Four months ago, Vice President Biden proclaimed a summer of recovery that would create 250,000 to 500,000 jobs a months. A few days ago, Vice President Biden stated, “no doubt we’re moving in the right direction” economically. Reality is we have 3.3 million fewer jobs since Obama and Biden took office. Is the right direction purposeful failure?

 Earlier this week, the National Association of Realtors reported that July sales of existing homes fell by 27% from June 2010. The Commerce Department reported  that sales of new homes fell 12.4% Since June 2010.

 Earlier in August, first time claims for unemployment hit a nine month high. Unemployment remains at 9.5% but including those who have stopped looking for work the unemployment rate is around 18%. Forty-eight of fifty states have lost jobs since the stimulus bill was enacted.

 General Motors new cars sales are in a death spiral, dropping 36% in September from the prior month;  Chrysler new car sales dropped 33% for the same period. The “cash for clunkers” program removed so many cars from the road that used car pricing has soared due to the newly limited supply of used cars.

 President Obama claims that 2.3 to 2.6 million jobs were saved by the stimulus package but he can’t support his statement because there is no metric for “saved jobs.” The cold hard fact is 3.3 million people lost jobs since Mr. Obama became President.

 Businesses are sitting on $2-3 trillion that could be invested in new jobs. The Obama administration policies of increased taxes, increased health care regulation, increased financial regulation, and the uncertainty created by massive regulation and lack of leadership in Washington, D.C., is making the private sector pause. No one wants to make a long term decision when all the President’s policies do is create more uncertainty rather than answer questions and solve problems.

 The Congressional Budget Office estimates the Obama administration will spend 24% of GDP during his term in office. Budget deficits will average 8.7% of GDP or 24 times the size of President Clint’s surplus!

 Beginning January 2011, the Obama administration will raise taxes on small businesses. In fact, the minimum personal income tax rate increases 50%. Additionally, beginning in January, drug companies, health plans and medical device manufacturers will increase prices to cover their increased taxes. Everyone who has company sponsored health insurance will pay taxes on the cost of this health insurance, which means less take home pay for every worker.

 In the face of these stark facts, President Obama still claims the economy is humming along at a good pace. Hello???

 The damage inflicted on the United States economy by Obama’s socialist administration is tantamount to a declaration of war against the American people. Never again can the Democratic Party be trusted with the future of the United States or the futures of our children.

 While President Obama focused all his energies on passing the financial regulation bill, the American people watched as the second stimulus bill failed to produce jobs.

 Now, as President Obama begins his ninth vacation in nineteen months, he proposed a third stimulus bill for small business job creation.

 As Albert Einstein said, “insanity” is repeating the same process or steps over and over, and expecting a different outcome.

 It is now safe to question the President’s sanity . . . or is it. The first stimulus bill was never about producing jobs, nor was the second stimulus bill nor the third. The stimulus bills were authored by the Apollo Alliance, who included in the bill every progressive-socialist agenda except jobs.

 As of 8/6/2010, the government has spent only 58% of the first stimulus package of $862 billion (Recovery.gov still shows the original amount of the first stimulus at $787 billion). The second stimulus bill has failed to make it to Recovery.gov.

 The stimulus bills have always been about the socialist agenda of population control by keeping the population dependent on government. How? By not producing jobs.  Even President Obama’s recent ban on drilling in the gulf coast had nothing to do with oil but everything to do with the elimination of approximately 100,000 direct and indirect jobs in the gulf.

 The health care bill was not about providing better health care for the people. It was about population control through government controlled health care plans, government bureaucracies and special panels, all run by unelected political hacks.

 The financial regulation bill was not about trying to prevent another financial meltdown, otherwise why did Congress and President Obama exempt Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac from the bill? No, it was all about control. It was all about imposing a socialist agenda over a capitalist market.

 What can be expected from a progressive-socialist agenda? First, it is an inhumane political philosophy. How do we know? We turn to history. We turn to the tens of millions of innocent people controlled and ruined by Joseph Stalin. We turn to the millions of innocent people whose lives were controlled and ruined by Mao Zedong. We turn to the histories of  Idi Amin, Kim Il Sung, Mengistu Haile Mariam, and Pol Pot, to name a few more.

