the United States are unlawful; and being unlawful, they are criminal offenses against the affected parties

This bill would make it a crime – with imprisonment for up to 30 years for each offense – for “any judicial officer, law enforcement officer, agent, or employee of the federal government, any multinational government, any international government, or any global government” to attempt to “enforce any federal, multinational, international, or global law” reserved to the State of Georgia under the 10th Amendment to the Constitution.

As of this writing, the bill has had two readings in the Georgia House. Will such a strong piece of legislation go anywhere? Only time will tell. The reality, though, is this – it’s going to take some serious effort to push back against decades and decades of unconstitutional federal acts.

————————

News today at Hot Air via Townhall: Dem sources: Senate “fix” for ObamaCare could add another $300 billion to price tag; Update: Dems ready for reconciliation, says Kyl

As the saying goes – strike when the iron is hot.

Many of my friends will disagree with me this is the time or that healthcare is the issue to fight the nullification battle and start the long journey back to re-asserting states rights; it is a nasty and drawn out process, not an event as many would think. There is the beginning, a middle, and an end. The middle and the end are often, shall we say, fraught with peril. However, given the sheer level of contempt the Democrats are preparing to level at the American public it is clear the time for niceties is over. And I am not talking about the nullification of just the individual mandate which, if successful, may only serve to usher in more quickly the single-payer system, I am talking about the nullification of the entire bill. I’ll go even further and suggest that as many states as possible draft and pass legislation that would allow that state to nullify any federal law which violates state sovereignty. What I am talking about is an virtual (not literal) act of war by the states against the federal government. It would not be pretty; it would not be easy. Continuing a campaign of pressure against the federal government while steadfastly supporting state’s governors and legislators as they embark on this journey of defiance requires great skill, leadership, patience, and gumption. So get ready.

In his excellent piece A short history of the destruction of state sovereignty, a worthy read in itself, Dr. Hunter notes the following regarding the rolling back of tyrannical federal powers:

But, it won’t be simply a matter of untying the knot or walking this cat back. It is impossible to simply retrace the steps that brought the American political system to its present perilous situation; it will require courage, steadfastness, truculence, defiance and a will of iron to stand up to Washington and stand down the power of the federal government. It will be an undertaking not in principle different from but even more daunting and difficult than the Civil Rights Movement, namely reviving America and restoring liberty by overcoming oppressive government that is acting illegally and immorally with a pointed gun under the color of law.

Later, Dr. Hunter goes on to say (emphasis mine):

After spending several weeks traveling around the country speaking at grass-roots events and Tea Parties, I am impressed by the pent up anger at the federal government spilling out across the land. It is diffuse and largely unarticulated but it is real, and it is growing.

I also am impressed by the actions already taken and under consideration in several states to re-establish state prerogatives and “sovereignty”—from unilaterally withdrawing from the federal government the authority to regulate guns manufactured, sold and used solely within the confines of the state (MT & TN), to opting out of national healthcare (AZ) to consideration of refusing to be ensnarled in cap-and-trade (IN).

It is a messy, boisterous process and mass movements such as the Tea Parties frequently get it wrong in their enthusiastic assertions about what is and what is not constitutional. That said, there may be a kernel here—“state sovereignty”—around which a movement may be coalescing and the Spirit of ’98 revived.

But, the state sovereignty movement must be about more than simply unfunded federal mandates; it must go beyond making intergovernmentalism efficient and bearable; it must aim to revive genuine federalism in order to restore individual rights and personal freedom.

Certainly, to be a lasting political force, the Tea Parties need a focus rather than simply running around making noise and venting their frustrations. But time is not likely to wait for the intricate schemes and the best laid plans of man; from the sorry looks of states such as California and plans the current administration has in hand for a complete takeover of everything in sight, events may take on a life of their own.

In the not too distant future, America may face a spontaneous and violent crackup designed by no one but out of the control of anyone, followed by a backlash of severe national-government oppression and tyranny. That is why it is vital for citizens to get ahead of the curve and organize a peaceful rebellion against Washington—a restorative revolution led by the natural depository of power—the States—which were intended by the Founders to be the locus of resistance to check an oppressive and tyrannical national government.

If the states do not intervene to halt the national government’s takeover of everything and act to restore some semblance of balance to the American political system, there is a real danger that Nobel Laureate Friedrich Hayek’s prediction in The Road To Serfdom will come to fruition. Hayek feared that in times of turmoil and hardship, the appeal of dismantling the free-market system under the allure of central planning and the distemper of envy and fear would inevitably place society on “the road to serfdom,” which ultimately ends in the destruction of all individual economic and personal freedom.

Hayek argued that once a society progresses sufficiently far down the road to collectivism and consolidated central control, the failure of central planning would be perceived by the public as an absence of sufficient power by the national government to implement an otherwise good idea. According to Hayek, such a perception would lead the public to vote more power to the national government, and ultimately allow a “strong man” to rise to power. Once a charismatic strong man who is perceived to be capable of “getting the job done” consolidates his power, Hayek foresaw the ultimate and ineluctable descent into outright totalitarianism.

Or, America may traverse the road to serfdom via another route. Rather than a strong-man takeover, a consolidated and centralized national government may instead visit upon the American people tyranny by committee every much as destructive of economic and personal liberty as the rule of any strong man.

Although all the wounds of slavery, segregation and the Civil Rights Movement may not yet be behind us, it may be, one hopes, that they are sufficiently healed to allow a critical mass of Americans from all walks of life to join together and rejuvenate their states. To revive American liberty and restore our constitutional republic, people will have to rediscover their courage to resist the way Martin Luther King and his followers resisted. But whereas civil rights activists looked to the national government as the font of legitimacy to take down immoral and oppressive state laws, a restoration of freedom from national-government oppression will have to look to state governments as the font of legitimacy in resistance.

The Revive America Movement must begin by electing and supporting governors and state legislatures who will act with the Spirit of ‘98 in truculent and defiant resistance to Washington. It will require citizens standing shoulder to shoulder with their governors and state legislators to confront the federal government where possible, defy Uncle Sam where necessary and restore some semblance of balance to the American democracy before it is too late.

Reviving America and restoring liberty to Americans won’t be simple because we are too far down the road to serfdom for simple unwinding and backtracking. It is not self-evidently obvious what a true Restorative Revolution would look like but the civil rights movement offers a model that may be the last best hope we have before passing a point of no return.

As Redstate’s Brian Faughnan reports, Democratic pollster James Carville’s recent poll indicated just one-third of voters support ObamaCare:

Democrats are currently saying that no matter what happens in tomorrow’s Senate election, they will pass a health care rationing bill.

