"
(USJF) seek the rightful penalty for Barack Obama! "
Top
Page Links:
Ex-congressman: President a 'threat,' must be
IMPEACHED Obama Blasts Arizona Immigration Bill
Is Obama a socialist?
Very
Disturbing!!! Red Tape Rising
How the Left
Really Plans to Pay for Obamacare
THIS IS OUR PRESIDENT
" What shall America
do with Barrack Hussein Obama? "
As pressure continues to mount, it's time for Americans to start thinking:
What criminal and/or civil penalties shall Obama pay if it's proven that
he is not a natural born citizen and, illegally, he has stolen the office
of President of the United States?
Since penalties range from a slap on the wrist to being made an example to
deter others, I'm asking you fill out a survey to help the United States
Justice Foundation (USJF) seek the rightful penalty for Barack Obama.
The survey asks: "Should Barack Hussein Obama be found to lack the
qualifications, as specified by the U.S. Constitution, to serve as
President of the United States of America, what do you feel should
happen?"
Mr. Obama has come under increasing scrutiny as to whether he is a natural
born citizen, as required by the U.S. Constitution, to serve as President.
In 2009, Barack Obama produced a certification of live birth, purportedly
issued by the state of Hawaii. This, however, is not definitive evidence
of being a naturally born citizen. It is not a long form birth
certificate. Not even the State of Hawaii accepts it as proof of anything!
AND, questions have now arisen as to whether the State of Hawaii actually
issued this document, or whether it is a fake!
Yet Mr. Obama has categorically refused to produce proof positive of the
United States citizenship that he claims to have, going so far as to spend
over $1.7 million, to date, according to published reports, to have his
legal team keep his birth records, and other telltale documents, hidden
from the public.
USJF has filed suit, and is working alongside attorneys in federal courts
and state courts, to compel Barack Hussein Obama to produce evidence of
his natural born citizenship, and -- for refusing to produce valid
citizenship papers -- to have him barred from being on the 2012
Presidential ballot.
If Barack Obama is found to be ineligible to serve as President, he will
face a number of civil and criminal penalties. Barack Hussein Obama would,
in fact, face these potential federal criminal charges:
• False Impersonation of Officer or Employee of the United States (18
U.S.C. § 912), with a penalty of a fine or imprisonment of not more than
three years, or both.
• Conspiracy to Commit Offense or to Defraud the United States (18 U.S.C.
371), with a penalty of a fine or imprisonment of not more than five
years, or both.
• Activities Affecting Armed Forces During War (18 U.S.C. 2388(a), with
the penalty of a fine or imprisonment of not more than 20 years, or both.
• False Statement in Application and Use of Passport (18 U.S.C. 1542),
with a penalty of a fine or imprisonment of not more than 25 years (if the
offense was committed to facilitate an act of international terrorism); 10
years (in the case of the first or second such offense, if the offense was
not committed to facilitate such an act of international terrorism or a
drug trafficking crime), or both.
• False Impersonation of a Citizen of the United States (18 U.S.C. 911),
with a penalty of a fine or imprisonment of not more than three years, or
both.
• Perjury (18 U.S.C. 1621), with a penalty of a fine or imprisonment of
not more than five years, or both.
Perhaps it seems to you that these potential punishments don't fit the
atrocious crime. Rest assured that Mr. Obama's arch liberal pals in the
Justice Department, and throughout Congress, preaching a live-and-let-live
sermon, will be as lenient as possible!
But just think about all that this schemer has done! Not to mention all
that must be undone -- at great expense to you, the taxpayer!
When Barack Obama's house of cards comes tumbling down, who will pick up
the pieces? Remember, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi's name is on two
"Official Certification of Nomination" forms by the Democrat National
Committee -- one that states that Mr. Obama is "legally qualified to serve
under the provisions of the United States Constitution" and another that
merely says that Barack Obama is "duly nominated."
