Letter from the White House

I opened up my email this morning and found a letter from Dan Pfeiffer, Senior Advisor to President Obama, previewing the State of the Union speech coming up next week by President Obama. In reading through the email a few points really concern me and should concern all Americans.

In this year of action, the President will seek out as many opportunities as possible to work with Congress in a bipartisan way. But when American jobs and livelihoods depend on getting something done, he will not wait for Congress.

President Obama has a pen and he has a phone, and he will use them to take executive action and enlist every American -- business owners and workers, mayors and state legislators, young people, veterans, and folks in communities from across the country -- in the project to restore opportunity for all.

It will be an optimistic speech. Thanks to the grit and determination of citizens like you, America has a hard-earned right to that optimism. Five years after the President inherited the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, our businesses have created more than eight million new jobs in the past 46 months, and they're primed to create more.

Within these three short paragraphs lies plans if followed through to transform our Republic form of government into something far worse; a socialist state. It is true that President Obama came into office during the worst economic conditions seen in the United States since the Great Depression and it is accurate that since he has taken office five years ago that 8 Million jobs have been filled. Despite these facts the policies of President Obama have created uncertainty in the work force resulting in over 90 Million American's leaving the job force.

President's over time have attempted to expand the use of Executive Orders to side step Congress and ignore the United States Constitution. Also, the Supreme Court has ruled on the expansion of powers with varying degree of outcomes based mainly on the prevailing ideology of the Court. Yet this is the first time in our nations history that a President is so bold and reckless in the threat of Executive Order.

The Affordable Care Act, despite not being passed as a tax was upheld by SCOTUS based on it being so, is a debacle. While elements of it are progress in dealing with the escalating health care costs it created more questions and uncertainty in the market. Without rehashing the debate, President Obama by stroke of the pen waived the mandate for the Executive Branch, Legislative Branch, Big Business and Unions. Thus re-writing the ACA which is not a power the Executive Branch has; yet Americans sit idly by and allow it to happen. 

President Obama needs to understand that the Executive Branch doesn't have the power to create legislation nor re-write legislation signed into law. If the President Obama is serious about getting people back to work then remove the uncertainty of the ACA.

The other part of the email that is concerning and more than likely puts a smile on Karl Marx face is the part of " [enlisting] every American -- business owners and workers, mayors and state legislators, young people, veterans, and folks in communities from across the country -- in the project to restore opportunity for all." The government's role is not to create jobs; rather the government is to ensure employers don't exploit the employees. 

I look forward to listening President Obama speak on Tuesday. My hope is that he will finally earn that Nobel Peace Prize he was awarded after being elected.

Rhetoric of the campaign season

It does appear now that Gov. Romney will secure the Republican nominee for President of the United States and President Obama will be the Democratic nominee. Before the media starts spinning things and before Super PAC's start running their ads for or against a candidate let's get some definition's out there that we can all agree on. Here is a short list:

Democrat - A member of the Democratic Party.

Republican - A member of the Republican Party.

Socialism - A theory or system of social reform which contemplates a complete reconstruction of society, with a more just and equitable distribution of property and labor.

Capitalism - An economic system based on predominately private (individual or corporate) investment in and ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange of goods and wealth.

Fascism - An authoritarian system of government under absolute control of a single dictator, allowing no political opposition, forcibly suppressing dissent, and rigidly controlling most industrial and economic activities.

Communism - A scheme of equalizing the social conditions of life; specifically, a scheme which contemplates the abolition of inequalities in the possession of property, as by distributing all wealth equally to all, or by holding all wealth in common for the equal use and advantage of all.

Republic - A state in which the sovereign power resides in the whole body of the people, and is exercised by representatives elected by them.

Democracy - Government by popular representation; a form of government in which the supreme power is reatined by the people, but is indirectly execercised through a system of representation and delegated authority periodically renewed.

Liberalism - An economic theory advocating free competition and a self-regulating market and the gold standard.

Progressive - Disposed toward adopting a new methods in government or education, holding tolerant and liberal ideas, and generally favoring improvement in the civic life.

Conservative - One who desires to maintain existing institutions and customs; also, one who holds moderate opinions in politics.

All these definitions are taken from www.webster-dictionary.org. It is interesting to see the root definitions of these words. I think for an accurate debate and character to develop we need this common ground. Now, if others feel Webster has it wrong then let's redefine them so we are all on the same page going forward.

