Views on the News
May 16, 2009
Views
on the News*
Obama is most partisan
and divisive President whose main appeal is to manufactured “victim” groups and his promise is
to punish their “oppressors”
and make them pay! Obama’s whole redistribution of
wealth strategy is based on convincing everyone that they are
“poor” and that the “rich” must pay more to
“fix” this inequity of wealth. It is clear that Obama has embarked on a “War
on Business” with his populist-tinged, sometimes acid critiques of
certain sectors, including large companies that keep some profits overseas to
reduce their U.S. tax burden. Obama's
targets usually are unsympathetic and faceless corporations or hedge funds. Progressives divide the world into
victims and exploiters, and see themselves as saviors of the underdogs who are
incapable of fending for themselves, and requires greater government power in
their hands, to vanquish the exploiters. Illegal
immigration, like abortion is a cause célèbre, and Progressives
will resist the smallest limitation on the grounds that it might lead to the
idea that there are legitimate reasons to control borders. That's the reason for in-state tuition
rates, sanctuary cities, social security payments, housing, welfare,
food-stamps, and free medical care for illegals, when they don't give a damn
about the education, safety, health or financial security of illegal
aliens. Growing government is the real reason Progressives are pushing
socialized medicine, since they know perfectly well it doesn't work. They don't care about your health, or
what healthcare costs you now, or about rationing or low quality care, so no
arguments about the inadequacy of government-run healthcare will move them. The reason for gun registration is not
the safety of citizens, they know perfectly well that most legal gun owners are
responsible and, in fact, have fewer accidents with firearms than most police
departments. They don't care about
the "Earth," so controlling energy gives them total control of the
means of production, which translates as total control over food, shelter,
goods and services. Progressives
don't care about children, since today’s education indoctrinates the next
generation of zombies to believe in, support and trust Big Government. Progressives don't care about women,
since the only 'liberation' they want for mothers, is from husbands who could
keep them from being dependent on the state. Women are victims when it comes to
abortion, so letting live babies die unattended in broom closets after botched
abortions must not be outlawed because it might lead to the further limitation
of a woman's right to "choose."
Progressives don't care about blacks, since they only want to keep them
on the plantation, voting for Progressives en masse while receiving just enough
to keep them ignorant, broken, hungry and angry, so they'll believe they need
their masters, the Federal Government, to eat, and despise and fear any path
that would make them independent... like God, good marriages, children with
fathers, pride of accomplishment, respect for education, or a focus beyond
race. Progressives don't care about
gays, since they only want to break marriage, damage the culture, hurt the
morals, virtues and culture of a strong and prosperous middle class. They don't care about "social justice"
or "fairness," since they just want cover to loot and cripple the
productive, the independent, the individualists, the entrepreneurs. The government Progressives' arguments,
excuses, reasons and explanations seem stupid and irrational because they are
false. There
is just one goal for Progressives and that is to grow the size and power of government.
Obama has no intention
or desire to grow the U.S. economy, but rather, wishes only to grow U.S. government
dependency. Dependency is on government welfare by
U.S. citizens, and, ultimately, a dependency of our entire nation on China and
other nations abroad. The American
liberal mindset is that economics is a “zero-sum game.” Weakening
America economically will allow other nations to be a little bit stronger, or
so goes the theory, and if Obama can achieve this, he will have made the entire
world a more ‘fair’
place. The powers that the Obama
administration claimed in order to arrest the financial crisis and mitigate the
recession are being used and abused in ways that are undermining the legal and
financial stability of the United States.
In the case of Chrysler, several of the institutions to which it owes
money are banks that accepted government bail-out funds last year and earlier
this year. Those banks are now
enslaved to whatever President Obama and the U.S. Treasury Department tell them
to do. So when Obama tells, say,
“bank X” to “accept
twenty-eight cents on the dollar as payment of the debt Chrysler owes
you,” well, those banks are obliged to obey Obama, whether or not it
makes financial sense to do so, and whether or not bankruptcy law allows that
bank to demand more. But the
private sector economy got in the way of Obama’s plans to save the world,
because some of Chrysler’s secured creditors are hedge funds, that,
unlike the “bailed-out banks,“ are NOT under Obama’s control.