Now there’s some audacity for you.

I am reminded of our Declaration of Independence:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of government.

The train of abuses has been long, and with the Brown win, President Obama is promising a combative turn. Translation: more abuses of federal power and even less attention paid to the will of the people. Therefore, it is time, in this author’s opinion, for the Tea Parties to work with state legislators and governors, standing shoulder to shoulder with them, unbending and stalwart in the battle for the freedoms and rights guaranteed to us by the Constitution. Together, state leaders and citizens must stare down the federal tyranny with an icy glare. So perilous is this journey that the path must be carefully prepared, our leaders steadfast, and our own resolve unbreakable. What of federal repercussions and our legislative preparedness to deal with them? Are each of us prepared, as in the civil rights movement, to resist in a passive-aggressive manner the abuses of the federal government with acts of civil disobedience? When will the movement reach critical mass, causing the federal powers to crumble under their own weight and lucre?

If the Senate or the House passes the current and very unpopular health care bill, especially if the process of reconciliation is used, this very well could be the tipping point, forcing our hand to take measures to ensure a federal government oblivious to the will of the public is spanked hard and spanked often until it caves to our will. As Orrin Hatch recently stated, the use of the process of reconciliation in the Senate is will lead to an all out war in that chamber. The states would not be far behind.

Already, we have seen the Democrats in the Senate vote, along party lines, to increase the debt ceiling to 14.3 trillion. Combined with the soft on terror approach of the current administration, balooning deficits, a Congress that seems hell-bent on ignoring the American public to the point of brazen arrogance and dismissal, an appology tour by nothing less than the President of the United States, a recent Executive Order by the Presidet that surrenders U.S. sovereignty to Interpol, and a host of other abuses that would fill a book, there is a growing sense that enough is enough.

It is interesting to note that many today believe the Supreme Court to be the final arbiter of all things within the borders of the United States while in fact this Court is only a check against the other two forms of the federal government, not the states. Where the Constitution is silent, the states can govern themselves.

From The Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions (emphasis mine):

The resolution explicitly disclaimed that the national government was the judge of its own powers. Allowing it to judge its own powers would be akin to permitting an agent, rather than the principal, to determine the breadth of the agent’s authority. The law of agency at its most basic level recognizes that an agent can act as such only subject to the consent and control of the principal to whom the agent owes a fiduciary duty (see Restatement [Second] of Agency, sec. 1). Just as A, B, and C, the partners in a business firm, decide what authority to give their agent Z, so the parties to the Constitution decide the powers of the national government. In light of such logic, Jefferson proclaimed in the resolution that “each party [to the federal compact] has an equal right to judge for itself, as well of infractions as of the mode and measures of redress” (Virginia Commission 1964, 144). For Jefferson, the people acting through their states — the authentic organs of government — were the final arbiters of constitutional interpretation. Jefferson feared that giving the federal government the exclusive power to interpret the Constitution through the Supreme Court would lead to arbitrary government. As John Taylor later wrote in his Construction Construed and Constitutions Vindicated, “a jurisdiction, limited by its own will, is an unlimited jurisdiction” ([1820] 1970, 131). With the states stripped of the power to construe the Constitution, the enforcement of constitutional limitations on the central government would be chimerical. Thus, it is not surprising that none of the convictions under the Sedition Act were appealed to the Federalist-dominated Supreme Court. The Republicans did not want to give the Court an opportunity to set a dangerous precedent.

The public in each state must ensure its state government does not fold like a bunch of cheap suits when the federal government attempts its first act of retribution – the withdrawal of state funds. While money is a very powerful weapon, the stream flows both ways. Let us not forget our resolve nor allow our leaders in each state to ignore their constitutional duty to each citizen to fight for the rights of the state against the tyranny of the federal government. Let us not waver in the face of opposition from tyrants whose own audacity places them at odds with each of us. This is the time to use federal lucre and abuse of power to grab back the rights duly possessed by the states of this country. In this, the Supreme Court holds no sway over the authority of the states. The Constitution makes this clear. So long and slow has the erosion of state authority occurred, the we forget the people of this country and their respective states wield power over the federal government – not the other way around. Time has eroded our feeling of empowerment, and like pawns on a chessboard, we feel moved by the powers that be, forgetting that it is US that moves THEM. It is time to take back that power. It is time to save the future for our children and grandchildren. It is time to put the federal government back into its proper place. The road will not be easy, but if our resolve is strong, we can have back the country our forefathers left for us.

Update 1: While not a great Ron Paul fan, the an article at the Tenth Amendment Center basically lays out the same approach as above, but offers a few more details. I found the following to be highly interesting:

There are a whole host of peaceful actions that a state government can adopt if that day comes or appears to be just over the horizon. These measures range from county sheriffs requiring that federal agents receive written permission from the sheriff before acting in their county, to setting up a Federal Tax escrow account, which could potentially de-fund unconstitutional federal activities by requiring that all federal taxes come first to the state’s Department of Revenue.

Besides state interposition, the other thing Washington would have to consider, is whether enough of their agents would actually obey orders to punish people for exercising their constitutional rights. There is a significant chance that enough of them would either publicly or privately decide in advance to ignore such orders. As the probability of this increases, it becomes more likely that Washington will not risk overplaying its hand. The reality is that Washington just doesn’t have the manpower to enforce all their unconstitutional laws if enough states choose to defy them.

Of course, it all depends on the people of the several states: ordinary people like you and I. Although I’ve discovered that there are more elected representatives at the state level who are committed to acting in a courageous and principled manner than I ever dared hope, most of their peers lack such a brave commitment. Most of them will stick their head in the sand or sit on the fence until they determine which way the wind is blowing. And so it’s our opinion, not the opinion of the American people in aggregate, but our opinion as citizens of our respective states, that will influence the decision of our state representatives to either stand tall or to kneel down and knuckle under.

Living in Texas I am particularly interested in one of the comments:

We are developing nullification legislation for Texas that might serve as a model for other states. See http://constitutionalism.blogspot.com/2010/01/cautions-for-nullification-proponents.html

Proposed Components:

1. Commission. Establish “Federal Action Review Commission” – special commission with grand jury powers to meet continuously with rotating membership drawn from a pool of legal historians and constitutional scholars, appointed by the Governor, Attorney General, or Legislative Council; empowered to review the constitutionality of congressional legislation, or federal regulations or decisions, and if it finds such legislation, regulations, or decisions to be unconstitutional, to issue an edict, with the force of law, requiring that no state or local officials, employees, or contractors cooperate in the enforcement of it, and urging state citizens to refuse to cooperate. This Commission would be established by an amendment to the Texas Constitution.