What I missed today on Haiti discussion on Facebook while passing my series 66 today!!!

What a day today. I had a number of personal things to take care of and that is why my entry is tardy. The big news of the day is that I passed my Series 66 and will be heading off to the sunny skies of Arizona shortly for a week of learning with my new employer. While I was running about today, a great discussion was taking place on the blog entry about Haiti on Facebook. I warned the group there that I was going to life the conversation for my blog entry today. I am eager to see what readers of the blog think of the conversation from Facebook. Hopefully we will get some crossover as well. Well here we go: (***small disclaimer: Some responses contain explicatives****)

TP said:

 

I find your article incredibly troubling.

 

I said:

What are you finding troubling? The Tea Party movement, while a few carried questionable placards, the overriding theme, at least what I saw and heard, was one of frustration with out of control spending, taxes, and the growing of government. The speakers at Minneapolis were not all bashing Obama, Progressives or Democrats. In fact many acknowledged that the Republican Party and Bush had lost their way by casting aside conservative values for reckless and progressive spending ideals.

So I ask you what do you find troubling about my blog entry?

TP said:

I don't give a damn what they were upset about. They never protested Bush spending did they? Sorry your supporting racists with a wink and an "oh well". For you to ask what I find troubling amazes me & shows an insensitivity which I don't tolerate. You blog about Reid then support this shit. BTW do you even know constitutional history & what the constitutional convention goals were or the context in which the convention was called? The White supremeists were there just like at that rally of deception.

 

TP continued:

 

What progressive spending ideals Education? Welfare? Health care for all (which I assume you're against). Don't believe in community do U? To call Bush policies progressives I'm afraid makes you lose credibility to me. You're using BS as an undercurrent to link Bush to Progressives & not fascism? You may not do well w/ the Buddhist w/ your take on "... See more conventional wisdom". If my Grandparents woulda seen that Tea Bagger shit Grandpa would've shot em just like he did the KKK. Do you really believe Black folk wouldn't be outraged?

 

To which I asked:

 

Did you read my blog entry from April on what I saw in Minneapolis?

 

And I added:

 

Plus I am not a socialist. I do believe in the importance of community as well as the limitations of it as well.

 

KH said:

 

Chris, I think Tony does have a point about the racist undertones of the "Tea bagger" party movement.

 

I see clear undercurrents of hypocrisy, false indignation and in my honest opinion racism in the tea bagger movement based upon their behavior and "Johnny come lately" movement towards "fiscal discipline" and belief in upholding the constitution.

 

Please where were they for the last 8 years when Patriot act was passed stripping American's of their constitutional rights? Where were they when the prescription drug plan was passed without even an attempt at paying for it within the bill?... See More

 

What has changed since those things happened? Oh that's right; the tea baggers party (republicans) lost the house, senate and presidency to a black man and his ilk. I don't like Obama or the Democrats any more than the Republicans but when something stinks in Denmark, it should be called for the pile of shit that it is. And the tea baggers aren't angry over government spending, that's just an excuse. They angry that they are feeling disenfranchised and inconsequential for the first time in their privileged white skinned, middle class lives.

 

Personally, I find them all hypocrites, fear mongers, racists and demagogues. But if the party they represent isn't careful and find a way to be inclusive of minorities it will find itself more and more marginalized in the future.

 

The days of white America dominating social and political culture in this nation are fast coming to an end. Don't believe me? Just ask the people of Atlanta when they last had a white mayor? The 2010 census will shock whites.....and probably drive quite a few to racist groups out of fear. I'm sure the tea party will be standing there with open arms to greet them.

 

KH added:

 

To your articles point though, I really do like that the president took a stand quickly and tried to show America as a leader and show the true American spirit to the world.

 

What won us so many friends through our existence was the fact that we, the American people, always tried to be there for others in the world when they were in need. The goodwill this generated benefited us for decades after the acts occurred.

 

We are the richest and most powerful nation on earth. If we stood by and did nothing when another nation, especially a neighbor so close to us, suffers - what does that say about us? ... See More

 

And the people trying to score political points off of this tragedy are the worst of us. They bring us all down from the heights we are capable of and diminish our acts of kindness and generosity.

 

To which I responded:

 

I do acknowledge that the conservative voice lost its bite and blindly followed bush. And that is why I think the tea party movement started. Perhaps I am naïve but I attempt to look at the movement as a group of people fed up with out of control government regardless if a democrat or republican is in office.

