Category: 2010 Election

A LIBERAL PROGRESSIVE VICTORY

InTheInterestOfSensibilityLeave a comment

Authored by William Robert Barber

The progressives have the wind at their back, a willing crew, and control of the helm wheel; the Obama ship of state, as Herman Melville once noted, “cleaves the brine with pinions afloat.” By means extraordinary the progressives have fitted the objections of the majority against healthcare into the bottle of disregard and tossed that bottle into the ocean.

As never before, the progressives of socialistic intentions have turned this right-central nation abruptly to the political left; the intelligentsias have won the day. Hosannas! Obama and his liberal progressives have achieved a great victory.

The Democrats have aligned their votes; the healthcare legislation is a reality. This political party, the party of FDR, is as in pre-WWII the catalyst, the implementer of radical economic and thus socio-cultural change. America is being pushed, unwillingly, into a European style of socialism; we the people can look forward to increased taxes, more governmental interdiction in our private life, and the hiring of many more federal employees.

Proportionately as never before the conservative movement is on a tear; as if on steroids, the opposition to Obama and his flock of progressives is focused and pointed. The objective is to retain and enrich this rally of anti-Obama policies into the November elections. The goal is to gain majority control of both houses of congress and position the electorate to vote down the healthcare ramification while capturing the presidency in 2012.

The conservative movement with its present anti-Obama government enthusiasm must not simply rescind what can be rescinded within the healthcare legislation but reinstate the original meaningfulness of the Constitution. The movement must limit and impose restrictions on federal power particularly where that power encroaches on state’s rights. Conservative must attain a super majority of public opinion and sweep liberal progressive representatives, their ideology, and their effect. We must stymie, block, and disable any ability of the Obama government to enact their socialistic, liberal, progressive ideals on this nation state.

Obama promised change and he is delivering the very change he declared; he and his followers must be stopped. Let’s defend the Constitutional concept of check and balance, state’s rights, and individual liberty by voting these progressives not simply out of office but out of contemplation.

THE OUTING OF THE PROGRESSIVE’S AGENDA

InTheInterestOfSensibilityLeave a comment

Authored by William Robert Barber

Today, there is no doubt that the House of Representatives and its ipso facto socialist majority, the very political party of Democrats that parade under the more marketable guise of liberal progressives, the ones that are excellently exemplified by the leadership of Senators Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid… they legislate and govern as they please.

For reasons of extreme and timely perfection and a lot of help from President Bush and the Republicans, these soi-disant representatives of the American people have the power to abuse. 2010 is, for the conservative governess of this country, the Rubicon of non-recourse. Either we overtake the majority in the House and the Senate, or we have doomed this nation-state to socialism. There can be no quarter, no compromise, no settling for half-a-loaf — either we overtake the opposition in whole, or we fail. If we fail to gain control, the Democratic majority will deem their socialistic agenda into law.

Interestingly, the governing thesis of the liberal progressives aka socialists, despite their insistence to the contrary, upon implementation are establishing nothing less than a bureaucratically enriched oligarchy. Truly, as the opposition is fond of pointing out, elections have consequences; nevertheless, Harvard graduate or not, no matter the IQ or the dynamics of one’s rhetorical eloquence, the round will not fit into the square.

As long as the sum of 1+1 equals 2, rain wet, and gravity constant: The economic-socio-cultural ideals touted by Liberal Progressives will never bear up to the reality of the whimsicalness of markets nor the predominance of the often operationally dysfunctional, and the always unpredictability of pseudo-sapient behavior.

Government cannot regulate good sense or morality, nor can governments anticipate and act with timeliness. Hell, government cannot even manage its own designs with any consistency; government pledges and promises transparency, ethics, statutory adherence, and fiscal righteousness — but delivery of such always falls short because at its ethos, governments are corrupt.

The basis of a progressive’s economic plan and relevant operational agenda is founded a continuum of socio-economic grading. The goal is to eradicate individual exceptional(ism). The initial objective is to abate the distinction between the have-less and the have-more. Naturally, in an oligarchy the wise and sublime are granted a waiver.