 Of course, President Obama’s strategy will be more sophisticated. Approximately 40-50% of the population was dependent on the government before he became President. He only needs to nudge another 20% into that dependency category in order to have voting majorities in the country. What citizen dependent on government largesse will refuse to vote for the party of handouts? We already see it in some minority groups who make up the bulk of government dependents.

 Second, it is a pro-tyranny, anti-liberty political philosophy. How do we know? Again, we turn to history. As Mark Levin wrote in his book, Liberty and Tyranny, “The Statist . . . misuses equality to pursue uniform economic and social outcomes. He must continuously enhance his power at the expense of self-government and violate the individual’s property rights at the expense of individual liberty, for he believes that through persuasion, deception, and coercion he can tame man’s natural state and man’s perfection can, therefore, be achieved in Utopia. The Statist must claim the power to make that which is unequal equal and that which is imperfect perfect. This is the hope the Statist offers, if only the individual surrenders himself to the all- powerful state. Only then can the impossible be made possible.”

 Third, progressive-socialism is steeped in hatred of everything and anything that is anti-collectivist.  It is a pro-fear ideology. It is a political philosophy that divides and attempts to conquer its perceived enemies by race, by class, by religion, by ethnicity; it is no surprise that the Democratic Party was founded as a pro-slavery party. History clearly identifies this ugly stain of the Democratic Party. The Democratic Party still abuses Black Americans through policies that destroyed the Black family. Look at every large urban population center containing large poor government dependent populations and you’ll find large Black populations under Democratic administrations, e.g., Washington, D.C., Detroit, Atlanta, Oakland, Philadelphia, San Francisco, and Los Angeles come to mind.

 Four, with progressive-socialists, it’s never what it seems to be. Americans have already picked up on President Obama’s consistency of saying one thing and doing another. Like every dictator in history, progressive-socialists must have enemies to attack and blame for perceived problems. Ninteen months into his first administration, President Obama continues to blame George Bush for every conceivable problem.

 Progressive-socialists always use the race card. A case in point is Spencer Ackerman, a so-called journalist from the Washington Independent, who urged his fellow journalists “to deflect attention from Obama’s relationship with Wright by changing the subject. Pick one of Obama’s conservative critics, Ackerman wrote, “Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares — and call them racists.”  Progressive-socialist writers are not necessarily “journalists” but they have proven their dishonesty and bias.

 Progressive-socialists love taxes. The current administration efforts to tax the top 2% of taxpayers even more aligns with President Obama’s strategy of not producing jobs. The top 2% of taxpayers are the very people who make the investments that helps grow business and create jobs. Raising taxes on the top 2% keeps this money out of the private sector. Keeping money out of the private sector means jobs are not created.  Enacting stimulus bills that do not work means jobs are not created.

 It’s not what it seems.

 Jan 2009 – President Obama , in an interview with ABC’s George Stephanopolis, said “that fixing our economy over the long term will require sacrifice from every American and scaling back some of his campaign promises [emphasis mine].”

 Stephanopolis:  “And eventual sacrifice from everyone?”

 Obama: “Everybody’s going to have to give. Everybody’s going to have some skin in the game.”

 Feb 2009 – Headline: “Obama calls for sacrifice — and more spending” [emphasis mine].

 The Obama’s spent four days in Chicago playing basketball and having a Valentine dinner.

 Mar 2009 – Headline: Obama calls on bankers to show ‘sacrifice’ over pay.

Apr 2009 – US President Barack Obama called on Chrysler  bondholders to make sacrifices in order to keep the nation’s third largest automakers from filing for bankruptcy.

 Jun 2009 – Headline: “Obama tells of sacrifice for next generation” [emphasis mine].

“But I want you to know that what you’re doing is making a sacrifice for the next generation.”

Aug 2009 – Obama takes the family for a much needed vacation to the Grand Canyon in hateful Arizona

 Headline: “The Politics of Sacrifice” [emphasis mine].