2. Structure and procedure. The Commission shall consist of 23 members, who shall serve for staggered terms of 4-8 months, drawn at random from a pool of at least 230 constitutional scholars and legal historians, who shall meet for at least one hour once a week, with a quorum of 16, and a vote of 12 required to issue an edict, based on a presumption of nonauthority and requiring strict proof of constitutionality from logic and historical evidence. It shall be open to direct complaints of the unconstitutionality of federal actions from any citizen. It shall have the power to subpoena witnesses, and its deliberations shall be secret, except that it may disclose anything in its presentments. It may authorize criminal prosecution by issuing an indictment to any person, not necessarily a lawyer, upon a finding that the court cited has jurisdiction and that evidence of guilt is sufficient for trial.

3. Penalties. State and local officials, employees, and contractors shall be duly notified in writing of such edicts within ten days and shall have twenty days to comply or be subject to termination after one written warning and a second failure to refuse to cooperate.

4. Funding. Establish a state fund to pay for legal and financial support of state citizens and officials who refuse to cooperate with unconstitutional federal statutes, regulations, or decisions, with the intention to obtain judicial decisions that support the unconstitutionality of the federal actions.

Update 2: Another reason to start the nullification movement: Reconciliation flip-flopper of the morning

Update 3: Reconciliation, the public option, and Demcare revival

There is a story making its way through the blogosphere concerning the “white flag” from White House pertaining to the public option. Nobody is buying it. What is being bought is time – time to allow someone to turn the pressure relief valve and time for RHINOCare to make its way out of the Senate Finance Committee. Obama and the liberals in Congress, well aware that co-operatives are a Trojan Horse for a single payer system, are only to happy to assist in keeping the pressure off in the hope of one of two outcomes. The first – by removing pressure from the public, the administration is free to apply its own pressure to ensure a public option. Second, less public pressure increases the chance the RHINOcare option makes its way out of the Senate Finance committee. But as I have said before, there are already procedural amendments in place to kill ObamaCare as long as pressure is brought to bear on five Republican Senators in the Finance Committee. Read on.

Memorize and repeat the following like a mantra:

A cooperative is nothing more than a Trojan Horse for single payer healthcare.

Remember these five Senators:

• Chuck Grassley
  United States Senator, Iowa
• Olympia J. Snowe
  United States Senator, Maine
• Susan Collins
  United States Senator, Maine
• Michael Enzi
  United States Senator, Wyoming
• Lindsey Graham
  United States Senator, South Carolina

You can contact them here.

What do they all have in common? All are members of the Senate Finance Committee, the only committee with a chance at a reaching a bi-partisan compromise on health care reform. Many are already touting the end of the public option, which is slated to be replaced by co-operatives. But is this really a victory? The answer is a resounding NO. These five Republicans with an annoying proclivity to reach across the aisle are about to sell out America.

Read the rest of this entry »

Update: The Nightmare That Is The Senate Finance Committee Healthcare Proposal – RINOCare Gone Wild. Are you ready for governement controlled health insurance cartels? Socialized healthcare vs. fascist healthcare, the dangerous bi-partisan compromise.

The endgame is here and the most important aspect that could kill the above linked post concerning the Senate Finance Committee healthcare bill and any other form of ObamaCare is being ignored by not only the media, but major bloggers everywhere. The only other reference I can find other than on the Social Security Institute website (see link below) is from FreedomWorks. Given that these two amendments kill any chance of reconciliation, I am at a loss to explain the complete lack of interest in this topic.

There were two amendments offered by Senator DeMint prior to the health bill conferences and debate in the Senate – a point-of-order amendment and instruction to conferees. The following is taken directly from an email Mr. Uhler received from Dr. Lawrence Hunter of the Social Security Institute that was forwarded to me and placed in the first link above. Dr. Hunter also has a very long and distinguished career and served as policy advisor to President Ronald Reagan during Reagan’s second term. He also served as a Member of the Board of Advisors for the NTLC:

During deliberations on the Senate Budget Resolution earlier this year, Senator Jim DeMint (R-SC) introduced a point-of-order amendment that would require a 60-vote majority to pass “any bill, joint resolution, amendment, motion, or conference report that eliminates the ability of Americans to keep their health plan or their choice of doctor (as determined by the Congressional Budget Office).” The Senate approved the DeMint Amendment unanimously.

Subsequently, before the Senate Budget Resolution went to a Conference Committee where differences with the House Budget Resolution were to be worked out, DeMint offered a motion to instruct the Conferees not only to insist on retaining the 60-vote provision in the final Conference Report but also to widen the scope of the provision to cover any provision and so forth that decreases the number of Americans enrolled in private health insurance while increasing the number enrolled in government-managed, rationed health care. The Demint motion to instruct passed the Senate by an overwhelming vote of 79 to 14.

As a matter of congressional comity, the House ordinarily would have been expected to accede to the Senate provision since it affected Senate rules that applied only to the Senate. Remarkably, Senate Budget Committee Chairman, Kent Conrad, allowed the Demint 60-vote requirement to be removed from the Budget Resolution in Conference.

Prior to the above statements by Dr. Hunter is information of great importance:

However, with a united Republican front in the Senate, Democrats would be hard pressed to jam a bill as comprehensive and detested as ObamaCare down Americans’ throats. Current polls indicate that more people oppose ObamaCare than support it. Moreover, Senate Republicans stand on very strong procedural grounds for resisting a bum’s rush on government-run healthcare through the Reconciliation process. It would take an act of extraordinary arrogance and recklessness for the Democratic Leadership to use Reconciliation this way.

If agreed upon to be enforced, the Demint amendments would in effect kill the reconciliation process and force 60 votes to pass ObamaCare in its present form – even with the co-operative option, which is nothing more than a Trojan horse for what ultimately will become a single-payer system. Mr. Uhler has identified five Republican Senators that need to align themselves with the party and forgo their proclivity to reach across the aisle. If this story goes national and pressure is brought to bear on these five Republican’s to stand firm with their party, then it is reasonable to assume the above conclusion from Dr. Hunter to be correct. Under these circumstances I do not believe the Democrats in the Senate would have the votes to commit “an act of extraordinary arrogance and recklessness”. However, wide public knowledge of the amendments and the subsequent pressure on Senators to follow their own rules requires national exposure. The average American is completely unaware of the procedural hurdles that Senator Jim Demint placed to block the ramming of a very unpopular plan onto the American people.