Several of the hedge fund managers
involved in the situation did what they are permitted to do under bankruptcy
law, and demanded more than the meager “pennies on the dollar” loan repayment that President Obama
was ordering them to accept. In
barely four months, Barack Obama has nudged the United States toward a future
in which government will be bigger and more assertive -- where taxes will be
higher and government unions more powerful -- where legal rights are less
secure and contracts more uncertain.
Does he really think that he will “save” the U.S. economy
and get banks lending again and get people with money to invest in new
businesses and begin producing new employment opportunities, by denying legal
rights to investors? President
Obama has now demonstrated to the world’s investors that rules and laws
don’t matter. His personal
and political preferences are what matters, and he will get his way, even if investors
are denied their rights and damaged in the process. If Obama’s
objective is to weaken the U.S., so as to make a “more fair world,” he’s well on his way to achieving
that goal.
The federal government
published two important reports on long-term budgetary trends and they both
show that we are on an unsustainable path that will almost certainly result in
massively higher taxes. This ambitious administration plans to
grow the federal government to unprecedented levels through gigantic spending
increases that will result in an exponential explosion of the federal
deficit. Not a single credible explanation has emerged, even from the
vaunted Obama team of economic advisors of how all of this will be paid
for. Not one administration official has explained why this spending orgy
is not certain to encumber future generations with a dreadful financial
burden. We have yet to hear why this adventure will not bankrupt the
nation. However, just like gravity,
the laws of economics are insurmountable. Nearly four months into his
presidency, Obama has begun to describe a pivot from economic crisis to
economic recovery. Much of a
recovery will rest on a growth in consumer demand, but the most recent figures
show a 0.4% decline in retail spending from March to April--and an 11.4%
decline from the previous April. The
White House envisions renewed economic growth by this summer, but the
unemployment rate will continue rising for perhaps another year. One of President Obama's campaign
pledges was to "create or save"
more than three million jobs in his first two years in office, not all that
ambitious considering the economy has created 1.5 million jobs annually since
1980. Well, so far this year, 1.9
million jobs have been swallowed by the recession, so he's already nearly five
million jobs in the hole. The lag
between recovery and falling unemployment carries multiple potential
consequences for Obama’s agenda, to include eroding his popularity. How bad future inflation will be is
unknown. The New York Times published
on Thursday an editorial declaring the end of the U.S. dollar is at hand. It
could be a normal inflation of 3% to 4% a year or it could also be a
banana-republic 10% a month. Even
Obama declared Thursday that the current level of federal deficit spending was
"unsustainable" and warned of skyrocketing interest rates if the U.S.
government continues to finance government by borrowing from other countries. What we know is that all governments make promises they can't
fulfill and both political parties have taken promise making to a high art.
The
barrage of tax increases proposed in President Barack Obama's budget could, if
enacted by Congress, kill any chance of an early and sustained recovery. Historians
and economists who've studied the 1930s conclude that the tax increases passed
during that decade derailed the recovery and slowed the decline in
unemployment. That was true of the
1935 tax on corporate earnings and of the 1937 introduction of the payroll tax.
Japan did the same destructive thing by raising its value-added tax rate in
1997. This is no time for tax
increases that will reduce spending by households and businesses. The Obama budget calls for tax increases
of more than $1.1 trillion over the next decade. Obama's biggest proposed tax increase is
the cap-and-trade system of requiring businesses to buy carbon dioxide emission
permits. The nonpartisan
Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that the proposed permit auctions
would raise about $80 billion a year and that these extra taxes would be passed
along in higher prices to consumers.
The next-largest tax increase -- with a projected rise in revenue of
more than $300 billion between 2011 and 2019 -- comes from increasing the tax
rates on the very small number of taxpayers with incomes over $250,000. The third major tax increase is the plan
to raise $220 billion over the next nine years by changing the taxation of
foreign-source income. In the end,
the corrosive consequences of oppressive taxation and the grim reality of
governmental central planning will weigh heavily on a suddenly-wiser American
people as it awakens from its trancelike infatuation. Federal income taxes for every taxpayer will have to rise by
roughly 81% to pay all of the benefits promised by these programs under current
law over and above the payroll tax.
We
can no longer ignore Social Security and Medicare funding problems since the
recession has moved their date of insolvency even closer than predicted. In
the four years from January 2004 to January 2008, the Medicare trustees
reported that the unfunded liabilities of Social Security and Medicare grew by
a stunning $10.4 trillion, and the average annual growth topped $2.5 trillion.
