Nanny Pelosi Knows Best

The nanny state is alive and well. Nanny Pelosi spoke after a group of Democrats presented their views on repeal of Obamacare. They gave the standard lies and some said how much it would cost to repeal, standard stuff one expects from the nanny state but Nanny Pelosi took the case.

In this video from The Blaze (linked from WBAL Radio) Pelosi states that even if everyone in America was happy with their health care and it was affordable for all, the government takeover was necessary because the system was not sustainable.

Listen to what this moron is saying. She indicates that even if EVERYONE had health care and liked it and it was affordable she and her nanny state Democrats would have had to take it over because it was not sustainable.

Excuse me while I laugh. OK, I am back. If everyone has what they want and they can afford it then the system IS sustainable. The system is and has been sustainable but according to Pelosi even if the system was completely ideal and everyone had coverage they liked and could afford, the government would need to take it over.

This is more proof that the takeover had nothing to do with the stated goals and everything to do with involving government in our lives.

It is absolute proof that this is about one thing and one thing only. CONTROL! They want to control us and they know it will be easier if they control our health care.

I have an idea. Government as we know have it is unsustainable. Spending is out of control and we are 14 TRILLION dollars in debt. We have a bloated government that is simply unsustainable.

So let’s take it over. It is necessary and, according to Nanny Pelosi, the proper thing to do.

We started today and if the Republicans don’t do the right thing we will fire them and replace them with people who will. We will keep replacing these people until we get folks who will do what is right by this country and the people who make it work.

Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog

Gunline

[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]

Terrorism

So, what is terrorism? How about we check old Webster’s:

the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion

Hmm. Okay, how about “terror”:

: 1 a state of intense fear
2 a : one that inspires fear : scourge b : a frightening aspect c : a cause of anxiety : worry d : an appalling person or thing; especially : brat
3: reign of terror
4: violent or destructive acts (as bombing) committed by groups in order to intimidate a population or government into granting their demands

So, logically, a terrorist is one who uses terror to coerce people into doing things they don’t want to do, right?

Read the rest of this entry »

TSA: About Control

So, while there still are people who claim the TSA is doing what they’re doing for safety, this story makes it very, very clear that this has absolutely nothing to do with safety.

In the story, a man strips instead of submitting to a groping. He strips down to his underwear. At the point, it is obvious to everyone that he has no explosives. So, at this point, Mr. Wolanyk is no danger to anyone. So what does the TSA do? They arrest him.

Again, after making it very obvious that Mr. Wolanyk has NO weapons or explosives or ANY kind of prohibited item, the TSA arrests him. On what charges? Failing to complete the security scan and — get this, it’s a new one — illegally recording!

The TSA is making this clear — they are NOT going to back down. Instead, they have identified the enemy, and it is people. The TSA has increased the odds. If you now refuse to follow their orders — any orders — you will be jailed and fined. If you do not submit, or attempt to record them, you will be jailed. This, very clearly, has absolutely NOTHING to do with anyone’s security. You are guilty beyond any reasonable doubt if you enter an airport, period. Oh sure, they’re just “following orders.”

I found this post interesting. In it, various TSA officers are reported as saying how sad they are for the comments they get from people. My response? Too bad they’re not getting more comments. Nope, sorry, I have NO PITY for these people. They are scum (and I really don’t say that lightly). If your job is really that bad, quit! I’m serious. Maybe that’s the only way to get these bastards to stop — keep insulting them until enough of them quit that the TSA just can’t do their “job” any more. The TSA agents are NOT “people like everyone else.” They’re people who are molesting and arresting others.

On the good side, perhaps this will be enough to finally wake people up and start a revolution for freedom. Hey, I can dream.

Gunline

[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]

Lesson: Don’t Depend On Government For Retirement

Social Security was never supposed to be a complete retirement plan. It was a plan that provided insurance to those who retired so that they would have some income after their working years ended. There have been revisions along the years and they have expanded the scope of Social Security to something it was never intended to be. One of the provisions enacted was to index cost of living allowances (COLA) to inflation. When there is inflation the COLA goes up and when there is no inflation there is no COLA.

The government has announced that, for the second year in a row, there will be no COLA because there is supposedly no inflation. Prices are rising but there is not yet a measured inflation.