 “When asked whether Americans will have to sacrifice for the sake of reform, the president replied, ‘They’re going to have to give up paying for things that don’t make them healthier.’ But while this may improve care, it represents a significant shift in the mind-set that defines the current patient-doctor relationship.”

 Obama takes the family for an even much more needed vacation to Martha’s Vineyard.

 Sep 2009 – Obama, Lady Obama and Oprah Winfrey fly to Copenhagen so they can tout Chicago to win the Olympics. . . and do a little shopping.

 Dec 2009 – Mr. And Mrs. Obama go to Oslo so he can pickup a Nobel Prize and she can do a little shopping.

The Obama’s fly to Hawaii for an eleven day Christmas vacation, where it took Mr. Obama two days to comment on the Christmas bomber story.

 What have Mr. & Mrs. Obama sacrificed?

 Washington Alert: “Desiree Rogers Stages One Party Every Three Days In First Year of Obama Reign”

 “Let the good times roll” – and roll they have at the Obama White House, while nearly 11% of the workforce remains unemployed, nearly four million Americans are losing their homes, and terrorists ride the open skies

 “In fact, according to the Chicago Tribune, the stylish Ms. Rogers and the party-hearty First Couple hosted no less than 170 parties and social events through December 3 of 2009. And that does not even include the 17 parties and 11 open houses – feting more than 50,000 guests – ABC News reported the Obama’s hosted throughout the Holiday Season.

 “For those not counting, that means by January, 2010, Ms. Rogers had staged one gala White House event every three days throughout the first year of the Obama Administration, making the once austere Executive Mansion look more like party central.”

 Apr 2010 – With BP oil flowing freely in the Gulf , Mr. Obama decided to duck out for a quick family vacation in Asheville, North Carolina.

 May 2010 – Mr. Obama takes his second vacation since the BP oil spill began, this time to Chicago, leaving Vice-President Biden to attend Memorial Day ceremonies at Arlington National Cemetery.

 July 2010 – “Obama took the family to Cadillac Mountain in Acadia National Park in Maine to relax as a reward for skillfully avoiding even the appearance of competence in the BP disaster.”

 Headline: Morning Sentinel – “White House wanderers tour Acadia”

 “. . . Arriving in a small jet before the Obama’s was the first dog, Bo, a Portuguese water dog given as a present by the late U.S. Senator Ted Kennedy, D-Mass.; and the president’s personal aide Reggie Love, who chatted with Baldacci.

 ”We’re ready. We’re going to do it all,” Love said with a big smile.

 “Air traffic at the small Hancock County-Bar Harbor Airport in Trenton was shut down for the presidential arrival. A U.S. Coast Guard helicopter patrolled the air in anticipation of the first family’s touchdown, and a pair of local fire and rescue trucks stood ready on an otherwise empty tarmac at the private air hangar.

 “The Obama’s then traveled onto Mount Desert Island in a motorcade of at least 16 vehicles. It was led by two Maine State Police cruisers and included five black Chevrolet Suburbans . . .”

 Headline: Obama’s ‘Mandate for Sacrifice’ Costs Thousands of Jobs

 “As many as 100,000 Americans who lost their jobs, or will soon, because of GM and Chrysler dealership closings can thank Barack Obama and his “mandate for shared sacrifice,” according to a top Obama official.

In a scathing report on the federal auto industry bailout, Special Inspector General Neil M. Barofsky notes that the Obama administration rejected initial automaker plans which would have required relatively minimal dealership closings, insisting instead on far more drastic cuts — as many as two thousand dealerships between the two corporations.

 August 2010 – Mrs. Obama and daughter head to Spain for a “private mother-daughter” trip with forty of their friends, staying at hotels at $2,500 per night. The cost of flying in government transportation is over $450,000.

 Again, what have Mr.& Mrs. Obama sacrificed?

 They have not sacrificed. They are not sacrificing. They are enjoying a progressive-socialist imperial presidency built on the demands that others sacrifice while they collect; that others service while they are served.

 “It only stands to reason that where there’s sacrifice, there’s someone collecting the sacrificial offerings. Where there’s service, there is someone being served. The man who speaks to you of service and sacrifice is speaking of slaves and masters, and intends to be the master.”