 

KH responded:

 

Chris, the government was out of control for years. NEVER during that 8 years did these same people speak up and cry foul. So that begs the question what changed? As I said above, it's a black man and his ilk sitting in "THEIR" seat of power. Remember that the tea party movement is nearly 100% white, middle class and Republican.

 

Their sudden discovery of small government, fiscal discipline and defense of the constitution stinks of the shit that is political opportunism, not truly deep seated beliefs in these ideals.

 

I say this rather confidently because the talking heads that appear on TV supporting this movement are clearly visible during the Bush years supporting the very ideals that they now cry foul over.... See More

 

So, I'm sorry to say but, I believe you are being naive. There may be some people like yourself who truly believe these things in the movement - but your leadership does not. They will use you for the pack mules that they see you to be moving their political baggage to the next convenient party message and dump you when you become inconvenient.

 

TP responded:

 

Do you even know what a socialist is? Answer my questions about constitutional history? Do you know it or do u just do one line disclaimers to obfuscate your right-wing manipulative over simplifications? The Mpls Tea Party was put together by the friggin PATRIOT CHANNEL SCUM!! The other TParties were organized by the same people who rented the ... See More busses for the invasion of Florida so that the recount of 2000 would be disrupted long enough for the Supreme Court to steal the election. And in doing so cover up the violations against Blacks in ref to the Voting Rights Act & the Civil Rights Act. Do you know the history behind the reason for the founding of the court? Kevin what the USA is giving for Haiti is a fraction of what we owe them, Cubans, Mexico & all of Latin America for the EXTREME human rights violations,& pilferage committed by us against them over the past 2 centuries plus(read "THy Will Be Done").How about honoring Treaty Rights right here in the good ole boy USA? I do not see the largesse u do. BTW we give less to the needy of the world (who we continue to rape) per GNP than any other country in the world. Chris: When the all White T bggrs close their eyes & sing about taking their country back they are telling me FUCK YOU & u know what all I got to say is FUCK YOU BACK!!!

 

TP added:

 

BTW the only limitations of Community are that capitalized sociopaths cannot act in their own eschatologically fatalistic individual self interest at the expense of human freedom. Like destroying our natural right to free & equal access to clean Land, clean Air & clean Water. These bastards oppress the many for the profit of the few in order to produce more capital, which in the end is artificial POWER and a license to enslave, rape, napalm, torture & kill to protect "their property"

 

KH responded with:

 

Ok, for the record, the election in 2000 was not stolen. That implies that it was Al Gore's win based upon facts not in record and the Supreme Court overturned those facts in favor of a politically expedient resolution. Since we do not know for a fact that Florida was won by Al Gore, thus giving him the Electoral College votes to be president (in part because the Supreme Court stopped the counts mind you) it's impossible to say that the election was stolen. It was however settled through less than constitutional means via the Supreme Court which IMO overstepped their authority in electoral issues.

 

But the past is the past. Dwelling on a result you disliked doesn't change that result.

 

Tony, I have no problem giving Haiti anything, but remember it was France that "raped" that country not the US. Also, to claim reparations one must have a valid claim of harm being done to you personally not via some historical grievance of generations gone by. I'm all for fixing the social injustices of the past, but wealth re-distribution is not the solution because it's analogous to giving a homeless person a winning lottery ticket without the skills to manage those newly won resources. Without those skills the winnings are squandered and they are soon back where they started. Enabling those who were wronged to earn their own wealth through improvements in their economy, society, culture and political systems are the true gifts we can give them and they will generate returns on investment for centuries to come.... See More

 

But to say that we owe them for wrongs of a generation or more ago is where I say "I personally did you no wrong, therefore I owe you nothing". But I am still generous enough in spirit to give of my own free will because I would hope they'd do the same in my shoes. But I don't owe that to them - it's called being altruistic and charitable.

 

TP responded with:

 

Read Greg Pallast and others. They Robbed the election the good ole fashioned plausibly deniable Southern way, they nullified the Black vote in the state that the redneck Texan has a redneck brother. Oh gee do you want to buy some swamp land in the Arctic? The Supreme Court ordered the state of Florida to stop the recount. That was unprecedented ... See More but the real story that the Corporate media never told was the computer voter fraud or the coercive forces unleashed to turn Blacks away from the polls. So sorry thats a GD theft!!& No one said a word. The Cong Black Caucus walked out on Bush being declared winner for that reason.

