A craving to control ~ By Henry Lamb

Henry Lamb shows us how Progressives have a lust for power and control over not just our businesses and property, but over We the People and our pursuit of life, liberty and happiness. Henry summarizes what we need to do in the following paragraph:

Progressives were served notice on Nov. 2. There is a growing number of Americans who want progressives – and their Marxist philosophy – ousted from government at every level. The last election was a start; the next election will be another step. Victory will not occur until the progressives are sent packing, and the vast majority of our elected officials – from the courthouse to the White House – understand and believe Adam Smith's "Wealth of Nations," the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution.

And I am sure that you aware that eliminating the progressives from all levels of government can not be done in just a midterm election or the next election in 2012. It will most likely be a decades-long, if not a century-long process.

A craving to control

HENRY LAMB

By Henry Lamb

December 04, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

Progressives are the unintended consequence of the collision of ideas offered by Karl Marx and those of Adam Smith – the product of pure communism colliding with laissez-faire capitalism. Free-market capitalists see government regulations as a detriment to profit; progressives see government regulations as the way to control the behavior of both profit-makers and largess-takers.

For most of the last century, progressives in both major parties have controlled the federal government. The current administration's quest for control exceeds even the remarkable efforts of the Wilson and Roosevelt administrations. The Obama administration – supported by progressive allies in Congress – intends to control virtually every facet of human activity.

Capitalists were appalled when Obama took over General Motors; progressives, socialists and communists applauded. Capitalists could not believe that Obama's czar had the audacity, and the power, to dictate the salary of top executives of companies that took federal bailout money; progressives, socialists and communists danced with glee.

Ordinary citizens stood up and screamed "hell no" to Obamacare. Obama ignored them. He twisted arms and Senate rules to ram it through anyway, with provisions that require private insurance companies to insure people with pre-existing conditions, and to keep costs and profits to 20 percent of gross sales. Progressives, socialists and communists knew they were in control.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

Be sure to check out
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!

Progressive control-freaks ~ By Henry Lamb

Henry gives us a pretty strong warning about what is going to happen when ObamaCare is passed today.

It's almost as if the U.S. Constitution did not exist. The congressional powers enumerated in Article I, Section 8, have, for all practical purposes, been erased. The Fourth Amendment, which guarantees security from government without a warrant, is routinely ignored. The Tenth Amendment, which reserves all powers not granted to the federal government to the states and to the people, has been rendered meaningless.


Unless this entire crowd of progressive control-freaks is booted well beyond the D.C. Beltway in the next election, America will continue to spiral downward, deeper into a government-controlled hell-hole.

By Henry Lamb

Posted: March 20, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

Whether they are called Democrats, socialists, Marxists or progressives, the current leadership in Washington has but one goal: control. The current leadership has demonstrated its belief that government must control virtually every facet of the economy, of politics and the life of every citizen.

With unprecedented arrogance, this leadership manufactured nearly $2 trillion with which to exercise its control over the banking industry, the auto industry and over virtually every other entity that was persuaded to take the federal handouts. Government is now firmly in control and working overtime to expand its control.

Since the turn of the 20th century, progressives have championed the idea of universal health care delivered by government. No other program touches so many lives with such absolute control as does the delivery of health care. When government is in control, it is government that decides what services and procedures will be provided, to whom and when. When government is in control, it is government that decides how much doctors and nurses will be paid, how much hospitals will be paid and how much will be paid for drugs.

People who have been disappointed by the brick wall an insurance company can build will not believe the impenetrable barrier government can build when a bureaucracy is in control. In a free market, there is always another insurance company; when government is in control, there is no alternative.

Government control doesn't end with health care. The feds are taking control over student loans. On the pretext of eliminating profit of the greedy bankers, the federal government will begin making loans directly to students. Some shallow thinkers may welcome this progressive innovation – until the government begins directing students into fields of study of the government's choosing. When government is the only lender, it is a simple matter to make funds available for those subjects the government wants to promote and deny funds for study in those fields the government wants to discourage.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

Be sure to check out johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!