 Ayn Rand, 1943, The Fountainhead

 Henry Morganthau, Treasury Secretary under Franklin Roosevelt, admitted, “”We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work . . . We have never made good on our promises … I say after eight years of this Administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started … And an enormous debt to boot [emphasis mine]!”

Barrack Obama has done more damage to the financial health of the United States in eighteen months than Franklin Roosevelt did between 1933 and 1941. It took World War II to put America back to work. What will it take Mr. Obama, whose closest comparison is not Franklin Roosevelt but Jimmy Carter?

 Add to Mr. Obama’s failed response to the recession not only his inadequate response to the Gulf oil spill but also the fact that he was aware of the hazardous situation in February, two months before the explosion, and still failed to take action. This inaction paints a glaring picture of incompetence and lack of leadership, liabilities already demonstrated in response to the Dodd-Frank financial meltdown.

  To the mind of David Walker, former Comptroller General of the United States, even more dangerous than Obama’s failed policies and actions regarding the recession and the Gulf spill is Obama’s irresponsible spending: our mounting national debt is a “fiscal cancer” that is devaluing our currency, putting the future of our country in the hands of the Chinese and, in Obama’s mind, leading to further tax increases and dictatorial control of the population.

 Dictatorial control of the population is also the basis for the so-called Obama health care plan. This is a plan that purports to provide health care to all by reducing health care funding for seniors, forcing people into government approved health plans, rationing health care and interfering in the doctor-patient relationship. This plan was signed into law even though the majority of American citizens were against the health care bill. Rasmussen polls show 59% of Americans want to repeal this law.

 Now we have learned that the Obama administration has drafted a plan to grant immediate amnesty to illegal aliens by Executive Order. Several Senators have sent Mr. Obama a letter urging him to not pursue this idea. The extraordinary use of an Executive Order in this manner is simply an end run around Congress because the administration fears it cannot gather sufficient votes for a comprehensive immigration bill.

 While he fails to secure our border with Mexico, Mr. Obama sues the State of Arizona while Mexican drug cartels place bounties for the murders of Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu and Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio. Within Mexico, several police chiefs and numerous police officers have been killed by the drug cartels. Mexico is close to being classified a failed state. Now Mr. Obama is allowing drug cartels to threaten United States law enforcement personnel and purposely not securing the border. Moreover, Mr. Obama has the FBI wasting precious agency assets investigating whether Sheriff Arpaio has violated the law over the last eighteen months. What a monumental waste of time, effort and tax dollars. Mr. Obama is not just failing “to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States,” he has turned his back to our law enforcement officials and the American people. 

 In the end, we now know Mr. Obama views the United States Constitution as an impediment to his plans for this country. “Seven years before Barack Obama’s ‘spread the wealth’ comment to Joe the Plumber became a GOP campaign theme, the Democratic presidential candidate said in a radio interview the U.S. has suffered from a fundamentally flawed Constitution that does not mandate or allow for redistribution of wealth.” This view that our Constitution is flawed reveals a very skewed mindset by our current president. Is this the reason for his extra-constitutional attitude regarding illegal immigration? Regarding border security?

Mr. Obama has noted that the U.S. Constitution as written is only a guarantee of negative liberties from government and not an entitlement to a right to welfare or economic justice. Mr. Obama forgets that the Constitution limits government power to prevent tyranny from occurring. Does Mr. Obama favor a Constitution that forces the government to provide welfare and so-called economic justice (socialist code for redistribution of wealth)?

 Unfortunately for Mr. Obama the term “negative liberties” is an oxymoron. Liberty is always positive. The Constitution provides for positive restrictions on government power in order to promote liberty. In his skewed mind, Mr. Obama views the promotion of liberty as negative. This is why he promotes big government, more regulation, government takeover of the auto and mortgagae industries . . . all contrary to the notion of limited government.

 Mr. Obama favors a “second bill of rights,” one he calls of “positive rights.” These are “rights” the government must provide, such as jobs, education and housing. But government cannot create wealth. And sooner or later, socialist programs run out of other people’s money. In order to provide a “second bill of rights” Mr. Obama must destroy the original Bill of Rights, which means Obama is intent on taking away our inalieanble rights to “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” Since “our Creator” granted these rights to us, Mr. Obama cannot take them away except by force.