The Social Security Board of Trustees
reported Tuesday that costs will exceed revenues in 2016, a full year sooner
than expected just last year. Total
Social Security assets, including more than 70 years of "surpluses" built up in the "trust fund," will be completely
gone by 2037, four years earlier than in last year's report. The deficit over the next 50 years is
expected to be about 2% of taxable payrolls, up from 1.7% last year. Long-term, unfunded liabilities for
Social Security and Medicare top $53 trillion, about four times the size of
current GDP. Taxes must either rise
or benefits shrink by that amount to close that gap. The long-term outlook is made much worse
by the recession. The problems of
Social Security and Medicare are structural, requiring a massive,
root-and-branch reform that Washington seems unwilling to do. Taxpayers are on
the hook for Social Security and Medicare by these amounts: Social Security,
1.3% of GDP; Medicare part A, 2.8% of GDP; Medicare part B, 2.8% of GDP; and
Medicare part D, 1.2% of GDP which adds up to 8.1% of GDP.
Does anybody really
believe that adding 50 million people to the public health-care rolls will not
cost the government more money? Obama’s goal of universal health
care, and the idea that it’s a cost-cutter will actually cause costs to explode. This new entitlement, like Medicare but
open to all ages and all incomes, would quickly crowd out private insurance as
people gravitated to heavily subsidized policies, eventually leading to a
single-payer system. So Democrats
are trying to seduce diffident Republicans with a Potemkin compromise. A "soft" public option would
limit enrollment only to the uninsured or those employed by small businesses,
or include promises that the plan will pay market rates. The truth is Democrats know that any
policy guardrails built this year can be dismantled once the basic public
option architecture is in place. That
is what has always happened
with government health programs. Federal
boards are going to decide what’s good for you and me, which will drive a
wedge between doctors and patients.
Any law that empowers government to provide individual coverage in the
public interest implicitly empowers government to deny individual coverage for
the same reason. When Medicare was
created in 1965, benefits were relatively limited and retirees paid a
substantial percentage of the costs of their own care. The clout of retirees has always led to
expanding benefits for seniors while raising taxes on younger workers. In 1965, Congressional actuaries
expected Medicare to cost $3.1 billion by 1970. In 1969, that estimate was revised to $5
billion, and it actually came in at $6.8 billion. That same year, the Senate Finance
Committee declared a Medicare cost emergency. In 1979, Jimmy Carter proposed limiting
benefits, only to have the bill killed by fellow Democrats. Things have gotten worse since, and Medicare
today costs $455 billion and rising.
Medicaid was intended as a last resort for the poor but now covers
one-third of all long-term care expenses in the U.S., because it has become a
middle-class subsidy for aging parents of the Baby Boomers. Its annual bill is $227 billion, and so
far this fiscal year is rising by 17%.
SCHIP was pitched a decade ago as a safety net for poor kids, and some
Republicans helped sell it as a free-market reform. But SCHIP is now open to families that
earn up to 300% of the poverty level, or $63,081 for a family of four. Any new federal health plan will
inevitably follow the same trajectory, no matter how much Republican Senators
might claim they've guaranteed otherwise.
The Lewin Group consultants estimate that 119 million people who now
have private insurance could potentially be captured by the government under
the Obama public option, and this is on top of the 90 million already in
Medicare or Medicaid. This would guarantee a spending explosion that would over time
lift federal health care outlays as a share of GDP into the upper 20% range or
higher.
Selecting a justice to
serve on the Supreme Court is a weighty responsibility, and so is the decision
by the Senate to confirm or reject the nomination. Empathy is the opposite of equality
before the law. The proper criteria
for choosing a Supreme Court Justice are poorly understood by many Americans:
·
Impartiality. The nominee should demonstrate an
ability to fulfill the oath to "administer justice without respect to
persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich," regardless of
the judge's personal feelings toward the parties in the case or the political
groups to which they belong.
·
Commitment
to the Rule of Law.
The nominee should demonstrate a commitment to the design of our Constitution,
under which the people's elected representatives in Congress make the laws and
judges interpret the laws as written and intended. It is a judge's consistent
adherence to the written law -- serving as a neutral umpire, calling balls and
strikes fairly, regardless of personal feelings -- that protects our property,
our families and our very freedom.