One could reasonably ask themselves why the public must follow rules, where the Senate can choose to ignore them. It will focus attention on the contempt that some Senate elitists have for the public. However, to date no major conservative talk show, media outlet, or think tank has covered this tactic. Everyone is talking about Blue Dogs killing the legislation. While certainly one strategy to pursue, I personally believe Blue Dogs have a habit of growling but, at the end of the day, many of them will roll over. I prefer a multi-pronged strategy that would include the above approach outlined by Dr. Hunter. On the legislative front, what is called for is combining public pressure on the Blue Dogs in the House and placing pressure on five Senate Republican’s to stand firm with their party and not negotiate ObamaCare Lite with the cooperative option replacing nationalized health care. Instead the public should insist the Demint rules be followed. This could very well kill the bill as it exists today. We could then press the reset button and start talking about real reform.

Using Reconciliation to force feed ObamaCare to an unwilling nation would backfire in ways that Democrats will find difficult to imagine. That is the type of atmosphere some liberals, such as Chuck Schumer are willing to create now and for the foreseeable future.

Here is the link to the story on the Social Security Institute article from Dr. Hunter:

In other news and opinion:

As the Byrd Rule Flies: Why Dems Can’t Use Reconciliation to Pass Radical ObamaCare

Co-ops a federal-subsidy trough

From Moe Lane at Redstate: Howard Dean threatens primary challenges on public option ‘no’ votes.

Is ObamaCare Constitutional?

Blue Dog: Hey, maybe we should start over on ObamaCare. Won’t happen, but this can be killed in the Senate. I am still astounded nobody has picked up on this yet.

ObamaCare: Does the media matter?

That’s a question asked by Joe Gandleman at The Moderate Voice (whatever that means). Channeling Marc Ambler from the Atlantic, Mr. Gandleman asks:

The emerging narrative in a lot of the major press coverage of heatlh care reform is that President Barack Obama has lost control of his message, which is why he was out on the hustings today at a town hall meeting. But now The Atlantic’s Marc Ambinder writes that he now senses a slight relief at the White House.

Why? Because, according to Ambinder, there’s a growing feeling that the Republicans may have lost control of their message and that GOPers at Town Halls have provided a picture of some of the party’s most extreme, angry elements — which won’t convince the Blue Dog Democrats to panic and not support the plan and could well scare off independent swing voters.

Here are key portions of what he says in a post titled “How Conservatives Are Blowing Their Chance.” He notes that the mood at the White House has changed from one week ago:

A week later, and the Atlantic’s tricorder readings are picking up much calmer electromagnetic energy from the White House. Getting Democrats to attend the town hall meetings was really an intermediate goal. But Democrats are beginning to notice that opponents of health care reform have discredited themselves. They ramped up much too quickly. When smaller, conservative groups Astroturfed, they inevitably brought to the meetings the type of Republican activist who was itching for a fight and who would use the format to vent frustrations at President Obama himself. There were plenty of activists who really wanted to know about health care, and some who were probably misinformed — scared out of their chairs — to some degree, but the loudest voices tended to be the craziest, the most extreme, the least sensible, and the most easy to mock.

Ambinder suggests that conservatives had a window of opportunity to make their case seriously which “required a certain restraint — and a willingness to traffic in at least approximate truths — and an ability to make distinctions within their own ranks about which tactics were valid and which tactics were venomous. It also required a sophistication about the media.”

And what about the media? Ambinder contends media reports were not helpful to the GOP because reports were done in either two ways: “they credulously reported the louder, angrier voices (inherently damaging to Republicans in this case) or they reported on the political architecture of the town hall meetings, which plays down the substance of the protests.”

The Blue Dog Democrats’ swing constitutes aren’t angry,” he writes, “and the Blue Dogs know this. They’re political independents for whom the sanctity of the process is important. These are the type of voters who like President Obama because he appears willing to bring people together even though they don’t agree with their policies.”

In short, he argues, the right has lost control of its message, much as the left did under Bush. Lawmakers of both parties:

…found their meetings full of engorged spleens. Unrestrained, these town hall meetings are going to turn off the type of voters Republicans most need to pressure Blue Dog Democrats — independents who don’t have red genes or blue genes.

This has been the problem with the GOP in recent years: most of its pitches, when the rubber meets the road, eventually boil down to arguments that seem aimed at wavering Republicans and the style and tone of the rhetoric is — as we have called it here — the confrontional, angry and demonizing talk radio political culture. That works fine with Republicans, but it can only cause a counter reaction in wavering liberal Democrats who began to sour on Obama and independent voters wanting to follow a debate don’t get much substance hearing people yell about socialism, Marxism, Nazi Germany or Obama death panels.

In the end, this may come down to which side discredits itself first. Getting media coverage isn’t always positive if the images that come out are unpleasing to others who are not just not on your side but on the fence deciding which is the side worth joining.

So does this mean that Obama is on the descent as Ambinder suggests due to the images the meetings are emitting?

Not necessarily. Political veteran David Gergen has a different take on it and can foresee health care reform being defanged or even derailed due to the angry protests, which he notes don’t just involve talk radio and special interest group types but other Americans who distrust the change:

In this week’s issue of the National Journal, correspondents Brian Friel and Richard E. Cohen provide a valuable insight into possible endgames. They report that there are four possible outcomes:

(1) A major bipartisan reform bill is passed;
(2) A major Democratic reform bill is passed over nearly united Republican opposition;
(3) The Democrats cannot agree among themselves and pass Health Care Lite, a very watered down version of reform;
(4) Failure

Looking at the chances today, in the midst of all this brouhaha, one would have to say that the odds for outcomes one and two are going down. It is hard to see how a lot of Republicans will sign up for a bipartisan bill in the teeth of this opposition; similarly, it may be tougher for moderate Democrats, especially new members from Republican-leaning districts, to sign on to a Democratic-only bill. That means the odds are going up for outcomes three and, yes, four.

Does this mean that reform is dying? Not at all. It is still possible that if the protests continue at a high decibel level, more people in the middle will grow disgusted and rally to the President. And given his political and rhetorical talents, it is more than possible that Barack Obama himself can turn this around. But for the moment, the raucous clips coming out of Senator Specter’s session with his constituents along with other clips from other town halls — as offensive as they are to many (including me) — are also presenting a growing threat to reform.

So pick the theory of your choice — and come September, see which proved to be correct.

I could not help myself and commented as follows (I add additional information below not found in the original comment):

The first theory ignores the real data – polls. Nothing is mentioned about the polls because the first theory fails on its merits if polling data is included int the analysis.