Mr. Obama’s “second bill of rights” means that Obama can grant or take away these rights as he sees fit. That means, in Mr. Obama’s skewed mind,  the power of government does not derive from the consent of the governed. It means Mr. Obama’s government is all powerful and the people have only those rights the government grants to them. This is the scary, tyrannical Mr. Obama that Americans are beginning to see.

 Mr. Obama’s view of a “flawed Constitution” and the need for a “second bill of rights” to replace the first Bill of Rights calles into question whether he can live up to his oath “to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States?”  Based on his own record of inaction, lack of leadership, take-over of the auto and mortgage industries, failure to protect the Gulf coast, take-over of the health care industry, and his irresponsible spending and irreparable harm inflicted on this country, the answer has to be “no.”

 NEVER AGAIN can America trust its national security, its financial security and the security of its people to progressive-socialists like Barack Obama.

 “To preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States,” Americans must NEVER AGAIN elect progressive-socialists to elective office.

The American people know it.

 This is why Mr. Obama will never serve a second term.

 Taxes are the peoples’ money, not the government’s money. Tax cuts do not need to “be paid for” as they are a savings to the tax payer. On the contrary, government spending must “be paid for.”

 Only big government progressive-socialists would ask the people to accept a tax increase in order to pay for a tax savings. Their skewed view is that government is separate from the people; that the government is not one “of the people, for the people and by the people.” Progressive-socialists believe the people exist to support the government.

 This is the great divide between progressive-socialists and the rest of us, who believe that government power is derived from the consent of the people and government exists to serve the people.

 It wouldn’t surprise me to find the Obama administration behind the “leak” of these classified documents that, for the most part, covered the Bush administration years. Such a massive disclosure of material across numerous data bases and years is either a catastrophic security breach or an intentional breach of security at the very top of government.

 The Obama administration is hip deep in bad news and needed something to distract the American public away from its failed stimulus program, lack of jobs, 9.5% unemployment rate, this year’s deficit equaling 10% of our entire economy, and projected unemployment this year at higher than 9%.

 Whew! No wonder Obama did nothing to prevent publication of these classified documents.

 “One of the methods used by statists to destroy capitalism consists in establishing controls that tie a given industry hand and foot, making it unable to solve its problems, then declaring that freedom has failed and stronger controls are necessary.”

 By signing the Dodd-Frank financial regulation act, President Obama has almost completed restructuring America into a police state of vast proportions. For the first time, the government will have access to every financial transaction in the United States. Why? Where does the Constitution allow the government this onerous power?

 The legislation creates another huge bureaucracy in the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), whose responsibilities include policing lending, capping interchange fees charged by banks, and allowing retailers to set minimum and maximum limits on debit card purchases. Why? Where does the Constitution allow the government this onerous power?

 Prior to the financial meltdown in 2008, the Democrat controlled Congress manipulated Fannie Mae-Freddie Mac policies to encourage riskier loans on sub-prime mortgages. When responsible Republicans attempted to tighten up policies for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in 2005, Democrats Barnie Frank and Chris Dodd led the charge to protect Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Ironically, the very people who were complicit in causing the meltdown found themselves in power and wrote the new financial regulation bill. But they omitted Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac from this bill.

The new regulations are so onerous in restricting bank earnings that banks, like airlines, will start eliminating free services and start charging for small services. Start with the elimination of free checking.

 The new law allows the federal government to take over a non-bank financial company without due process of law. The law only requires that someone deem a non-bank’s financial condition a threat to the United States. Why? Where does the Constitution allow the government this onerous power?

 The bill allows the federal government to force companies to “register” with a government “Board of Governors” that then controls the companies. This is the beginning of the National-Socialist movement as seen in Italy and Germany prior to World War II.

 The law also includes numerous provisions that have nothing to do with financial security. For example, the law makes it easier for unions, environmental groups and other activist organizations that hold shares to put their representatives on the boards of directors of every corporation in the United States.