For Obama and brethren, the order of battle is the governmental control of healthcare, energy resources, and education. To follow is a world order wherein governess is manifested in a consortium of willing nation-states. The United States of America is the only super power. Therefore, in the interest of ‘good faith’, the objective is to achieve a common denomination of power and resources; therefore, this nation must relinquish its superpower status and affiliate by subordination to an equal nation status. This equilibrium amongst nations is the price and the precedence to the universal realization of social justice.

As stated — but unlike Lenin’s Soviet Union or Mao’s China — what these progressives espouse for America is impossible to implement. However, they do have the wherewithal to damage the financial, military, socio-educational and economic present and future of this country. The danger is real. These progressives are hell-bent to discharge their ideals on America. We must defeat them…

THOSE ARE FIGHTING WORDS

InTheInterestOfSensibilityLeave a comment

Authored by William Robert Barber

The media has enunciated the obvious… Liberals and conservatives disagree. The insightful mainstream media goes on to declare that the depth and scope of their disagreement is profound. For emphasis, as pointed out by pundits of varying political persuasions, the competing ideologies’ incongruity prompts child-like maliciousness such as name-calling. This kind of behavior is frequently coupled with scurrilous accusations. Imagine that — so say the network medias — a discovery of the apparent is now newsworthy.

Since the Obama election the attacks by liberals and conservatives have intensified and the media are almost enthusiastically enthralled by the thrusts, jabs, and overhand rights, executed by both sides. Indeed, the behavior of some within the ranks of the elected has carved a divide of irreconcilable disrespect and the new legislative norm seems to be opinionated rancor, polarization, and stubborn disregard.

Over the last 25 years of electoral, the electorate has lost all faith in the premise that governments applies its power evenly; instead, a significant number of citizens think of their government as one of freewheeling incompetence and arrogance. Wherein politicians are tenured practitioners interested in fostering a curriculum of electability and politicking, solely for the purpose of retention. For the average American voter, the yesteryear presumption of moral integrity has been replaced with askance, frustration, and a complete displacement of the obedient fidelity.

There are multiple reasons for such a sea-change of opinion; here are a few: Governments are now enterprises, aggressively working to sell services and products to its constituency. Governing bodies are in the gambling business, inclusive of slot machines, lotto, and table games. With their team of well paid staff, they have devised the means and methods to extract fees, permits, taking licensing to new levels of distribution. It is now accepted practice to create measures to impose indirect taxation on all aspects of all transactions. Additionally, the federal government has distanced itself so far-and-away from the average Joe and Mary that it no longer acts in tempo with the community’s need. For capital’s politicians, Washington is a sublime place where those that know all things reside; these inhabitants have lost their regard of constituents’ interest, along with hearing and sight.

Withstanding the disengagement of Washington, for the political parties, compromise has run its course, no room for any give and take; the two factions are stubbornly steadfast in their beliefs. Ostensibly, respective of the reality of political gamesmanship, the liberals and conservatives are truly committed to their ideals and will not — even in the interest of the nation — abandon one more ideal in favor of a compromise.

When the liberal or conservative leadership is challenged by a material question, without hesitation, they reference their predetermined ideals or beliefs. Only after gaining access to these founding premises will they fashion a response. If the challenging question appeals to their emotion rather than to their logic, more than likely the effect will render a proportionate emotional reaction. If the material question is logic oriented, then the question either serves as a supporting tool to an inherent belief, or is discarded because it is unsupportive of a held belief.

In other words, beliefs and ideals do not die easily; indeed, to transpose an original thesis to an anti-thesis is an uphill expedition. Our ideals and beliefs are intrinsic to our persona. Thus, in order to change one’s intrinsic belief, words alone are not sufficient. Influences of empirical reality must be experienced over and over again to provoke a change in a founding ideal. Experiences that provoke charge are rare and exceptional. Therefore, one’s founding premises respective of valid evidence to the contrary is nearly intractable.

Obama, Pelosi, and Reid will never agree to conservative beliefs or ideals; indeed, their beliefs and ideals are the direct antithesis. For the media to expect anything other than such behavior in this volcanic emotionally charged political scenario is rather naive.

It has, for voters, come down to the simplest of questions. Where, within the scope of political variance, is your personal and national best interest served? If one believes the government is the answer/solution than the Democratic Party is your choice. If one believes in the conservative premise of limited governess, than one’s best bet is the Republican Party. After all, when the ambiguity of politics and governing is cleared away, it really comes down the simplest of terms.