One would think that since there are rules in place that they would be followed. This is a pipe dream when it comes to Washington DC. Last year the politicians passed a law to give Social Security recipients a $250 check to make up for not getting a COLA. If the mechanism in place determined that there should be no COLA then why did they circumvent that mechanism and pay the money anyway?

When I originally wrote about this recent COLA news I indicated that it would not be long before Congress worked to send another check to people who did not get a COLA. Keep in mind that they did not get a COLA because of the law that Congress passed, but that makes no difference.

After all, it is an election year.

As I predicted, the Congress is working to pay another $250 to offset something to which Social Security recipients are not entitled (in accordance with the law).

Representative Earl Pomeroy (Democrat, North Dakota), who introduced the legislation, had this to say:

“Seniors who rely on their modest Social Security payments need these cost-of-living adjustments for their day-to-day survival,” Pomeroy said. “Passing this bill will ensure that the lack of cost-of-living adjustment will not jeopardize seniors’ ability to survive on their benefits.” My Way News

The message here is that Seniors are DEPENDENT on government. Seniors, according to Pomeroy, rely on the payments from government which means that they are at the mercy of the government when it comes to the amount of money they will receive. He also is saying that the laws the Congress passed dealing with COLA jeopardize senior’s ability to survive.

In other words, seniors depend on government to survive. This is not a place anyone should EVER desire to be.

By any measure, money paid to Social Security would have returned much better profits than government if invested in the market. The claim that seniors would have been wiped out is wrong. First of all, the most recent legislation would have exempted people over a certain age so they would have been unaffected. Those who are younger would have had plenty of time to recoup the loss. Second of all, if the money had been invested the return would have been higher so the amount lost would not have been as devastating.

In addition, had the system been set up that way decades ago, people would be much better off and not waiting for government to hand them a few more scraps. If those accounts belonged to the people (it IS their money) they would control it, it would not be taken by the government to spend on worthless endeavors and the money could be passed to heirs thus ensuring growth of wealth in this country.

But government can’t have people being wealthy and independent in their senior years.

How else will government control the people if they are not at its mercy?

[note]A person who makes $1000 a month for 40 years at the average of 6% would have $245,712 in 40 years and this assumes NO increase in salary and no change in the interest rate. A person making $5000 a month would have $1,228,558 using the same assumptions. Government does not give this kind of return on investment[/note]

The lesson is to save as much as you can. The old saying about paying yourself first is great advice. Decide how much you can save and then invest it in a vehicle that pays good interest. A balance between interest and risk is a good idea.

If people fail to save they will be at the mercy of government, which is just where they want you.

They need that to pander for votes.

And to control the population…

Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog

Gunline

[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]

The Democrats Need To Huddle

Looks like the Democrats need to get in a huddle and get the game plan set so they are all on the same sheet of music. While Joe Biden is out blaming George Bush and the Republicans for the country’s problems (they inherited a mess you know) Barack Obama is out blaming Congress. In this instance Obama is closer to the truth than Biden.

George Bush was president when things went bad but they did not go bad until the Democrats took over Congress. They have been in charge of both chambers since 2006 and the country rapidly deteriorated since that time.

I know there is an election coming and I know the Democrats are set to lose quite a few seats and possibly both chambers of Congress but they need to get their act together. Biden is predicting that his party will not lose control as he is expected to but it helps little when Obama is blaming the inaction of Congress for problems, a Congress controlled by his party.

My prediction, and it is at odds with Biden’s, is that the Democrats will lose the House and I am betting even odds that they will lose the Senate.

This might be best for Obama (and might explain why he blamed Congress) because a Republican Congress will make him look good as it did Clinton. Bill Clinton gets a lot of credit for things that were done as a reult of the actions of a Republican Congress and having a Republican Congress is probably why he got a second term.

Obama might be hoping to be so lucky and all indicators are that he will at least get the same opportunity Clinton had because despite Biden’s cheery outlook, the Democrats will lose control of the House.

I might be wrong though. After all, Biden was the one who called this the Summer of Recovery…

And we see how that is working out.

Sources:
al-Reuters
LA Times

Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog

Gunline

[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]