Penalties should extend to those who knew that Barack Hussein Obama didn't
have the Constitutional qualifications. Did Vice President Joe Biden know
and go along with the skullduggery? Then he shouldn't be allowed to step
up to President. In the line of succession, Nancy Pelosi obviously is
suspect. How about Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid?
Mainstream media and the Democratic Party will want to say, "So what?"
They will demand that Barack Obama continue on as if no crimes had been
committed. In answer to cries for justice, they might even call for an
amendment to the U. S. Constitution—Barack Obama's supporters have been
discussing such a strategy since 2005! More likely, they will say, "The
Constitution is merely a dusty guideline that modern government is not
honor bound to follow." That's where I really get angry!
That's why USJF must bring up the subject of penalties now. Americans must
be made aware of the fact that, without proof positive of Mr. Obama's
citizenship, crimes have been committed and condoned. The public must
demand justice - with the punishment that fits the crimes.
Unfortunately, this requires more funding than USJF can spare from our
ongoing court battles with Barack Obama, who has spent, according to
published reports, over $1.7 million in legal fees fighting the demand
that he produce a birth certificate!
At times, I wish that we could pull away from other battlefields to
concentrate all our resources on this fight. But that would be wrong! We
must continue to fight on, relying on right-minded patriots, like you, for
reinforcement.
So I turn to you for the funding necessary to make America aware of the
criminal consequences of Barack Hussein Obama's actions, so that there is
sufficient outrage that all of this illegal activity cannot be swept under
the rug!
Think of it: Barack Obama knows the place of his birth and the status of
his citizenship, as nearly all adults in the world do. As a constitutional
lawyer, he also has known all along if he doesn't have the qualifications
that the Constitution demands for him to serve as President of the United
States!
Therefore, with premeditation, and, yes, malice, he may have purposefully
perpetrated the greatest hoax in history on the American people, and on
the United States!!
The United States Justice Foundation (USJF) is a non-profit organization,
whose tax-exempt status under IRS section 501(c)(3) has been recognized by
the Internal Revenue Service. Your contributions are tax deductible.
Corporate contributions may be accepted.
Back to top:

" Ex-congressman: President a 'threat,' must be
IMPEACHED
"
'We have man in White House who brazenly disregards his oath of office'
OBAMA WATCH CENTRAL
WorldNetDaily
July 23, 2010
By Bob Unruh
A former congressman and GOP presidential candidate says, for current
members of the House and Senate to uphold their oath of office that
includes the defense of the United States against enemies "foreign and
domestic," they need to be filing impeachment charges against Barack
Obama.
Former U.S. Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., joined what has become a growing
surge of those recommending the ultimate solution for a president they
believe not only has disagreeable policies, but is participating in
actions that damage the nation.
Tancredo wrote in a opinion piece in the Washington Times that "Mr.
Obama's refusal to live up to his own oath of office – which includes the
duty to defend the United States against foreign invasion – requires
senators and representatives to live up to their oaths. Members of
Congress must defend our nation against all enemies, foreign and domestic.
Today, that means bringing impeachment charges against Mr. Obama."
The ultimate guide to Obama's radical agenda – and how to stop it!
Tancredo is not the first to raise the idea of impeachment against Obama,
who has implemented legislation and policies effectively nationalizing
financial institutions, automobile companies, health care and many other
previously private interests.
In fact, he was not even the only person on this particular day. Times
columnist Jeffrey T. Kuhner, who also is president of the Edmund Burke
Institute, wrote at the same time, "President Obama has engaged in
numerous high crimes and misdemeanors. The Democratic majority in Congress
is in peril as Americans reject his agenda. Yet more must be done: Mr.
Obama should be impeached."