·
Integrity. The nominee should demonstrate
unquestioned personal and professional integrity. If confirmed, the nominee
will be honored with a lifetime appointment, checked almost exclusively by his
or her personal discipline and restraint. Unimpeachable character is an
indispensable prerequisite for the job.
·
Legal
Expertise and Judicial Temperament.
The nominee should demonstrate a mastery of the law, an ability to apply the
law to complex facts, and the skill to craft plain and enduring opinions that
lower courts, lawyers and the people can understand. The nominee must also
demonstrate the humility necessary to be subordinate to the law that he or she
will interpret. Great justices recognize the limits of their own power and
defer to the wisdom of the people, effectuated through elected representatives
and expressed in the written law.
Politics should be set aside
and a careful analysis of the nominee's suitability to serve should be carried
out using appropriate criteria. .
The world's terrorists
and rogue nations have clearly become more dangerous since President Obama took
office, and analysts say they're testing him to see how much they can get away
with. North Korea, Iran, al Qaeda in Iraq
and the Afghan Taliban have gotten much more threatening in recent months,
while the administration pursues a new foreign policy based on the belief that
they can achieve much more through soft diplomacy - sitting down with our
adversaries and having a "dialogue" with them. In an ever-more-dangerous world, the
Obama administration says it is practicing "smart power" instead of "hard power." "With
smart power, diplomacy will be the vanguard of foreign policy," Secretary
of State Hillary Rodham Clinton told senators at her confirmation hearings. That's the message Mr. Obama has sent
since his swearing-in, but so far, it doesn't seem to be working. On the contrary, it seems to be
encouraging further bad behavior. Communist
North Korea has brazenly stepped up its development and testing of medium-range
missiles and nuclear weapons that threaten its neighbors and, eventually, us. Taliban forces have grown more
aggressive, threatening Afghanistan's weakened government and taking control of
the Swat Valley and neighboring areas in Pakistan, where they have moved their
troops to within 60 miles of Islamabad.
Al Qaeda has ramped up its deadly suicide bombings in Baghdad and
elsewhere in Iraq amid reports the United States may slow its withdrawal plans
if conditions worsen there. Iran,
too, is working overtime to support terrorists while pursuing its own nuclear
programs in defiance of United Nations resolutions and economic sanctions. A CIA report to Congress says it has
dramatically increased its uranium-enrichment program. "This has to do with testing him. Our adversaries and friends alike
perceive a potential U.S. vacuum of leadership and international leadership
abhors a vacuum, and other people are going to do things to fill that vacuum. In the case of North Korea, we are
clearly worse off than we were a few months ago," he told me. What have we got by reaching out to the
Iranians… not much. They are
working on their missiles; there's not much change in their posture. Pakistan is certainly more of a worry
now, not just in the tribal areas, but in Pakistan proper, and the danger of
getting control of nuclear weapons, which would be a nightmare." No change in America's foreign policy is
more troubling than Mr. Obama's approach to Iran, where his olive-branch
diplomacy has done nothing to change that country's path toward war. Recent events show that even as the
Obama administration seeks to engage Tehran, the Islamic Republic has continued
to work to undermine U.S. interests and to support anti-American elements
around the world, as demonstrated by its ongoing efforts to resupply Hamas,
support Hezbollah's efforts to destabilize Egypt, and assist Iraqi insurgents. Mr. Obama, of course, has many defenders
in the foreign-policy community here, but they have growing concerns, too. In some ways, I worry about Pakistan the
most because it has nuclear weapons, but that's a long-term challenge. What the administration does not seem to
grasp is that the battle against the Taliban in Pakistan and the nuclear
threats posed by Iran are not going to be solved through soft power or
good-faith engagement. The Taliban
and the Iranian leadership are motivated not by earthly desires but by a
religious ideology, one that brands any government unwilling to bow to their
demands as illegitimate and Satanic.
Eagerness to compromise with the Taliban such as the Pakistani
government turning over the Swat Valley to them in the hopes of a brokered peace
or attempting to buy off Iran or North Korea again only whets their demands for
more concessions. In the end, that always results in more dangerous
consequences.