Obama attacks Toyota ~ By Roger Hedgecock

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By Roger Hedgecock Posted: February 01, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2010 Toyota owners stormed dealerships all over the country last week demanding "fixes" for "defects" described in wildly inflammatory press reports. Toyota apologized for "defects" that to date are still being investigated. Before whatever problems might exist had been determined and before any "fix" has been found, the government ordered Toyota to begin the largest recall of vehicles in automotive history. Toyota then shut down its U.S. plants and stopped selling eight of its popular models, including Camry and Corolla. Toyota claims these actions were "voluntary," but Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood was quoted as saying the Obama administration had ordered the recall. The sales suspension affects about 56 percent of all Toyota and Lexus vehicles sold last year. The nation's Toyota dealers estimate they stand to lose $2.5 billion each month that sales of these popular models are suspended. The current cascade of troubles for Toyota started on Aug. 28, 2009, when a San Diego family died in their Lexus in an horrific crash caused by what is known as SUA – sudden unintended acceleration. The actual cause of SUA is not known. Rumors about a "stuck" gas pedal or faulty software or the floor mat interfering with the gas pedal are still rumors. An investigation is still underway. Disclosure: My family drives Toyota cars (a Prius and a Lexus SUV), and we have never had a problem with these excellent products. On our cars (and every other Toyota vehicle I've seen), the floor mats are firmly secured by hooks and cannot interfere with the gas pedal. And the gas pedal works just as it should – press down and the car moves faster. Ease up and the car slowly decelerates. Nonetheless, Toyota faces a perfect storm from SUA. But is government "greed" a factor here? As a co-owner of Toyota rivals GM and Chrysler, is the Obama administration and its jihad against Toyota "consumer protection" or revenge against a successful, non-union, red state based rival? Given what Rahm Emanuel said about crisis as an opportunity to "advance the agenda," this question deserves closer attention. READ FULL STORY >

Let's take the 'crony' out of 'crony capitalism' ~ By John Stossel

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By John Stossel Posted: January 13, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2010 When Judge Richard Posner, the prolific conservative intellectual, released his book "A Failure of Capitalism: The Crisis of '08 and the Descent Into Depression" last year, you might have thought the final verdict was in: Capitalism caused the economic downturn and high unemployment. That this verdict was pronounced by someone like Posner, who is associated with the University of Chicago and the free-market law and economics movement, gave moral support to all the politicians who were intent on exploiting the recession (as they exploit all crises) to increase government control of the economy. But what exactly is this "capitalism" that is blamed? The word "capitalism" is used in two contradictory ways. Sometimes it's used to mean the free market, or laissez faire. Other times it's used to mean today's government-guided economy. Logically, "capitalism" can't be both things. Either markets are free or government controls them. We can't have it both ways. The truth is that we don't have a free market – government regulation and management are pervasive – so it's misleading to say that "capitalism" caused today's problems. The free market is innocent. But it's fair to say that crony capitalism created the economic mess. READ FULL STORY >

Freedom in the balance ~ By Henry Lamb

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

"The current majority in Washington, which obviously rejects the idea of limited government and individual freedom, must be removed, or at least significantly reduced, in 2010. In 2012, a whole new regime must capture the Capitol."

By Henry Lamb Posted: December 12, 2009 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2009 The federal government was created by people who were sick and tired of a king's government that controlled every facet of life. They wrote a Constitution that explicitly limited the power of the new government. Under this new government, individuals were free to pursue happiness as they chose. In 200 years, this new nation of free people created prosperity unmatched in all of history. While free people were busy pursuing their happiness, others were free to pursue political power. Throughout the 20th century, a cancer grew in the very fabric of freedom. The idea that the role of government is to provide for its citizens is a return to the Dark Ages when the prevailing thought was that without the protection of a benevolent government (king), man's life was, as Thomas Hobbes put it, "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short." The people who share Hobbes' philosophy have been called by many labels over the years, but they all fit rather nicely into the ideas expressed most eloquently in modern times by Karl Marx. It matters not what labels are pinned on the people who want to put government in charge of individual lives; what matters is that freedom cannot exist when it requires the permission of government. The people who have found life to be "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short" are eager for government to take control of their lives, and the lives – and fortunes – of those people whose pursuit of happiness has produced prosperity. When government assumes control it can "spread the wealth around." READ FULL STORY >