Kuhner continued, "He is slowly – piece by painful piece – erecting a
socialist dictatorship. We are not there – yet. But he is putting America
on that dangerous path. He is undermining our constitutional system of
checks and balances; subverting democratic procedures and the rule of law;
presiding over a corrupt, gangster regime; and assaulting the very pillars
of traditional capitalism. Like Venezuela's leftist strongman, Hugo
Chavez, Mr. Obama is bent on imposing a revolution from above – one that
is polarizing America along racial, political and ideological lines. Mr.
Obama is the most divisive president since Richard Nixon. His policies are
balkanizing the country. It's time for him to go."
Tancredo's arguments aren't complicated. During his brief presidential run
in 2008 he focused on the border-security issue of the United States, and
he still is concerned that the failure to secure the U.S. boundary –
especially with Mexico – will lead to tragic consequences at the hands of
border-crossing terrorists.
Tancredo appeared on Fox News today to defend his position from skeptics,
saying Obama's responsibility is to protect and defend the Constitution
and the United States, not "fundamentally transform" them.
"Our president is an enemy of our Constitution, and, as such, he is a
danger to our safety, our security and our personal freedoms," Tancredo
warns, affirming his belief that Obama is more dangerous for the United
States than al-Qaida.
"He is more dangerous simply because he is inside," he said. "Few people
took him seriously about fundamentally transforming America. That is what
he is all about. That is what he has set about doing. He is a committed
ideologue. When you have someone like that in the White House, it is a
scary proposition."
He cited the president's lack of action to adequately secure the border
with Mexico.
"He's putting his country in danger," Tancredo said. "The country the
Founders put together, that's what's in jeopardy."
"Barack Obama is one of the most powerful presidents this nation has seen
in generations. He is powerful because he is supported by large majorities
in Congress, but, more importantly, because he does not feel constrained
by the rule of law. Whether he is putting up the weakest possible defense
of the Defense of Marriage Act despite the Justice Department's legal
obligation to support existing law; disenfranchising Chrysler and GM
bondholders in order to transfer billions of investor dollars to his
supporters in the United Auto Workers; or implementing yet a third
offshore oil-drilling moratorium even after two federal courts have thrown
out two previous moratoriums, President Obama is determined to see things
done his way regardless of obstacles," Tancredo wrote in his op-ed.
"To Mr. Obama, the rule of law is a mere inconvenience to be ignored,
overcome or 'transcended' through international agreements or 'norms."
Tancredo wrote that the "dedicated Marxist who lives in the White House"
holds power over budgets, the judiciary, national defense and health care.
As such, "his regime and his program are not just about changing public
policy in the conventional sense. When one considers the combination of
his stop-at-nothing attitude, his contempt for limited government, his
appointment of judges who want to create law rather than interpret it –
all of these make this president today's single greatest threat to the
great experiment in freedom that is our republic.
"Yes, Mr. Obama is a more serious threat to America than al-Qaida. We know
that Osama bin Laden and followers want to kill us, but at least they are
an outside force against whom we can offer our best defense. But when a
dedicated enemy of the Constitution is working from the inside, we face a
far more dangerous threat. Mr. Obama can accomplish with the stroke of his
pen what bin Laden cannot accomplish with bombs and insurgents."
Tancredo, who served five terms representing Colorado and now is chairman
of the Rocky Mountain Foundation, was joined by Kuhner, who accused Obama
of abusing his office and violating his oath.
Kuhner cited Obama's demand that all Americans buy health insurance.
"The federal government does not have the right to coerce every citizen to
purchase a good or service. This is not in the Constitution, and it
represents an unprecedented expansion of power," he wrote. "Yet
Obamacare's most pernicious aspect is its federal funding of abortion.
Pro-lifers are now compelled to have their tax dollars used to subsidize
insurance plans that allow for the murder of unborn children. This is more
than state-sanctioned infanticide. It violates the conscience rights of
religious citizens."
He further cited Obama's actions regarding the BP oil spill.