Oh, vote conservative…

OBAMA: THE POPULIST

InTheInterestOfSensibilityLeave a comment

Authored by William Robert Barber

“We want our money back. We want our money back! And we’re going to get your money back-every dime, each and every dime.”

Does anyone actually believe the sincerity of President Obama’s declaration? Sounds more like his pledge of CSPAN transparency; wherein, instead of televised real-time transparency, healthcare debates were held behind the closed doors of a Democrats-only caucus. Details of exactness as to the contextual merits of the actual legislation were safely deposited within the mind of the closed-lipped Senator Reid; clearly, Mr. Obama has an issue with truthfulness.

Obama’s ideologically enhanced litany of leftist-progressive political principles has eclipsed his ability to enable and implement the political pragmatism presently required. He just can’t bring himself to adjust to the new political realities. His innately intuitive Chicago breed street smarts have retrograded in favor of his political-ALFA impulses; sensibility has been trounced by populist rhetoric. He insists on scurrilous name calling, threats of punitive taxation, and the blatantly stupid continuum of faux charges that only create market-uncertainty when market-certainly is the requirement.

The TARP funding was uneven in application, simpleton in language, forced into place by the inertia of self-induced panic, and wholly void of the diligence required in general prudent lawmaking behavior. Our esteemed elected officials demonstrated the totality of their incompetence by enacting this monstrosity of discombobulating legislation. Now Mr. Obama wants to change the rules of the TARP funding by enhancing the lending agreement, supposedly, in favor of the government. He has decided that the banks got a good deal and now must pay an arbitrary surtax.

When the too-big-to fail banks received their funding (some forced to take the money) the lender did not contractually specify the governess of a pay-czar, a restriction on bonuses, or an additional tax on revenue; indeed, the government just gave up the funds. Well, by means vested into place by the Federal Reserve, the interest on funds- near zero, the banks paid back the money plus interest.  On top of that many of these banks declared huge profits; Obama declares such actions as the “fat-cats.” Imagine, showing a profit, paying federal/state taxes on such and benefiting their shareholders. How unseemly!

Either we are a country of formal laws or not. Rule by arbitrary legislation is un-American, an indicator of despotic inclination, and a definitive of socialistic governess. Obama and his liberal-progressives cannot run roughshod over the fundamental principles of formal law or the rational precepts of this country’s implied precedence. This president cannot manage, lead, or attempt to govern this nation by ad hoc means; a populist agenda requires substantive rules of evidence. For example, what specifically is the lawful advantage of implementing a bank-tax? And why not tax AIG, GMC, and Chrysler?

Obama with the sleight of a the right populist hand has  the intent to imposed the coercive apparatus of government upon a vital sector of this nation’s economy; while arbitrarily, with the left hand, he supports by the simplicity of tax-exception, other certain government funded entities  that were also too-big to fail.

These Obama gals and guys are lost in the distance between the theories prompted by academic inquiry and the reality-law of imprecise results.

They just do not understand that liberty and freedom, for the peoples of America, is of sublime value; withstanding the surety that is promised as possible by Obama’s political brethren. Americans are not willing to limit their ethos of individualism in exchange for any socialistic utopia.

We should require that before running for the highest office in the land that the candidate must manage a candy-store for 1-year.

DESPITE MEDIA PREFERENCE

InTheInterestOfSensibilityLeave a comment

Authored by William Robert Barber

Spurred on by a Bush bashing media, a less than convincing John McCain, and an economy unexpectedly turned upside down by an inexplicable financial-banking-insurance calamity, the electorate overwhelmingly voted in Obama and his democratic colleagues. The Democratic Party, with an arrogance that originates from the assurance of ultimate power, unilaterally attempted to turn this politically center-right nation into a leftist-socialist nation state. The leadership of Pelosi and Reid, pumped up by their newfound political potency, decided early in their tenure on the power-tactics of purposeful, excluding Republicans from the legislative process. They have practiced where required the bullying of their Blue Dog Democrats. For key members of congress, the leadership created a milieu of creative offerings; these offerings came in the form of persuasive enticements. Including cash rewards, the specific exemption for a certain state, as well as all unions of their heretofore pecuniary obligation — all of these extraordinary inducements are in play while leadership blatantly ignores the reasonable concerns of the nation’s constituents.