Polling indicates a growing dissatisfaction with ObamaCare that drops by the day. He is losing seniors big time – and they are the largest voting bloc in mid-term elections. He is also losing independent voters big time. Many independents are experiencing buyers remorse and know the bait and switch Obama pulled on them. If you attempt to argue that no independents are attending town halls and shouting angrily as politicians literally lie to their faces, then you present an opinion that is patently absurd. As the town halls became more vocal, support for ObamaCare eroded further – not something one would expect of a backlash. Blue Dogs and other Democrats are quite aware of this and it is the poll numbers that will dictate their voting behavior. Should they choose to ignore the polls and vote for ObamaCare, look for a real backlash in 2010. So theory one looks like Swiss cheese upon further scrutiny and is not worthy of additional discussion (the extra CO2 required would exacerbate global warming).

Marc Ambinder of the Atlantic is following the media script of “backlash, backlash, backlash!” in an effort to silence the town halls, because they are eroding support for ObamaCare. Of course, nobody is listening to such nonsense. Whatever does pass – if anything at all – will be a watered down version of reform. August 22nd is national recess rally day – look for some real fireworks by millions, not a few hundred at a town hall. It won’t be so easy to dismiss that level of protest. I can’t wait to see Nanny State Nancy try. She is the gift that keeps on giving.

Blue Dogs are also aware of the opt out amendments in Florida and Utah and up to ten other states that will be using the 10th amendment to fight ObamaCare. Throw that dynamic in the mix.

If you want real backlash, check out Little girl at Obama town hall has not-so-random political connections. Documented, proved and case closed. Obama lies once again, stating the members of his town hall were not screened. Of course, anyone with half a brain knew better. Look for further plunging poll numbers, the obvious dynamic described as: Obama opens his mouth on the subject the numbers drop. Marc’s sense of “relief” at the White House belongs in the same boat as Obama stating he was never for a single payer system – fabricated.

Obama’s coattails are becoming an anchor.

Update: Backed up by Mickey Kaus (via Glenn Reynolds)

In other news and opinion:

Democrats now taking refuge at SEIU offices

BUSTED!: “Obama As Hitler” Poster Was A Democrat/Union Plant At John Dingell Townhall! UPDATED with video interview!

If you are a liberal, how do you live with yourself? First, you have the tape where Obama admits he wants a single-payer system – exhibit A evidence. Then, his admission in yesterday’s town hall that he has never been for a single-payer system – exhibit B evidence. Conclusion: Obama Lies.

Now you have Obama claiming there were not plants or screening in his town hall – exhibit C evidence. Michelle Malkin dispels that myth – exhibit D evidence. Conclusion: Obama Lies.

Now a plant by Dingell at a Town Hall?

If one has to resort to lies and underhanded tactics to make a point or sell a product or piece of legislation, it stands to reason that a sane person would begin to question the peddled snake oil and become either cautious or outright distrustful of the whole thing.

Video: Nelson strikes back against ObamaCare

How much can we now trust this: GA congressman describes hate mail, Nazi graffiti after protests

Okay people, time to wake up. Gateway Pundit: Bus–ted… Obama Bussed In Supporters For New Hampshire Town Hall (Video).

Funny… During the meeting Barack Obama told his supporters:

“I don’t want people thinking I just have a bunch of plants in here.”

No, we sure wouldn’t want that to happen.

People might think it was all a staged dog and pony show.

One of the comments for the Gateway Pundit called it:

it was a pony and horseshit show, without the pony……..

Lies, lies, and more lies. The White House seems determined to draw itself into litigation. How stupid can these people be?

White House continues spy campaign: White House Launches Health Tattle-Tale Site on another .gov website. The site is here.

I describe in a previous post how the older now defunct White House flag site violates .Gov domain guidelines as outlined here.

What is interesting is that I am unable to use Firefox’s built in capabilities to look at the White House source code to discern what email address is being used in the section “Contact Us”. I find this a bit fishy. Perhaps someone with more computer acumen than I can figure this one out. I still think it good strategy to inundate the new website’s email address by using the contact form. Millions of emails equates to letting our voices be heard.

Amazing how many lies these people will attempt to propagate in a vain attempt to spread the meme of “ObamaCare” is good for you. Melt the phone (202-501-0282) and send those emails to Lee Ellis (lee.ellis@gsa.gov), policy administrator of the GSA Federal Acquisition Service (GSA FAS) which assign .Gov domains and creates the guidelines for the use of .Gov domains. Be courteous.

Most interesting is the following statement on the main page of the new site:

Links to Facebook, Twitter, and “More Ways to Share,” point to third-party sites that are not on the White House server.

Assume for a moment the White House is not in violation of the Privacy Act of 1974, but is in violation of .gov guidelines which do not allow the use of a government second level domain to be used for political or campaign purposes. In my talks with Lee Ellis, I was informed that two actions that could be taken against whitehouse.gov website of which Macon Philips is the Chief Information Officer (macon@who.eop.gov). A request to take down the website or put a disclaimer on the site stating the page violates the .gov guidelines. Still nothing has occurred to date on the new site, and the old site is now down, whether at the request of the GSA FAS or their own volition unclear at this time.

I must admit I am disappointed in the lack of action on the part of the GSA FAS concerning the new site. The “Reality Check” site, although pointing to a non .gov location, would still be in violation of the guidelines by the very act of providing a link to a site dedicated to campaigning for ObamaCare.

Even with the closure of the old site, I believe the White House is open up to litigation as pointed out in this Fox News story:

But Napolitano said the White House probably cannot be sued because of sovereign immunity, unless someone was harmed by what the government did with the records. But that’s unlikely, he said, because the person would probably be unaware of the harm.

“That’s a silent violation of your right to privacy,” he said.

Any emails collected by the White House must be maintained via the Presidential Records Act (PRA), which requires the White House to preserve and maintain its records for permanent storage in a government database as reported here.

I still think there is a case for Privacy Act violation by the White House or First Amendment encroachments. I believe these should be pursued with the utmost passion. It looks like the American Center for Law & Justice is doing just that.

New ACLJ petition here. Check out the ACLJ Legal brief here.

Remember, people have died for our freedoms. It is imperative that nobody fear the government, for a life lived in fear is a life not worth living. Protect your rights and freedoms. Obama and his propagandists be damned. Its your life, your future, and the future of your children. The time for sitting down and taking it on the chin are over. Let the battle for the hearts and minds of America be joined.

Contact the RNC – melt the phones (202.863.8500). Ensure they intend on using national television to expose Obama’s overt violation of the privacy of U.S. citizens.

Such a blatant violation of the First Amendment could very take down the Obama presidency. Talk about Waterloo.

Is there a Woodward and Bernstein team ready to take this on? Pulitzer Prize anyone?