"There is a legal process for claims to be adjudicated, but Mr. Obama has
behaved more like Mr. Chavez or Russia's Vladimir Putin: He has bullied BP
into setting up a $20 billion compensation fund administered by an Obama
appointee. In other words, the assets of a private company are to be
raided to serve a political agenda."
He also wrote about the takeovers in the auto and financial industries,
and the New Black Panther case.
"Under Mr. Obama, the Constitution has become a meaningless scrap of
paper," he said. "As president, he is supposed to respect the rule of law.
Instead, his administration has dropped charges of voter intimidation
against members of the New Black Panther Party. This was done even though
their menacing behavior was caught on tape: men in military garb
brandishing clubs and threatening whites at a polling site."
Tancredo nearly two months ago broached the subject of impeachment,
suggesting an "impeachment file."
"I believe there is a growing body of evidence of impeachable offenses
sufficient to warrant a formal impeachment resolution in the House,
followed by a trial in the Senate," he wrote at the time.
And the suggestion even has come from onlookers at a presidential
appearance. CNN has documented when Obama made a surprise visit to a crowd
on a shuttle bus, one onlooker shouted, "When are you going to quit? When
are you going to be impeached?"
The issue even has appeared among online gamers, when Microsoft told an
Xbox user the signon name "Impeach Obama" was not allowed because, "If you
were President Obama, how would you feel if someone wanted to impeach
you?"
Floyd and Mary Beth Brown, in a column on WND, discussed the
www.ImpeachObamaCampaign.com
that they launched.
They reported that many, instead of examining the evidence, attacked the
messengers.
"We expected these attacks," they reported. But they said the unresolved
issues include:
• "Obama repeatedly lies to the American people when he says we can keep
our private insurance, knowing full well that his legislation will
inevitably drive private insurers out of business.
• "Gerald Walpin, inspector general of the Corporation for National and
Community Service, investigated Kevin Johnson, a big buddy of the
president, for misuse of funds from an AmeriCorps grant. Obama did not
like Walpin's investigation and findings, whereupon he vindictively fired
Walpin to cover for his friend, Johnson. A subsequent investigation
vindicated Walpin's judgment in the matter.
• "Barack Obama oversaw the effective takeover by government of banks, the
largest insurance company (AIG), General Motors and Chrysler – the bulk of
the U.S. auto industry – thus stripping bondholders, shareholders and
others of their personal property.
• "Barack Obama is actively pursuing cap-and-trade legislation. Instead of
taxing the very air we breathe, it will instead, in a manner of speaking,
tax the air we exhale, giving the government unprecedented control over
the economy and American businesses. Those taxed businesses will then pass
the fees onto the American people.
• "Spending American citizens' money, Barack Hussein Obama is running up
our debt at an alarming rate. In just the nine months since Obama assumed
office, our national debt has gone up by over a trillion dollars. To put
that figure in perspective, it took George W. Bush eight years to add $4.8
trillion to the national debt.
• "And, to add insult to injury, Obama is printing money like it's going
out of style. The effect will be hyperinflation, a crippling of our
economy and, quite possibly, personal hardship on a scale that has not
been experienced since the Great Depression.
• "Barack Hussein Obama appointed countless "czars" to oversee everything
from the closing of Guantanamo to the food we eat. These czars don't have
to be approved by the Senate. The czars have unprecedented power and
report only to Obama. Members of both parties are disturbed by these
extra-constitutional excrescences. Sen. Robert Byrd said: "The
accumulation of power by White House staff can threaten the constitutional
system of checks and balances." Rep. Jack Kingston called the czars a
"parallel government."
• "And finally, Obama consistently refuses to approve the release of his
actual birth certificate, college transcripts and his medical records. Is
he trying to hide something that will threaten his presidency?"
Back to top: 
" Obama Blasts Arizona Immigration Bill "
Friday, 23 Apr 2010
By: Dan Weil
President Obama has called a pro-security immigration bill passed by
Arizona’s legislature “misguided” and urged Congress to pass its own
immigration plan instead.