The hagiographic pronouncements of an enchanted-by-Obama media favored the presidential candidate throughout his campaign; indeed, there is observable evidence that this very same mainstream media (in contrast to the customary effort placed on unbiased reporting) has extended its favoritism into the first year of the Obama presidency .This liberal-progressive-socialist president and his brethren of the also elected have heretofore enjoyed, in general, a robust positive cheering of support from a media of like-same-political belief.

In addition to such cheerleading, often enough, the seemingly liberal personalities that host and manage the non-cable networks and its cable affiliates, willingly, often with not even a pretense of presenting a counter-argument, present programming that is an effectual endorsement of Democratic policies. This consistency of press patronage is best described as a Barrack-can-do-no-wrong viewpoint, rendering to the receiving public a politically charged prospective that catalyst a counter-prospective from a constituency of independent and conservative viewers, listeners, and readers. The media-reporting by liberal progressive sympathizers are in fact nothing less than a broadcast of appreciation for Obama’s policies. The liberal media has established a value-plus certification of the current administration’s actions. They have a platform designed more for ideological alliance then a media-platform designed for skeptical journalists.

Interestingly, despite media bias, the facts on the ground cannot be denied; such political consequences are clearly disturbing to the liberal progressives. Imagine loosing the governorships of Virginia and New Jersey and now having the super-blue state of Massachusetts vote red. Well, the unimaginable has happened — Scott Brown the Republican beat the liberal progressive Democrat in the bluest of blue states.

Now how can the liberal-bias spin this election as anything other than a rejection of Obama’s policies? In the finality of result, irrespective of the media’s own political prospective, the American people can think for themselves. The people have, in general, rejected the liberal progressive agenda; specifically the people have rejected the Obama Care legislation, the excessive federal spending, and legislation that adds to the largeness of government. This special election is a great victory for the conservative cause.

MANIPULATIVE POLITICIANS AND IDEOLOGISTS

InTheInterestOfSensibilityLeave a comment

Authored by William Robert Barber

I am not sure of the details as to when and I would be guessing as to how. But I think at certain times, starting from the beginnings of American history (such times distinguished by crises perceived or real) by extent variant, means implied, methods explicit, politicians seeking to impose an ideological agenda took advantage of the particular crises with one predominate result: To enhance the power of the federal government. Never have the actions of these politicians, prompted by a crisis of design or real, resulted in the abatement of federal power.

Politicians (elected and common) in cahoots with a somewhat willing governmental bureaucracy while purposefully advantaging the historical sociology of an ambivalent often confused, sometimes frightened, citizenry. These very same politicians have deliberately rearranged and often decisively forsaken the constitutionally founded apparatuses of constitutional governing. Their actions, utilizing the imperial-like edits of legislation or ideological edits that spur beneficial initiatives, have willfully violated the long-established nuance, connotation, and consequence of the constitution’s intent. The spirit, even its established meaningfulness, particularly, regarding the constitution’s explicit federal limitations of authority and supremacy over the governess of states and individual citizens, has effectually been challenged. These politicians of liberal progressive persuasion have for all intents and purposes disabled the constitution’s contextual integrity.

Wherein originally, the idea that the founders crafted into documental form the specifically expressed, uniquely American, political belief of limited government has been vacated in favor of the liberal-progressive persuasion or interpretation that the constitution is a ‘living-ever evolving document.’ This decisive white to black change of constitutional reading has rendered a founding document that is subject to revisionism. The practical result of this liberal-progressive-revisionist remake of our constitution’s original intent is a government of boundlessly omnipotent power.

Certainly, since the turn of the 19th century, the federal government’s insatiable uncontrollable inertia for more power has circumvented, violated, or by implication revised the lawful meaningfulness of the nation’s constitution. The consequence of such has seriously threatened the sovereignty of state’s right and diminished the freedom and liberty of individual citizens.