 

KH responded with:

 

Again theft implies that Al Gore was president legally and that it was taken from him illegally. At no time was he declared victor via the Electoral College and at no time did he hold the votes necessary to make that claim prior to it being declared either. Therefore it was merely a judgment that you disagree with because of your political leanings - not theft which implies something criminal.

 

I've read plenty from all sides regarding this issue and the point I make is completely valid still. The assertions you are making are suppositions, innuendo and inferences, not facts. Facts are things we can prove, not things we believe to be true. The fact is that the Supreme Court likely overstepped its authority in stopping the election recounts in Florida. That is likely a fact. The fact is that when this occurred, it implicitly awarded the election to GWB because he held more Electoral College votes than Gore.

 

All the rest has yet to be proven as fact and is merely assumed, surmised, implied or inferred to have happened. If its fact and you have evidence to that effect, then a class action lawsuit should be brought on behalf of the disenfranchised voters in a court of law. The fact that this hasn't happened tells me that this isn't the case so yell, scream and bluster all you want of "theft" that doesn't make it so.... See More

 

If all you have are the "facts" that cannot be verified, proven or otherwise become evidence based upon reasonable legal standard then they are not fact. They are suppositions and that's all they are.

 

By the way, screaming, using sarcasm and ad hominem statements because you feel people were somehow wronged or because you feel we're not smart enough to see your point only makes your point that much less valid in my opinion. People should be capable of discussing a subject and agreeing to disagree in an agreeable manner. If you can't do that, your point loses any value to those around you that you are trying to influence

 

TP responded with:

 

Does "less than constitutional" mean unconstitutional & if it does (it does) then it was taken illegally. "STOLEN" is an appropriate word. Read Haitian history about 19th century American involvement I don't want to hear what you believe about historical facts tell me what you know. Right now your 0 for 1.I love it when White people jack you take ... See More control then claim you aint got the experience to run anything yourself. Haiti was doing just fine in recovering her national life w/Aristide & then we over threw him not once but twice. & now they are not even allowed to grow rice because the WTO has forced Haiti to accept cheap GM rice grown cheaper than the Haitians can grow it &forced on to that market thru shere gangsterism just like in Ethiopia. Just like what NAFTA did to Mexico. I love it when white folks have someone else's shit & then refuse to even consider sharing it because your Grand Daddy took it. There is no statute of limitations on crimes against humanity. You want to support social justice "your way" we don't count because in the end we gotta take whatever bone you throw. How long do you think we as aspecies can survive with that kind of attitude? We as a species are dying & we need cooperation not the paternalistic bullshit I just heard I just get so sad hearing decent people like you talk with no clue to the real meaning to your words.

 

KH ended with:

 

How quaint that you cling to the constitution with your hands in a vain attempt to justify Gore's presidency and at the same time trample it with your feet by claiming that reparations are due to those who were not wronged and should be paid by people who did not wrong them.

 

To address your points.

 

Show me where in the constitution or in the annals of US law where the Judicial decision in 2000 was an illegal act?... See More

 

Unprecedented? Yes. But so was Roe V. Wade, is that illegal? The Supreme Court sets precedent every day with their decisions effectively enacting law through their constitutional powers. Constitutional scholars still argue over the legitimacy of the 2000 election decision and rightly so as the constitution DOES NOT ADDRESS IT DIRECTLY. Therefore their decision is based upon things they infer from the verbiage within that document.

 

Second, there is a statute of limitations on "crimes against humanity" and that limitation is the death of those responsible. Your stance begs the question; do you hold the African leaders equally responsible for the failures of their tribal ancestors who sold their people into slavery for profit? Where does it end or is this just about getting yours from the "white man" for perceived/actual wrongs of centuries past?

 

I'll leave you with a question because I see this discussion going nowhere because you continue to resort to ad hominem statements rather than reasonable discourse.

 

If you truly hate this nation the way it sounds like you do, I'd ask why you don't leave it? What keeps you here? Is it the privileges you enjoy that were guaranteed by generations of white "grand daddy's" throughout the last 250 years?

 

If that the case, then in my honest opinion, that's the reparations that you and your ilk cry so badly for. 250 years of sacrifice in defense of an ideology that you hold in contempt but still take advantage of. Perhaps you should contemplate that and think about whether a "thank you" is owed to them as much as you feel they owe you something for the mistakes they made?