The Arizona bill, currently awaiting the signature of Republican Gov. Jan
Brewer, requires state law enforcement officials to question people about
their immigration status if there is reason to suspect they are in the
country illegally.
That would mean Arizona police have the strongest authority in the nation
to investigate the status of suspected illegal immigrants, according to
The Washington Post.
Obama, speaking at a Rose Garden ceremony to naturalize 24 U.S. military
personnel, said he has instructed his staff to "closely monitor the
situation" to make sure the Arizona measure doesn’t violate people's civil
liberties.
Obama isn’t the only Democrat pressing for action on immigration. Sen.
Majority Leader Harry Reid, Nev., has pushed the issue to the top of the
spring agenda for Congress, ahead of an energy bill.
He sees bipartisan efforts for a bill as stalled. So he told Sens. Charles
Schumer, D-N.Y., and Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., to craft a deal in three
weeks or Democrats will push their own bill, aides and lobbyists told The
Post.
The aides said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., is on board to hold a
vote before November elections, if the Senate passes a bill.
The real issue for Democrats may be political. Even if their bill goes
nowhere, a Congressional debate over immigration could inspire their base,
particularly Hispanic voters.
In recent weeks, key Democratic supporters, including Latino groups, labor
unions and the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, have dialed up their demands
that Obama and Reid address the immigration issue.
Obama promised in the 2008 election to implement immigration reform, and
Reid made the same commitment to supporters in his heavily Hispanic heavy
state, where he faces a difficult contest for re-election.
Republicans are ready for a fight with Democrats over the issue.
At a time when one in 10 Americans are unemployed, "There is little
enthusiasm in Congress to pass legislation that would legalize millions of
unlawful residents to compete with out-of-work Americans for needed jobs,"
Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., the ranking member of the Senate Judiciary
Committee, said in a statement.
"One has to ask: are members raising the idea of comprehensive reform now
because they believe the majority of Americans truly want it, or because
it serves a specific political purpose in a tough election year?"
Sessions isn't the only one who thinks the Democrats have their priorities
wrong.
"The problem Obama has is that any time he is not talking about jobs, he's
on the wrong topic," Republican pollster David Winston told The Washington
Examiner.
"And trying to bring up particularly divisive issues, like immigration, at
this point makes the situation worse."
Graham’s support for the measure he co-sponsored with Schumer has cooled.
The bill would beef up border security, punish employers who exploit
illegal workers and establish a road map for legalization or expulsion of
about 12 million illegal immigrants.
Instead, Graham has said his top priority is an energy and climate bill,
and he has lambasted the White House for failing to work for passage of
the Schumer-Graham bill.
Immigration advocates say Graham's position makes it less likely that the
Senate will pass an immigration bill.
© Newsmax. All rights reserved.
Back to top:

" Is Obama a socialist? "
April 8, 2010 - 3:08 ET
The claim: No proof Barack Obama is a socialist
The response:
Barack Obama Sr. (Dad)
*Communist who saw nothing wrong with government 'taxing 100%' so long as
the people got benefits...
- Obama Sr. on socialism (Link)
- Overview of the paper (Link)
*Harvard educated economist
*Nairobi bureaucrat who advised government to 'redistribute' income
through higher taxes
*Demonized corporations
*Abandoned Barack Obama Jr. when he was 2 years old to continue at Harvard
(teaching son that ideology is more important than family)
Stanley Ann Dunham (Mom)
*Communist sympathizer
*Practiced 'critical theory' (aka Marxism)
*Influenced by Nietzsche and Freud
*Left Hawaii for Indonesia, Pakistan
*Attended a leftist church nicknamed the 'little red church' because of
its Communist sympathies
*Left Barack Obama Jr.