In other news and opinion:

White House: You’re not un-American, but you are still corporate shills so just pipe down

Be careful: DOT inspector general challenges O’s stimulus spending.

Overflow crowd at Maryland town hall.

Specter faces angry crowd at town hall meeting

Internet Snitch Brigade disabled, but…Updated. Michelle is starting to cover the new site. To date, there has been no major player covering the violation of .gov guidelines (rules for thee but not for me?).

UPDATE 1: 9/9/2009 The Nightmare That Is The Senate Finance Committee Healthcare Proposal – RINOCare Gone Wild. Pay attention to what the Senate is doing right under our noses. It is important to understand what the Senate Finance Committee healthcare proposal means to you. Hint: it’s not good.

Update 2: Finally someone is talking about the constitutionality of ObamaCare. It is this very issue which strengthens the case made by Dr. Lawrence Hunter to use the two Jim Demint amendments and pressure five Senate Democrats on the Finance Committee to stand with their party. What Senator wants to stake their careers on a bill that may pass only to be repealed later? The real question comes down to how long can the states tie up this legislation in the courts. We only need three years. Is ObamaCare Constitutional?

Watch for more of this to come. Utah is looking into using its state constitution and the 10th Amendment protection of states rights from an encroaching federal government to opt out of ObamaCare should it pass Congress.

SALT LAKE CITY — Republican Utah lawmaker Carl Wimmer, R-Herriman, wants Utahns to have the option not to take part in a federal health care program.

He says he’s drafting a proposed amendment to Utah’s Constitution; one he believes will get overwhelming approval.

“We’re going to pass a state Constitutional amendment stating that people will not be forced by the national government to purchase health care insurance and that small businesses will not be forced to provide them,” Wimmer said.

Voters, of course, would have to pass the amendment, and it would have to get at least two-thirds majority in the Utah House and Senate. But Wimmer says it’s worth it, no matter what comes out of the Federal health care reform effort.

He says it’s a state’s rights issue and that Utah has made good progress on its own reform plans. “We don’t need help from the Federal government figuring this thing out, we know how to do it and we’re able to do it far more efficiently than they are,” he says.

Such an amendment could lead to cuts in federal funding and to lawsuits, but Wimmer says it’s time states “wean themselves” from federal dollars and that lawsuits may be the only way to “turn the tables” on the Federal government.

The course for the ObamaCare ship is in uncharted waters, while ways to defeat it are not as difficult as one might think. First, Congress needs a bill for the President to sign. In this and the prevous post I outline the process whereby this can come to pass. These are not my ideas, but come from two very distinguished gentlemen, their biographies presented in my previous post. Keep reading.

Even if passed by Congress, expect strong resistance with a slew of state’s rights movements via the 10th amendment and subsequent lawsuits. There is plenty of time to tie this legislation up in the courts. Long enough, in fact, for the opportunity to derail the legislation by repealling it in a future Congress. However, if enough states fight Obama’s attempt to sieze control and increase the powers of federal government the fissures and fault lines created by this backlash would not favor ObamaCare. What vulnerable Senator or Representative really wants to stake their careers on legislation that may pass, only to possibly be killed later, or that would create such an outcry against federal powers as to start a movement of decentralizing power back to the states? In the end, polling and passion will win the day and minds will be changed. We are living through history, and many of us are actively a part of it. As Obama has shown us, we can no longer take liberty and freedom for granted. It is the duty of every American who cherishes liberty for themselves and future generations to take to the streets and town halls, to encourage state legislatures to resist the federal governement, and to call Senators and Representatives and make their voices heard. This is a beast that can be slaughtered.

Florida is also asserting 10th Amendment State’s Rights under the U.S. Consitution (emphasis mine):

On the heels of a successful state-level resistance to the 2005 Real ID Act, activists and state legislators alike are focusing their efforts on state governments as a way to resist new federal programs.

The latest? Health Care.

In response to what some opponents see as a Congress that doesn’t represent their interests, State Legislators are looking to the nearly-forgotten American political tradition of nullification as a way to reject any potential national health care program that may be coming from Washington.

The most recent effort comes from Florida State Senator Carey Baker and State Representative Scott Plakon, who this week filed a proposed State Constitutional Amendment (HJR37) as a means to prevent Floridians from being affected by any Federal Health Care Legislation. If approved by the legislature, Florida residents could be voting on it as early as 2010.

HJR37 would deny the ability of any new law to impose demands, restrictions or penalties on health care choices on Floridians. Versions of proposed federal health care reform legislation have included insurance coverage mandates, and certain penalties on employers who fail to provide employee health insurance.

It states, in part:

(1) A law or rule shall not compel, directly or indirectly, any person, employer, or health care provider to participate in any health care system

(2) A person or employer may pay directly for lawful health care services and shall not be required to pay penalties or fines for paying directly for lawful health care services. A health care provider may accept direct payment for lawful health care services and shall not be required to pay penalties or fines for accepting direct payment from a person or employer for lawful health care services.

A similar measure, called the Health Care Freedom Act, has already passed in Arizona, and residents of that state will have the opportunity to vote on it in 2010. Sources close to the Tenth Amendment Center say that more than ten other states may see such proposals introduced in the coming session.

Of course, this may not even be necessary as outlined at the Social Security Insitute here by Dr. Larry Hunter:

While a constitutional amendment is a sound and desirable backup measure, and a powerful prophylactic against future over reach by Washington, Wimmer and his compatriots are strategically positioned to drastically reduce the chances of nationalized healthcare ever occurring in the first place. To do so, they need to prevail upon Republican U.S. Senator Bob Bennett to stop trying to negotiate a version of ObamaCare Lite with the White House and his Democratic Senate Colleagues.

Senator Bennett’s version of ObamaCare, which he has introduced with Oregon Democratic Senator Ron Wyden as The Healthy Americans Act (S. 391), is really nothing more than ObamaCare in drag—a Trojan RHINO with ObamaCare hiding inside ready to be smuggled into the country disguised as a “bipartisan compromise.” Bennett’s “solution” to the problems afflicting the healthcare system is not a conservative, market-based solution that one would expect a conservative Republican Senator to promote; it is not a plan that encourages and promotes individual self-reliance; it is RHINOCare (Republican Healthcare In Name Only) that simply wraps ObamaCare in a Republican skin and does not reflect conservative principles and values.

The bill would end the employer tax exclusion for employer-based health-insurance benefits and replace it with a combination of direct federal subsidies and individual tax deductions. In other words, it would increase people’s dependency on Washington dramatically. Mandatory insurance premiums would be collected through automatic payroll deductions from workers’ paychecks, which would be enforced by the IRS. Employers also would be required to pay into the nationalized healthcare system on a payment schedule based on number of employees, employer revenue and an average-plan premium—clearly a tax on employers to fund universal heath coverage run by the federal government.