 

Just some food for thought.

Obama 'Joker': Art or "Dangerous"??

A poster posted around Los Angeles challenges acceptance of our freedoms as citizens of the United States while the artist remains a mystery. I came across the article in the Chicago Tribune this morning. In doing a search on the topic it appears that The Drudge Report was the lead viral catalyst to the story. The poster is of President Obama in the likeness of Health Ledger’s role as the Joker in “The Dark Knight” (see below for poster).

Earl Hutchinson, Los Angeles Urban Policy Roundtable President, stated the “Depicting the president as demonic and a socialist goes beyond political spoofery. It is mean-spirited and dangerous.” Not sure how it is dangerous. The response by Mr. Hutchinson does reflect an undercurrent of a thin skinned American society. To add to the poster the word “Socialism” is listed below the picture.

As Noel Sheppard points out in his article, (Obama Joker Poster Stirs Outrage, Bush Joker Poster Not So Much)”Yet, when Vanity Fairs Politics & Power blog published a somewhat similar visual representation of George W. Bush last July, nobody seemed to complain.” Is political satire a one-way street? A big reason why people flock to the United States is because of freedom of speech.

Saul Relative comments (Obama Joke Poster: A Contradiction) that the artist attempt to paint President Obama as an “evil trickster, a jesting madman, a person in disguise” missed the mark and “...the image falls apart in its effectiveness. Because anyone who knows anything about the Joker, it is that there is nothing about him that is concerned about the common good. In other words, there isn’t a socialistic bone in his body. The joker steals for the power of it, the fun of it, and the disruptive force of it.” All elements that appear to contradict the Joker Obama and the assertion of “Socialism”, perhaps the artist was bringing satire to the famous Hope poster that followed Sen. Obama during the presidential campaign.

While the artist’s intention of the poster may be in line with Thomas Lifson interpretation (President Obama ‘Joker’ poster asks ‘why so socialist?’) of “Open mockery of Barack Obama, as disillusionment sets in with the man, his policies, and the phony image of a race-healing, brilliant, scholarly, middle-of-the-roader”, the real question is if the depiction steps too far over that satirical line or is it free speech?

Who's Next to be Nationalized

Today President Obama announced that GM will be entering into bankruptcy. 25,000 plus jobs will be cut and numerous plants will either be closed or moth-balled. The Government will own 60% of GM, not much different then the bank plan, while only 10% will be owned by the bondholders that staked GM.

President Obama says he does not want "run GM" but it is necessary that Government intervene. Nothing that I ever read in books about Capitalism or Civic duties of government included national government ownership; temporary or not. Why hasn't President Obama presented a plan to exactly what the Government will do to ensure GM's socialistic regime is short lived?

The lack of the plan indicates that President Obama is looking to socialize all aspects of our economy. Banks were the first and now Automotive. With Chrysler and GM under the thumb of the Federal Government, where does it leave Ford? How can the American Government not play favorites and balance their competing interests? With the taxpayer on the hook for the success of Chrysler and GM, how does President Obama plan to devise incentives to repay to taxpayer while not violating anti-trust laws. The simple answer is he cannot.

So the next move will be to force Ford into the same railroad job and spin it to the American public that its in the best interest of the American economy. A lot of rhetoric coming from President Obama eerily parallels speeches given by Adolf Hitler on the importance of rebuilding Germany. Post WWI left Germany in a deep recession with galloping inflation. Soon we will be experiencing the same inflation as the Federal Reserve Bank prints more and more money to pay off the Trillion of dollar debt that President Obama and Democrats in Congress has saddled us with. All in the name of "It's best for our Economy".

The Free Market and Capitalism are phoenix's. If one company fails, no matter the size, another will spring up to pick up the slack. Now where the Government can assist the Economic models that has given many Americans their wealth is to ensure, through limited regulation, that greed, deception, and corruption is kept in check. The role of government in a free society is not to own business or commerce; ownership of business is only seen in Socialistic societies where liberties and freedoms are restricted.

If Americans do not wake up soon and vote in a more fiscally responsible Congress our free society will be no longer.

Broken Promises: National Sales tax

Washington Post reported yesterday that rumor on Capitol Hill is the consideration of a national sales tax. Now I personally like the idea of a national sales tax only if a flat tax with no tax credits is instituted. The purpose of the national sales tax is to assist in paying for Universal Healthcare and paying down the Trillion dollar deficit that President Obama’s budget brings upon the United States.