Mentor
*Barack's grandparents introduced Barack Obama Jr. to poet and communist
Frank Marshall Davis (Link)
*Davis becomes a mentor as young Barack struggled with abandonment by
parents
College & Church
*Admittedly sought out 'Marxist' professors (Link)
*Admittedly attended 'socialist conferences' (Link)
*Began attending a Marxist church - led by pastor Jeremiah Wright
(attended for 20 years) (Link)
Career
*Tragedy of the Warren Court: No redistributive change (Link)
*Voted for TARP (Link)
*$787 billion stimulus redistribution bill
*Healthcare bill admittedly about 'redistributing the wealth'
*Single Payer Healthcare proponent (Link)
*President Obama now also President of GM & Chrysler
*President Obama seizes control of insurance giant AIG
*President Obama is leading America to single payer healthcare
*President Obama seized control of Student Loan industry in order to 'cut
out middle man'
*President Obama seizes control in massive land grabs
*Repeatedly vilifies 'the rich'
*Obama believes race problems can be solved through redistribution of
wealth... he said "race is still an enormous factor in our society. But
economics can overcome a lot of racial division."
*Trying to regulate the Internet via FCC
*Forces mortgage co's to cover people who aren't paying mortgage (Link)
*Extends unemployment benefits to 99 weeks (Link)
*Told Joe the plumber 'it's better when you spread things around' (Link)
Family, Friends, Advisors & Administration
*Wife Michelle Obama said “The truth is, in order to get things like
universal health care and a revamped education system, then someone is
going to have to give up a piece of their pie so that someone else can
have more.”
*Jim Wallis, Obama's spiritual advisor & forced redistribution of wealth
advocate
*Van Jones, disgraced Green Jobs Czar & Communist
*Ron Bloom, Manufacturing Czar & anti-free market
*John Holdren, pro-redistribution of wealth
*Andy Stern, SEIU President & redistribution of wealth fan
*Anita Dunn, fan of Chairman Mao
*Mark Lloyd, FCC 'Diversity Czar'
*Carol Browner, socialist
*Robert Creamer, socialist
Back to top:

" Very Disturbing!!! Sent by Retired Vice Admiral Bob Scarborough, of Arlington, Va. "
I wanted to give you all some disturbing information on our wonderful
president. I work with the Catch-A-Dream Foundation which provides
hunting and fishing trips to children with life-threatening illnesses.
This past weekend we had our annual banquet / fundraiser event in
Starkville . "As a part of our program, we had scheduled Sgt. 1st Class
Greg Stube, a highly decorated U.S. Army Green Beret and inspirational
speaker who was severely injured while deployed overseas and didn't have
much of a chance for survival to come.
Greg is stationed at Ft. Bragg,
NC and received permission from his commanding officer to come speak at
our function. Everything was on go until Obama made a policy that NO
U.S. SERVICEMAN CAN SPEAK AT ANY FAITH-BASED PUBLIC EVENTS ANYMORE.
Needless to say, Greg had to cancel his speaking event with us.. Didn't
know if anyone else was aware of this new policy. Wonder what kind of
news we all will receive next. You're just starting to see the
Obamanation Your religion is on the list next. I don't know about you,
but this makes me furious.
What a rotten thing to do by the "commander-in-chief". And I'm afraid we
ain't seen nothin' yet.
Back to top:
Red Tape Rising
Red Tape Rising
Just three days after President Barack Obama's health plan was signed into
law, AT&T
announced that due to an obscure tax
change in the bill, the nation's largest telephone company would take a $1
billion hit to its bottom line this quarter. According to
health benefits analysts this tax law
modification would shave as much as $14 billion from U.S. corporate
profits. While it would have been better had these tax losses been made
more public before Congress voted, at least these tax charges are
transparent and easily quantifiable enough to get noticed by the American
people. Unfortunately the same cannot be said of the hundreds of new
regulations that the federal government will enforce as it tries to
implement
Obama's redistributionist health agenda.