Most importantly or most dastardly for those of conservative principles, these manipulators, masters of lawmaking inventiveness have captured the three most important aspects of governing control: The first is the power to regulate; which in pure form is the unfettered inducement of draconian-like power. Such power in practical terms translate into the power of defining the meaning of legislation. The second is implicit calculation of inducing a legal procedural process wherein the layperson requires expert knowledge or must, at ones personal expense, rely on licensed by the state representative in order for one to protect oneself from governmental abuse. The elected, in majority, govern through the creative manipulation of ambiguously designed legal language that is in perpetual symbiosis with the judicial, as well as, legislative system. The third is the positively presented propagation of the first two aspects of governing control so to initiate a continuum of populous acceptance. This populous acceptance is in coordination with politicians buying votes by promising cash and rewards. Obama was very effective with his promise to level the playing field by giving money to those that pay no federal income tax.

The voting public is now at an interesting political crossroads. Do we Americans want a larger greater government or a smaller less powerful? I do believe Obama has been the perfect picture to go with the words. He is a socialist. He represents bigger and more; irrespective of tea parties, a resistant Republican defense, and an ever growing contrariness to the Obama administration; taxes will go up and government will expand. But the next election is right around the corner and the congressional majority is sticking to stupid. And I do have the faith that America will vote conservative in the next election so with the grace of sensibility and a few Marines the Democrats will lose congressional seats en gros…

OBAMA THE ENABLER

InTheInterestOfSensibilityLeave a comment

Authored by William Robert Barber

The continuances by politicians, news print, media, pundits, and entertainers posing as journalist, of dancing around the deductively obvious instead of objectively stating the transpiration of a particular event is intellectually stifling. Recently, we experienced a terrorist-crazy load up with explosives, board a US bound plane with the absolutely clear intent of killing everyone on that plane and as many people on the ground in Detroit as possible. This was a premeditated attack by Al-Qaeda; an act of war perpetrated by this nation’s sworn enemy; instead of shipping this crazy to detention in Guantanamo he was issued an attorney, read his rights, and jailed pending a court hearing to determine whether or not he will be detained. This methodology of legal-disposition is bird-brain stupid. This terrorist attacked US citizens, their property, and their institutions — and we treat him as though he robbed a bank.

Withstanding, the Obama administration’s failure to stop this terrorist from boarding the plane in the first cause and experiencing the ignominy of listening to Secretary of Home Land Security on Sunday last tell the national television audience that everything went according to plan, that the system worked, he was a lone wolf, and other etcetera nonsense. The president added coal to the fire by doing the very best he could to not call this terrorist incident a terrorist incident.

The ever so naive Obama is befuddled. After all, he has addressed the reasonableness of extending his hand of peace and tolerance with his speech in Cairo. He has added the rational mixture of “let’s all work together for the common good” and has apologized (repeatedly) for US unilateral aggressiveness; he even eliminated the use of the phrase ‘War on Terror.” And most importantly, as a good faith gesture, he is closing Guantanamo because the prison is an anathema to terrorist, might be terrorist, almost terrorist, Muslims world-wide, and of course without a doubt of hesitation by Obama, such a closing will significantly hamper Al-Qaeda recruiting.

However, this is not the only instance of dancing around the deductively obvious. Congress is addressing the passing of healthcare legislation. Noting that few have actually read the aforesaid, and most who have not read the pending legislation admit that if they read it they would not understand its content. Whatever happened to the concept of prudent oversight and willfully deliberate due diligence? We Americans are allowing the political majority to ramrod critical legislation as if the issue was transparent, commonly decipherable, and opaque. The majority agrees, it is not perfect. Indeed, interestingly, many of the senators that voted for the legislation did so only after insuring their state was except from its pending pecuniary obligations. Blatant payoffs and self-serving earmarks are the sugar Reid utilized to insure the 60-vote requirement. If a private company acted in this manner, the attorney-general would indict for violations, criminal and civil.

In order for the Obama liberal progressive to fashion the nation to accept the transition to socialism, under the guise of ‘for the common good,’ they must stymie all democratic procedures by means within their power, extralegal or by ad-hoc actions. Their goal is to supplement the principle of laws and general rational precepts with an ever enhancing amplitude of governing bureaucracy; the more complex the regulatory compliance, the easier for the socialist to control the process of decision making. The goal of Obama is to take vast powers and legislate under a platform of ordinances and decrees.