 The law forces new burdens on airlines, utilities and other non-financial businesses because they use financial derivatives to hedge their businesses against risks such as fluctuations in oil prices, interest rates and currencies, practices that were not related to the financial meltdown.

  The law requires financial institutions and agencies that contract with the federal government to adhere to race and gender quotas. The law requires establishment of the Office of Women and Minority Inclusion  (this is not a joke). The Treasury, FDIC, NCAU, the Federal Reserve, and all federal regulatory agencies shall establish an Office of Women and Minority Inclusion within the agency. The Office shall be staffed with a Director and unknown number of staff to to develop policies promoting equal employment opportunities and racial, ethnic, and gender diversity of not just the agency’s workforce, but also the workforces of its contractors and sub-contractors. to develop policies promoting equal employment opportunities and racial, ethnic, and gender diversity of not just the agency’s workforce, but also the workforces of its contractors and sub-contractors. to develop policies promoting equal employment opportunities and racial, ethnic, and gender diversity of not just the agency’s workforce, but also the workforces of its contractors and sub-contractors. to develop policies promoting equal employment opportunities and racial, ethnic, and gender diversity of not just the agency’s workforce, but also the workforces of its contractors and sub-contractors.develop policies promoting racial, gender and ethnic diversity of not only the agency’s workforce but also the workforces of its contractors’ and subcontractors’ workforces. Why? Where does the Constitution allow the government this onerous power?

President Obama’s health care legislation shreds the Constitution. For example, for the first time in our history, for failure to obtain health insurance, the government can penalize an individual up to $1,900.  In addition, the government can charge the individual with a misdemeanor carrying a one year prison sentence or a $25,000 penalty.

 The new health care law also provides for 16,500 IRS agents to enforce mandatory health insurance on every American, whether we like it or not. Why? Where does the Constitution allow the government this onerous power?

 Obama does not care about or respect the Constitution. It is about power and control. Obama stated in his campaign, “We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.”

 President Obama’s thirst for power knows no limits. The administration that cannot be trusted to observe the limitations of the Constitution must be removed from power. The 2010 election is the only election that stands between a free America and an Obama police state.

 This executive order, if signed, will be the equivalent of “high crimes and misdemeanors,” the basis for impeachment.

 I have written in American Commentaries on numerous occasions about Charles Rangel’s unethical behavior under the “Congressional Culture of Corruption Continues” series: #3 – Rangel Violates NY Rent Stabilization Laws (9/8/08); #6 – Rangel’s Tax Evasion (9/13/08); #12 – Rangel Demonstrated His Disdain for ethical Behavior (12/12/08); #21 – Charles Rangel is a disgrace to the House of Representatives (8/27/09);  #22 – Rangel Pays Off Democrats on Ethics Committee (9/4/09); #28 – Charles Rangel Ethical Violations Go Unchecked (2/27/10).

 As recently as March of this year I posted an article titled “The House Ethics Process is Working?” (3/21/10). My conclusion: “Only if the Democrats designed it to miserably fail.”

 The shame of it all is not that Charles Rangel has been allowed to engage in unethical behavior for so long. The shame of it all is not that the ethics committee took so long to arrive at this juncture.

 The shame of it all is that Democrats have been negotiating with Rangel for months to avoid the circus of a trial. They have yet to reach agreement. However, talks between the Democrats and Rangel continue. The possibility that another corrupt Democrat Congressman escapes punishment for his unethical acts will surely shatter the 11% approval rating Congress now enjoys.

 Rangel is said to be dragging his feet on an agreement because he wants another term in Congress. The Black Caucaus will protect Rangel at any cost, up to and including using the race card against Democrats on the Ethics Committee. Any type of ethics trial dragging close to the November elections will prove to be hazardous to Democrats up for re-election.

 Whatever happens, do not look for principled Democrat representatives to do the right thing.  The Democrats goal is to cover up, sweep it under the rug, and if Rangel proves obstinate Democrats in the House may throw Rangel under the proverbial bus.

 Janet Napolitanao, the Secretary of Homeland Security, said the border is more secure than ever.

 Is this the gang that couldn’t shoot straight?