In addition to the federal government's explicit taxes and spending,
Americans are also burdened with a slew of hidden taxes imposed by an
ever-increasing number of regulations. More than 50 agencies have a hand
in federal regulatory policy, enforcing more than 150,000 pages of rules.
Many of these regulations provide needed benefits. Most Americans would
agree on the need for security regulations to protect citizens from
terrorist attacks, although the extent and scope of those rules may be
subject to debate. But each regulation comes at a cost--a "regulatory tax"
imposed on all Americans. According to a 2005
study commissioned by the Small
Business Administration, the cost of all regulations then on the books was
some $1.1 trillion per year.
Worse than the existing size of our country's regulatory burden, is the
pace at which it has been growing. Contrary to what most liberals and
media elites would have you believe, President George Bush had a decidedly
mixed record on regulation. While he should be praised for strengthening
the role of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) in
screening new regulations,
by every objectively measurable metric the size
and scope of the regulatory state grew significantly under his tenure.
And President Bush's last years in office were his worst. In 2008 36 major
regulations were enacted by the Bush administration, and in 2009 some
$15 billion in new regulatory costs
were imposed on the American people.
President Bush doesn't deserve all the blame for that $15 billion in new
costs for 2009. About $4.4 billion is attributable to regulations approved
by the Obama administration. While that may seem like a significant
decrease, it is actually an ominous sign when put in context. Regulatory
activity always increases near the end of a presidency and is slower at
the beginning.
So in President Bush's first year, he enacted
only one major rule and he was in his third year in office before the new
regulatory costs he inflicted on the American people hit President Obama's
one-year $4 billion mark. And that $4 billion does not yet
include all the regulations for Obamacare. Or all of the regulations
Obama's EPA wants to pass under the Clean Air Act. Or any of the new
financial regulations that Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) and Sen. Chris Dodd
(D-CT) want to inflict on the American people.
There are some things Congress can do now to help better manage the
onslaught of federal regulations. First the authority and scope of OIRA
should be protected. Establishing a sunset date for all new regulations
would also help. But ultimately things will not change for the better
until policymakers exercise the will and resolve to guard against the
deluge. As Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI)
asked last week: "If Congress can't
control what a few mortgage finance bureaucrats do with your dollars, why
would anyone trust Congress to control what tens of thousands of
bureaucrats will do with your health? ... Should unchecked centralized
government be allowed to grow and grow in power ... or should its powers
be limited and returned to the people?"
Back to top:

How the Left
Really Plans to Pay for Obamacare
How the Left Really Plans to Pay for Obamacare
According
to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO),
over half of President Barack Obama's new $940 billion health care
entitlement is paid for by price-fixing Medicare cuts. Never mind that the
President's own Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services says that these
cuts would cause
"roughly 20 percent" of Medicare providers to go bankrupt in
Obamacare's first ten years. The CBO has to believe these cuts will happen
because they are required, by law, to believe everything Congress tells
them. The American people are not. So the American people ought to know
that instead of cutting doctors' Medicare reimbursement rates by 21% as
required by law on April 1, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
froze payments at current levels until Congress could come back after
Easter recess and rescind those cuts. Again. As they have done every year
but one since the cuts were first enacted in 1997.
This doc fix is big enough that, if it had been included as a cost of
Obamacare, it would have sent the President's bill into the red all by
itself. But the half trillion dollars in Medicare cuts used to fund the
rest of Obamacare are a much bigger problem. Even if we assume they all go
as planned,
President Obama's budget would borrow 42 cents for each dollar spent
in 2010; would run a $1.6 trillion deficit in 2010; and would leave
permanent deficits that top $1 trillion as late as 2020. Add on the half
trillion dollars in Medicare cuts that, given Congress' track record, the
American people would be naive to think will ever happen, and the federal
government is looking at a pile of new debt.
The left's solution to this problem has been simmering for some time now.