The government is after me … and you ~ By Patrice Lewis

By Patrice Lewis Posted: August 08, 2009 1:00 am Eastern © 2009 There's an old saying that goes, "Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean you're wrong." Lately I've taken that as my personal motto. That's because everything about our government seems designed to make me feel paranoid. They want my guns. They want my money. They want to dictate my lighting options. They want to microchip my livestock. If I attend a tea party protesting our trillions in deficit spending, or if I am against abortion, or if I object to illegal immigration, I'm lumped with terrorists. If I stare at a man dressed in drag – even though he's dressed in drag in order to be stared at – I'm guilty of a "hate" crime. So what's a paranoid housewife to do? "Is it just me," inquired my oldest daughter a few months ago, "or are things getting crazier and crazier?" "It's not just you," I replied. "They are getting crazier." And it gets nuttier every day. Our government is kicking our economy in the tush and encouraging it to tank by spending trillions it doesn't have. It says offering cash for clunkers will save our economy. It wants to take over health insurance, assuring us that it's a "right." (Documentation please!) It is spending trillions of dollars on certifiably idiotic ideas such as government-run "private" businesses and government-run health care and government-run schools. It wants to impose harsh restrictions that will close thousands of small businesses. It wants to take over my health insurance. It wants my personal information. It wants to restrict my ability to raise my children as I see fit. It wants to know how many toilets I have in my house, how long it takes me to get to work, and what my mental condition might be (hint: mistrustful). Now tell me, does any of this strike you as ominous? So what's a paranoid housewife to do? Leave? Believe me, I've fanaticized about it. I find myself longing for a place where a "don't tread on me" philosophy still exists. I confess I've taken to trolling Google Earth for a distant island where I can have my family and my friends and my guns and my cattle and my orchard and my garden and have the rest of the insane, mad world leave us alone. (Norfolk Island springs attractively to mind.) Being so close to Canada, I've entertained the thought of fleeing over the border. But would we be any better off there than here? I don't think so. I understand Canada is even worse than the U.S. when it comes to government intrusion … or maybe not. Our government may beat theirs in that aspect pretty soon. And the trouble with hiding on a distant island is there's no place to go if they come for you. Oops, does that sound too paranoid? Now I grant it's a pretty sad state of affairs for a citizen to be afraid of her government, but it's nothing unusual. In fact, throughout history it's been the norm rather than the exception. And maybe therein lies my complaint: Our government used to be the exception. Now it's the norm. It's changed from the Founding Fathers' vision of a lean, streamlined, minimal experiment in individual rights protection, a system that catapulted the United States light years beyond other countries in terms of freedoms, liberties and growth. Now we're slowing down to the plodding level of so many other Western nations, and I don't mean in terms of the economy. I mean in terms of personal freedoms. I mean in the freedom to live our lives as we see fit. To screw up or redeem ourselves under our own impetus, free from government intrusion. In times past, if someone was "after" you, you had the freedom to melt into the wilderness and disappear (sometimes forever – interpret that as you will). Today we don't have that option. The last frontier is not a place one can survive easily. The days of running away are over. There is no more "last frontier" to which we can flee and hide and be free. There's no place to escape the long arm of government control (ours, or another country's). In other words, there's no place to go. Which means I'll have to stick it out where I am and make the best of things. [CONTINUE READING]

Will feds use new power to dictate what you drive?

Senator's take on gasoline mandates: 'We own auto companies, why not?'

By Drew Zahn

© 2009 WorldNetDaily Posted: July 18, 2009 7:35 pm Eastern DES MOINES, Iowa – Now that the federal government has gained control over the nation's auto industry, one U.S. senator contends, it's time to make some changes in the kinds of cars Americans drive and the kinds of fuel they use. According to a Des Moines Register report, Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, wants Congress to use "climate change" legislation to mandate that auto manufacturers fit all new cars to run on a blend of 85 percent ethanol. "We own the automobile companies," Harkin said earlier this week. "Why not? I think that will be an easy one." Harkin, the Register reports, also wants to see the climate bill increase installation of E85 fuel pumps around the country and compel the Environmental Protection Agency to up the current limit on ethanol content in gasoline blends from 10 percent to 15 percent. Harkin's plans would pave the way for increasing demand of corn-based ethanol fuel blends and likely be of political benefit to the senator, who not only chairs the Senate Agriculture Committee, but also hails from the state that leads the nation in ethanol production. U.S. Energy Secretary Steven Chu agreed, stating in a speech last month that all new vehicles should be equipped to run on E85, though Chu spokesman Tom Reynolds later told the Register the Obama administration is not planning to impose mandates on the car companies. "The administration has been clear that the government won't be making day-to-day business decisions for GM and Chrysler," Reynolds said. "Those decisions will be left to the company's executives." Currently, America's three largest car companies make some E85-compatible cars, but have resisted any requirements that all cars be fitted for the fuel. [CONTINUE READING]