Senator Bennett’s bill would replace the employer as the tax wedge in the health-insurance market with a direct government tax-and-subsidy wedge designed to drive the after-tax price of healthcare below market-clearing levels—it’s called price controls and it will lead inevitably to healthcare rationing. Hence, the bill would replace one poison with another: Rather than having the employer make critical decisions about what kind of healthcare is available to workers, as the current system does, government would assume a much more direct and active role in making these determinations. For example, the Wyden-Bennett plan would replace the current health system with one that is heavily regulated by the federal government. Individuals would have access only to plans permitted by the government, and they would be required by federal law to purchase such a plan.

The federal government would standardize the entire insurance market through direct mandates and regulations. The federal government would determine which health plans people could buy. The bill would establish a standard benefits package.

The bill requires all individuals to purchase government-defined health coverage without any real choice for individuals to pick a plan that best suits their needs. Senator Bennett even requires that all health insurance policies pay for abortions.

The plan would use direct government regulation to “squeeze out inefficiencies” in the system. In other words, the system would rely upon a new federal bureaucracy to implement “cost-control” measures that would ration and delay care to reduce overall healthcare spending.

Let’s call a spade a spade: Wyden-Bennett represents a form of healthcare fascism in which government and private insurance companies work hand-in-glove (an insidious “public-private partnership”) to control who spends how much, on what medical goods and services, for whom, under what circumstances and on what schedule. While the bill would leave a private-insurance façade on the system, Senator Bennett is actually proposing to turn healthcare over to the government to run, making private insurance companies and healthcare providers essentially agents of the federal government.

Dr. Hunter continues to describe why there is an important political reason for Senator Bob Bennett to stop negotiating with the White House on health care, how the Democrats could ram through a version of health care reform via the reconciliation process, and how Senator Jim DeMint offered a point-of-order amdenment (passed unanimously) and motion to instruct the Conferees (79 yeah votes) that would all but kill the reconciliation process, only to have Senate Budget Committee Chairman, Kent Conrad, ignore the 60-vote requirement and allow it to be removed from the Budget Resolution in Conference. Everyone lives by the rules, unless you’re and Senator. It is elitist and dishonest, in the least, to ignore rules while expecting the rest of us to live by them. Call your Senator and Representative and ensure they commit themselves to the rules that, in one case, all of them voted for. Read My Discussion With Lewis K. Uhler – How 5 Republican Senators May Hold The Future Of Healthcare In Their Hands.

Dr. Hunter makes an excellent point that a constitutional amendment is a sound and desirable backup measure, and a powerful prophylactic against future over-reach by Washington. Even if ObamaCare passes, it is this my belief that states around the country draft resolutions and amendments that reassert state’s rights, putting the federal governement and the Obama administration on notice to tread lightly and expect one hell of a fight if they even attempt to tip-toe on our rights. Time to put the lot of them in thier place or throw the bums out. Many inside the beltway should thank their lucky stars that tar-and-feathering are out of fashion.

Stay out of our lives.

In othe news and opinion:

A must see video that should be passed on. The Public Plan Deception – It’s Not About Choice. Three public statements advocates of single-payer health insurance explain that a health care bill with the “government monopoly option” would move America toward a single-payer government health care system. In the video Professor Jacob Hacker admits, publicly, that:

Someone once said to me this is a Trojan Horse for single-payer. Well it’s not a Trojan Horse, its just right there (audience laughter). I’m telling you, we’re going to get there, over time, slowly, but we will move away from reliance on employment based health insurance as we should, but we’ll do it in a way that we won’t frighten people into believing they are going to lose their private insurance.

Watch the entire video. Email it. It is damning to the narrative of the Obama administration and its liberal allies – it pulls aside the curtain and allows us to peak behind the stage where we find the naked emperor.

The gift that keeps on giving. Dick Durbin, who as you remember compared America to Nazi Germany opens his pie hole and ticks off another segment of the public content until now with sitting on the sidelines. He accomplishes this task, free of charge, by stating the town hall meetings are clearly orchestrated and insulting a growing segment of the American public. I mean, you can’t buy that kind of motivation, the type of motivation that awakens a growing number of us to get out and make our voices heard. If any orchestration is going on, it’s people like Dick Durban and Nancy Pelosi, and Obama who are the wind in our sails, and I thank them for that. Keep up the good work and watch as more of us join the largest movement since Civil Rights. Note to self – liberals unable to follow simple logic. The more they open their mouths and accuse people like me and you of being automatons when it is clearly their side that is orchestrating violence at the town hall meetings, clearly liberal organizations such as the SEIU that are robots at the beck and call of Obama the citizen spy master, the more of us show up, the angrier we are, the more desperate they look, and the more the poll numbers for health care plummet. Anybody home in that brain there Dick? Obama? Rahm? Nancy? Any liberal?

Please, keep talking. Don’t ever stop. It’s like free advertisement when liberal leaders decide to bloviate ad nauseum and explain how good their version of health care is for us, yet refuse to back a resolution that would require them to “enjoy” the same benefits as their own constituents. An on August 22nd, when the recess rally occurs, liberals like Dick will look like fools and skulk back under their rocks. At that time, only a few brain dead liberals will buy the already lifeless meme of orchestrated resistance when they see millions of people taking to the streets. Ahhh, I love the smell of crybabies in the morning.

The Washington Times agrees, the polling data does not back up the protesters are scripted. Drooping polls undercut scripted protest claims

CRITICAL: White House continues spy campaign: White House Launches Health Tattle-Tale Site on another .gov website. The site is here. Don’t forget to turn yourself in by using the contact section of the page. Ask them to address this video. Amazing how many lies these people will attempt to propagate in a vain attempt to spread the meme of “ObamaCare” is good for you. Watch this one backfire and the polls to drop even lower. Perchance the older site was inundated with millions of emails? Let’s do it again. Melt the phone (202-501-0282) and email of Lee Ellis (lee.ellis@gsa.gov), policy administrator of the GSA Federal Acquisition Service which assign .Gov domains and creates the guidelines for the use of .Gov domains. Be courteous.

More protests in Austin. Some protests in Massachusetts. Did I just read that?

Death panels? What death panels? Oh, those death panels

Rep. Tsongas tries to explain why Congress is exempt from Obamacare. Fails.

“Drowning out opposing views is simply un-American.”