Senate Budget Committee chairman Kent Conrad (D-ND) floated the idea to
The Washington Post last May. Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) told
Charlie Rose it was "on the table" in October. And yesterday White
House adviser Paul Volcker
told the New York Historical Society it should be considered. The "it"
here is a Value Added Tax (VAT), which is a fancy way of saying national
sales tax.
A VAT can be (and has been) structured in many different ways. But the
real world results are always the same: higher taxes, more government
spending, lower growth, fewer jobs and more special interest power.
Higher Taxes: Don't believe for a second that a VAT will help offset other
taxes. International evidence clearly shows that a VAT is likely to
increase the aggregate burden of government. Europeans used to only have
a slightly higher tax burden than the United States. But beginning in the
late 1960s, European countries began to implement VATs. Since then, the
overall tax burden in Europe has climbed rapidly. And once a VAT is in
place,
the evidence shows that the tax rate rises over time.
Higher Government Spending: Not surprisingly, with more revenues, European
governments turn around and spend much more than the United States does.
According to a study by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, government spending
grew 45 percent faster in VAT nations than in non-VAT countries.
Slower Growth: According to
the academic literature, there is a strong negative relationship
between government spending and economic performance. In other words,
more government spending means less economic growth and fewer jobs.
Economic growth is driven by individuals and entrepreneurs operating in
free markets, not by Washington spending and regulations.
More Power to Washington: There is one economy that would greatly benefit
from a VAT: Washington, DC. No VAT could ever be levied evenly on all
goods and services. Due to political considerations, a VAT in addition to
current taxes would likely exempt politically sensitive items like food,
clothing, health care and housing. Industries would lobby heavily for
exemptions from the VAT for the economic benefits described above. This
would give Congress an even larger role in picking winners and losers in
the marketplace. Success would depend less on ingenuity and hard work and
more on the ability to gain political favor.
Our nation faces a financial crisis. But low revenues are not the problem.
Spending is. Heritage fellow Brian Riedl
explains:
Real
federal spending remained steady at $21,000 per household throughout the
1980s and 1990s, before President Bush hiked it to $25,000 per household.
Now, President Obama has a proposed a budget that would permanently spend
a staggering $32,000 per household annually – and that’s before all the
baby boomers retire and add another $10,000 per household in Social
Security, Medicare, and Medicare costs to the bottom line.
So the problem is not declining revenues, but rather a spending spree
unlike any in American history. If Washington insists on spending $32,000
per household, it will have to tax $32,000 per household – an unaffordable
and unfair tax burden regardless what kind of tax collects it.
Rather than tax America into permanent economic stagnation, President
Obama and Congress must rein in runaway federal spending. Simply bringing
real federal spending back to the $21,000 per household average that
prevailed in the 1980s and 1990s would balance the budget by 2012 without
raising a single tax on anyone. Even returning spending to the
pre-recession level of 20 percent of GDP would eliminate two-thirds of the
projected 2019 budget deficit without raising taxes.
Back to top:

" THIS IS OUR PRESIDENT
"

From Dreams of My Father: 'I
ceased to advertise my mother's race at the age of 12 or 13, when I began
to suspect that by doing so I was ingratiating myself to whites.'
From Dreams of My Father
: 'I
found a solace in nursing a pervasive sense of grievance and animosity
against my mother's race.'
From Dreams of My
Father: 'There
was something about her that made me wary, a little too sure of herself,
maybe and white..
From Dreams of My
Father: 'It
remained necessary to prove which side you were on, to show your loyalty
to the black masses, to strike out and name names.'
From Dreams of My
Father: 'I
never emulate white men and brown men whose fates didn't speak to my own.
It was into my father's image, the black man, son of Africa , that I'd
packed all the attributes I sought in myself: the attributes of Martin and
Malcolm, Dubois and Mandela.'
And FINALLY, and most
scary!
From Audacity of Hope: 'I
will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly
direction.'
We CANNOT have someone
with this mentality running our GREAT nation!
These are his words straight from his books!
Back to top:
|