Economic results are
coming in and they don’t meet American voter expectations. The
Democrat borrow and spend and spend and spend “stimulus” plan is
not working now and will not work in the long run. They are accomplishing
nothing more than bankrupting our children and grandchildren’s futures. The unemployment rate has now reached
8.9%, up a full percentage point since the passage of the so-called stimulus
bill. The unemployment rate fell
short of the expectations set by the Obama administration, even falling short
of the unemployment numbers they projected would result from passing no “stimulus”
legislation at all. The Obama
administration is either making up their numbers outright or their so-called
solutions aren’t working. As American families struggle to get
through these troubled times, the Obama administration and Democrats in Congress
are not delivering on the promises they made when they borrowed in the name of
the American taxpayer $1 trillion dollars to spend on 50 years’ worth of
liberal pet projects. The Medicare
report also issues a fourth consecutive warning about the amount of funding the
program is drawing from resources other than its dedicated revenue. Congress has known for years that our
largest entitlement programs, particularly Social Security and Medicare, simply
cannot survive as currently structured.
Regrettably, the President’s budget makes
the problem worse by expanding entitlement spending by $1.4 trillion over the
next ten years.
The last thirteen
non-partisan Battleground Polls over a period stretching from early 2002 to
late 2008 continue to show 60% of the American people described themselves as
"conservative" or "very conservative." 26% of Americans call themselves
"very conservative" on fiscal issues and 43% consider themselves
"somewhat conservative" on fiscal issues. 34% of America, more
than one person in three, is "very conservative" on social issues and
19% are "somewhat conservative" on social issues. It is too bad
that Dick Cheney, with nothing to lose, is the only one publicly defending Bush
decisions and conservative values, while the democrats continue to blame
everything on the previous administration.
A movement to reclaim for states all rights not specifically designated
to the federal government in the U.S. Constitution is exploding across the
nation, with 35 states already acting or at least considering such proposals. The grass-roots "Tea Party"
movement that swept across the country April 15 to protest federal tax and
spending hikes will hold demonstrations in Washington on September 12th when
Congress will be battling over President Obama's biggest budget proposals. When policy
ideas from the Democrats will harm the country, Republicans should embrace
being the “Party of No”
and offer their own “Party of Yes”
positive alternatives.
* There is so
much published each week that unless you go out of your way to find it, you
will miss important breaking events.
I package the best of this information into my “Views on the
News” each Saturday morning for your reading pleasure and to
fill in factual vacuums.
If you are
sick and tired of government and politics as usual, read my web site with its
individual issue analysis and recommendations sections at: http://www.returntocommonsensesite.com . Individual issue updates this week
include:
- Media
at http://www.returntocommonsensesite.com/top/roleofmedia.html
- Education
at http://www.returntocommonsensesite.com/dp/education.html
- Environment
at http://www.returntocommonsensesite.com/dp/environment.html
Week’s
Best Articles:
- “’Barack
Obama’s rich supporters fear his tax plans show he’s a class
warrior” by Leonard Doyle dated May 10, 2009 published
by Telegraph at http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/barackobama/5301078/Barack-Obamas-rich-supporters-fear-his-tax-plans-show-hes-a-class-warrior.html .
- “Quick
fix today, crisis tomorrow in Obama’s White House” by David
Frum dated May 10, 2009 published by National Post at http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2009/05/10/david-fum-quick-fix-today-crisis-tomorrow-in-obama-s-white-house.aspx .
- “Obamanomics:
Naïve, Or Intentionally Destructive?” by Austin
Hill dated May 10, 2009 published by Town Hall at http://townhall.com/columnists/AustinHill/2009/05/10/obamanomics__naive,_or_intentionally_destructive .
- “Upside-Down
Economy” by George Will dated May 10, 2009 published by Town
Hall at http://townhall.com/columnists/GeorgeWill/2009/05/10/upside-down_economy .
- “What
the Progressives Want” dated May 10, 2009 published by American
Thinker at http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/05/what_the_progressives_want.html .
- “Judging
the Judges” by Ken Connor dated May 10, 2009 published by Town
Hall at http://townhall.com/columnists/KenConnor/2009/05/10/judging_the_judges .
- “Anti-tax
crusade to storm Capitol” by Donald Lambro dated May 10, 2009 published
by The Washington Times at http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/may/10/anti-tax-crusade-to-storm-capitol-in-budget-battle/ .
- “Is
America about to go broke?” by Scott Burns dated May 11,
2009 published by MSN at http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/RetirementandWills/InvestForRetirement/is-america-about-to-go-broke.aspx .