The Obama administration coupled with the congressional majority is the single greatest threat to America’s traditional understanding and practice of liberty and freedom.

THE DEMOCRATS AND THEIR DIRTY DEED

InTheInterestOfSensibilityLeave a comment

Authored by William Robert Barber

The Democratic Party of Obama has misread the last election and overreached its electoral mandate. It has put most of its eggs into the basket of healthcare and angered the right and the left, and flummoxed the independents. How a political party could infuriate so many in such a short period of time is a bit mysterious. Nevertheless, by the end of next year, one will be able to measure the Obama effect; the midterm elections will quantify and parse the effectiveness or ineptitude of the Obama, Axelrod, and Emanuel policies.

It is simply amazing to me how devastating the hubris infection is to those in power; but I have never witnessed any group of politicians as arrogant as the Democratic leadership. Of course they do have an excellent role model to mimic; humility is not an apparent vestige of the president. As a consequence of their arrogance, Reid can outright lie to the American people; he can do so because he knows what’s best, and he actually feels justified in doing so.

In truth, Reid and Pelosi have lost their way; they are in the neither-land of blundering muddle-headedness. The healthcare legislation is no longer a matter of reforming healthcare or servicing the best interest of America; for the Democratic Party, this legislation is now a matter of exercising raw political power simply to render to Caesar a political victory. The Democrats have mounted a malicious and disingenuous attack on all non-supporters of the president’s agenda; they are working feverishly to unbridle themselves from the restraints of democratic procedure. These socialists are focused on implanting monopolistic institutions managed by special commissions, regulators, coupled with a behemoth bureaucracy and the entrenched ideal that the government does all the thinking.

This healthcare legislation is indecipherable, unpredictable, and full of contradictions and conundrums; this is the perfect exemplar of manipulating procedural methodology in the interest of divorcing the spirit of the law to suit the means to an end. Everyone knows the Congressional Budget Office scoring on this was founded on unattainable assumption and presumptions; the CBO detailed sections of deep concern within their report.  It seems to mean nothing to the claptrap of congressional officialdom; seemingly, the only true agenda is Obama politics of wealth redistribution over entrepreneurship.

Ideological animus is the fuel that runs the engine of liberal progressive coteries; their time is now and come hell or the loss of congressional seats, they have drunken the kool-aid and they are all in for a penny or a pound.

Well, they have done their deed and run, contrary to the wishes of the American people… that’s why we have elections.

NOVEMBER 3, 2009 AND BEYOND

InTheInterestOfSensibilityLeave a comment

Authored by William Robert Barber

The election results of Tuesday, November 3, 2009 were classic and pivotal. The Republican wins in Virginia and New Jersey did signal a vector to the political right. I believe the Democratics’ defeat indicates that citizens are wrestling with the “whole truth” of the entire Obama-Pelosi-Reid concept of governing. The results of the most recent national election is no longer an indicator of future electoral outcomes; “In the spirit of change we can believe in,” things have changed.

Voters are specifically apprehensive on three topics: The economy, the deficit, and the nation’s high percentage of unemployed. The Democratic response to all of these voter concerns is a 2,000 page document of ambiguous nonsense called Universal Healthcare. Then there is the dead-on-arrival-at-the-Senate Cap & Trade Bill; the one that passed the house of Pelosi with six Republican votes. This, followed up with Geithner’s treasury, seeking to enhance its power by undermining the means of entrepreneurs. All the while, the TARP and Obama stimulus folks are busy spending — or should I say, giving away — billions of dollars to either Democratic political interest or simply issuing these billions into the Obama department of the abyss. Now if this is not enough to angry voters, the Democratic majority is knee-deep in creating the largest deficit ever while Mr. Biden and company are inventing the number of jobs created or saved.

Respective of the results of the last election, one cannot lose sight of the political objective, the one continuum of vigilant regard, the never ending fight for conservative principles and values. Winning an election or not, it’s never over.

Prepare for 2010. This is an election of all-or-nothing consequence; the true test of Pelosi, Reid, and Obama’s governing acceptance. This election will be the definitive affirmation or discard of the liberal progressives’ brand of governing America.