Tsongas (D-MA): I won’t take ObamaCare because I have better options. Wow, the truth from a Democrat!? Quick, somebody turn her in to flag@whitehouse.gov. She’s spreading disinformation! It’s fishy I tell you!

It appears as if Obama’s coattails have become an anchor. Net approval for Dem Senators declining twice as fast as GOP counterparts

Dems Continue “Listening Tour”– Fists, Boots, Bullhorns, Stomping Heads, Smashing Faces, Assaults Included. I can’t wait for the 22nd. A little camera off in the background to document a few things, some thug(s) about to commit an act of stupidity their tiny brains can’t begin to comprehend, and then me. By the time I am done defending myself, said thug(s) will be spending so much time in the hospital they’ll name a wing after them. It will be called the Stupidity Wing – fully paid for by the SEIU.

Don’t forget to check out my discussion with Lewis K. Uhler and how 5 Republican Senators may hold the future of healthcare in their hands. A must read.

__________
Original Post

Update: ACLJ has Lawyers in Government Affairs Office working now on the legality of the White House spy program. Via the radio show today. To listen, see below (around 14:48 seconds into the show). Also read White House Spy Program Violates .Gov Domain Guidelines And Privacy Act of 1974 – Updates And Who To Contact.

Sign the petition The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ – think of the ACLU, only the opposite) website that asks Congress to remove abortion services from mandatory coverage in the health reform bill. Included in the petition is the following language (emphasis mine):

As a firm supporter of protecting life, I am deeply concerned about the official White House release calling on Americans to report those who make “fishy” statements about health care reform. The release is an attack on free speech and designed to stifle public debate about the health care issue.

Hear live casts and listen to archived radio shows at Jay Sekulow Live!. Play today’s show “Attack on Free Speech”, it’s a real eye opener. Forward the audio. GOP Sen. John Cornyn will be on the show tomorrow.

Related:

Is Obama Or Executive Branch In Violation Of The Privacy Act of 1974?

Bush Vs. Obama – Wiretapping Terrorists Vs. Spying on Citizens.

In other news and opinion:

“I hope Glenn Beck kills himself”

Thug life: Enter the unions

ACORN Watch: Louisiana investigates

Cornyn to Obama: Shut down Snitch Central

Update: Bush Vs. Obama – Wiretapping Terrorists vs. Spying on Citizens. Obama and the abuse of power.

Well, that did not last long. Right when the Obama Serfs were out trying to discredit Drudge after Matt released a tape where Obama admits right on camera that his fairy dust wish is a single payer system – also known as socialized medicine or the die, grandma, die bill – the argument from the Chosen One’s apologists centered around an accusation that Matt Drudge cut the video up so that Obama was taken out of context.

Well, Matt now points to the unedited version of that tape on Breitbart TV, which means Obama and his Ministry of Propaganda are left with one option: hoping we are too busy clinging to our guns and religion to notice the liars and thieves amongst us.

Hope and change? More like hopeless and clueless.

More from The Boss: Coming next: A texting czar? and Obama lied, transparency died, Pt. 10,001: No Cash for Clunkers disclosure.

It really amazes me that some people still think our Dear Leader is anything but a front-man and cheerleader for socialism. The only good thing about ObamaCare – I’ll probably live long enough to see its current supporters cry and whine as they experience first-hand the horror of what they have done as their parents, grandparents, and children suffer under this draconian system. It will be worth suffering right along with them and looking into their hopeless and confused eyes and laughing my way to the deep sleep.

Here’s a doozy: Obama is now spying on U.S. citizens. Don’t mind those terrorists, let’s waste time spying on those who disagree with us because, as the White House site states, “Facts are stubborn things”. That right Obambi, your job would be a lot easier if you could just rid yourself of those inconvenient truths. Come to think of it, how do you know the facts if you admitted to not reading the bill? Wow, you graduated from where again?

Bring. It. On.

I’m looking into the legality of this and will be talking with my lawyer friends. If this is a violation of my rights or an over-reach of the federal government, then for the first time in my life I will take up the mantle and sue the pants off anyone involved.

Now I’m really mad. Try bringing Chicago down here to Texas and see where it gets you Obama. That’s right, I just challenged you, Rahm, and your idiot health czar to a showdown at high noon.

Here is the referenced page. I have saved a copy in the event it is taken down or changed.

Is this meant to scare us? If so, your proclivity for miscalculation is reaching legendary levels. I am quite the opposite of scared – more like mad as hell.

A great suggestion from one of Michelle Malkin’s readers:

Danceswithdachshunds said:

Start the chain email machines!

Dear Citizen,

If you see something about Obama’s plan to socialize US healthcare and think there is something ‘fishy’ about it – let him know! Write to flag@whitehouse.gov and tell them what you do not like.

Pass it on!

(And don’t forget, every single person in Congress who doesn’t want to vote for HR 615 should be voted OUT of office. If Obama’s health care plan isn’t good enough for them – THEN THEY ARE NOT GOOD ENOUGH FOR US!)

UPDATE: I just talked with the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) and they are looking into this as we speak.

As I watch these videos (here and here) of congress members coming home to meet the wrath of their constituents, the hairs raise on the back of my neck. I am reminded of the Declaration of Independence. While the following was used as a preamble to describe the abuse of power by Great Britain and subsequent call-to-action for independence, the beginning is a generalization of the human condition under any form of tyrannical government:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of government.

If the liberals want to make health care a right, then by all means do so. The right to health care, combined with the inclusiveness of rationing and subsequent denial of care, would directly contradict the unalienable right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, with the greatest insult visited upon the right to life.

I think Congress and the Senate are on very dangerous grounds here. The backlash and public upheaval should they force through this boondoggle will be a great force, motivated by anger – a potential earth shattering apocalypse – metaphorical, and possibly literal.

For years the gatekeeper against our revolutionary spirit was apathy , so eloquently explained in our Declaration of Independence as:

Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed

But under Obama I am beginning to see signs that many believe we have suffered enough:

But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security.

Our duty.

The mask is off. Here is a video the proves beyond argument that Obama and the liberals are maneuvering towards a single payer socialized health care system, regardless of the lies they tell us. No more. Thanks also Ma Bird who is following me on Twitter for this story.

Now add to the mix of insults and lies the promise from Obama the middle class would not be taxed with his administrations recent statements that

We Can’t Promise Middle Class We Won’t Raise Their Taxes.

More on that here.

Can you say powder keg?

Call and email Congress now. Visit the town hall meetings. Read the words above from the Declaration of Independence and remind them who it is they work for and represent.

Should you become discouraged as you take up your signs, make calls, and send emails, keep the following quote from Thomas Jefferson in mind:

People get the government they deserve.