- “The
Jobless Rate, Slow to Improve, Tests Obama” by John
Harwood dated May 11, 2009 published by The New York Times at http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/11/us/politics/11caucus.html?_r=1 .
- “What
About Jobs?” dated May 11, 2009 published by Investor’s
Business Daily at http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=326933960257860 .
- “Republicans
and the ‘Public Option’” dated
May 11, 2009 published by The Wall Street Journal at http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124199822823204897.html .
- “Amnesty
Again” by W. James Antle, III dated May 11, 2009
published by The American Spectator at http://spectator.org/archives/2009/05/11/amnesty-again .
- “’Smart Power’:
Dumb Idea” by Donald Lambro dated May 11, 2009 published
by Front Page Magazine at http://www.frontpagemagazine.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=34765 .
- “’Obama’s
Spending Blueprint” by Steven M’ Cohen dated May 12, 2009
published by Front Page Magazine at http://www.frontpagemagazine.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=34855 .
- “Apocalypse
When?” dated May 12, 2009 published by Investor’s
Business Daily at http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=327020388104180 .
- “The Politicization of the Auto Industry”
by Alan Aronoff dated May 12, 2009 published by American Thinker at http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/05/the_politicization_of_the_auto.html .
- “Barack Obama, the Quintessential Liberal Fascist”
by Kyle-Anne Shiver dated May 12, 2009 published by American Thinker at http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/05/barack_obama_the_quintessentia_1.html .
- “Stimulus
Spending Not Working” by Connie
Hair dated May 13, 2009 published by Human Events at http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=31849 .
- “Barack Obama and the ‘Leap to Socialism’”
by Jack Kerwick dated May 13, 2009 published by Intellectual Conservative
at http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2009/05/13/barack-obama-and-the-leap-to-socialism/ .
- “Tax
Increases Could Kill the Recovery” by Martin
Feldstein dated May 13, 2009 published by The Wall Street Journal at http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124217336075913063.html .
- “The
Right Person for the High Court” by Jeff Sessions dated May
13, 2009 published by The Washington Post at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/12/AR2009051202877.html .
- “Too
Much to Handle” by John B. Judis dated May 14, 2009 published
by The New Republic at http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=bd815f64-36e5-4310-be37-733482bad8cc .
- “Obama’s
‘Public’ Health Plan Will Bankrupt the Nation” by Larry
Kudlow dated May 14, 2009 published by Town Hall at http://townhall.com/columnists/LarryKudlow/2009/05/14/obama%E2%80%99s_%E2%80%98public%E2%80%99_health_plan_will_bankrupt_the_nation .
- “Blind
Justice, RIP” by Floyd and Mary Beth Brown dated May 14, 2009
published by Front Page Magazine at http://www.frontpagemagazine.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=34864 .
- “States
to feds: Stay in D.C.!” by Bob Unruh dated May 14, 2009 published by World
Net Daily at http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=97898 .
- “Still
the Biggest Missing Story in Politics” by Bruce
Walker dated May 14, 2009 published by American Thinker at http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/05/still_the_biggest_missing_stor.html .
- “The 81%
Tax Increase” by Bruce Bartlett dated May 15, 2009 published
by Forbes Magazine at http://www.forbes.com/2009/05/14/taxes-social-security-opinions-columnists-medicare.html .
- “The Cost of Free Government Health Care”
by David Gibberman dated May 15, 2009 published by American Thinker at http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/05/the_cost_of_free_government_he_1.html .
- “Beware
of the ‘Public Option’” by Jim
DeMint dated May 15, 2009 published by National Review Online at http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=M2JiZWM5NDc0MGI4MjlmZjczYTI2NjgwYjNjZThiZDQ= .
- “Don’t
Insult My Intelligence” by Elizabeth Meinecke dated May 15, 2009
published by Human Events at http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=31878 .
- “Obama
Fanning War on Business, Corporate Heads Worry” dated
May 15, 2009 published by News Max at http://moneynews.newsmax.com/headlines/obama/2009/05/15/214691.html
.
- “Media
recognize Obama’s failure to support dollar” dated
May 15, 2009 published by World Net Daily at http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=98210
.
- “Don’t
Wince, Fight!” by William Kristol dated May 25, 2009 published by The
Weekly Standard at http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/016/503opswv.asp
.
David Coughlin
Hawthorne, NY