President Obama as a candidate said that he will not increase taxes but if he were to sign into law a national sales tax he will do just that. A national sales tax will not hurt the wealthy; rather have dire consequences on the middle class and the poor. President Obama’s $787 Billion stimulus bill and his $1.2 Trillion budget have already saddled my grandchildren with a debt that will be difficult to pay back unless everyone is paying a tax rate of 75%.

Socialism is the goal of President Obama. Shredding the U.S. Constitution is a secondary goal. In his first five months on the job, President Obama has nationalized the banks, fired the CEO of Chrysler, and is on the verge of nationalizing General Motors. With Cap and Trade, Universal Healthcare, and further spending coming down the pipe line, who do Americans think Government will pay for it all? During President Obama’s attack on Credit Card industry, he said that American consumers need to be fiscally responsible. Why is it that our own Government is not leading the cause?

As a private citizen, we do not have the opportunity to raise our incomes like the Government does with taxes. Americans need only look at California. California has a $24M budget shortfall and has looked to the National Government for a handout. Citizens of California are up in arms over the potential cuts that will need to be made to balance their budget. Perhaps voting in representatives with fiscal restraint would not have California in their current situation.

Now I should be fair. President Obama did announce he found $17B in annual earmarks to cut. Then again $17B is a drop in the bucket of a $1.2T budget.

Economic woe root cause: Socialism

The following words of mine were published in the Star Tribune on 11-28-08.

So the Federal Reserve is going take over debt from the failed dealings of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac all in an effort to ensure economic stability. The approach is suppose to help "Main Street" as well because it will allow the credit card companies and banks to free up cash to make loans at low-interest rates and increase one's line of credit. Is this not how America started down the road to economic ruin? What types of controls are being placed on lending institutions to ensure another collapse does not occur in five or 10 years?
Owning a home is not a right that all Americans are guaranteed. The direction the Democratic Party has America going is right behind the changes that took place in the final days of Rome. Congress wisely asked the Big Three for a recovery plan before it will give any bailout, or rather, loan. Why is Congress not doing the same for the financial realm? Could it be because leading Democrats are in bed with those who benefit from the bailout? Yes!
Sen. Barack Obama is going to bring "change" to America; the "change" will be in the form of a penny that used to be a $20 bill.

http://www.startribune.com/opinion/letters/35267544.html?page=3&c=y

The same people that are trying to fix our Economy are the same that felt Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae were solvent. President Obama’s administration is using Socialism to right the ship instead of identifying the root cause for America’s economical woes. America’s economical woes root cause is the Socialistic view that everyone has the right to own a home. Simply put, it is not a right to own a home.

Government backed Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae mortgage programs enabled the financial industry to package the “toxic” asset trade by guaranteeing mortgages. Armed with the backing of the Federal Government, mortgage companies proceeded to push the socialistic ideal of homeownership through ARM’s, interest only, and no money down loans.

In 2002 a number of concerned legislators warned the Judiciary Committee about the future insolvency of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. The warnings fell on deaf ears as Democrat Barney Frank stated over and over that nothing in the balance sheet or any projections supported the charge of insolvency. Why might this be?

Had Barney Frank heeded the warnings it would have meant a halt, most likely temporary, to the Democrats Socialistic agenda. Thus turning the average citizen into hedge fund managers as many that entered into mortgages they knew was going to break them in three or four years. Instead of holding homeowners accountable for their actions and the Government crafted the notion of predatory lending.

The topic of predatory lending opened the door for Socialism to thrive through a collapsing American economy and the partial nationalization of the financial industry. The House of Representatives even treaded on the U.S. Constitution by passing a bill of attainder to recoup bonuses paid to executives of TARP fund recipients. Now Secretary Geitner is asking for Congress to expand his powers to control of potentially failing companies that are vital to our economy. Barney Frank has proposed a bill that will allow the Government to establish wages for companies that take bailout money. The kicker to Barney Frank’s bill is that it will allow it to be retroactive.

On the surface the additional powers may make sense for those accepting money from the Government but that is only being short sighted. The shell game is Democrats attempt to entrench Socialism while removing Capitalism. Government has failed us by not identifying the root causes and using Socialism to attempt to right the ship. When will America wake up and realize that our freedoms are being stripped away?