Things like the budget, the stimulus package, tax scandals by cabinet officials, continuing warentless wiretapping, and the largest expansion of Government by taking over healthcare, not to mention broken campaign promises on open government, government fraud, lobbyists, and a myriad of other actual policy differences.  So take a lesson from the left-wingnuts rightwingers, the more you talk about secret muslims and false birth certificates, the more people will treat you like the 9/11 was an inside job and Bush lied people died crackpots.

Grow up right-wingers and deal with real issues that are going to destroy this country and less time with black helicopter conspiracies and NWO nutcases.

Evil Out.

Today is the culmination of Americans doing their "Patriotic Duty" for the year of 2008.  A proud day when a minority of Americans pay a little over a third of the money they earned to the Government and almost half of the population pays almost nothing.  Most people in this country have little to no idea how much they actually pay in taxes and have absolutely no idea what others pay in taxes.

Take a moment on this day to think about the complex, convoluted, and confiscatory tax system.  Take a moment to examine the built in unfairness in a tax system that punishes a person for being successful.  Take a moment to ponder how much time you spent filing you taxes this year.  Take a moment to think about how much money you spent, just to tell you how much you owe someone else.

Then take a moment to read about a system that eliminates all of those problems with our tax code.  Then go out today and participate in the nearest Fairtax rally or Tea Party and let those in Washington know that you vote and you want the Government out of your life and pocketbook.  Then go back home and continue to do everything you can to change this country.

Evil Out

The DHS/Office of Intelligence and Analysis (I&A) has no specific information that domestic rightwing

* terrorists are currently planning acts of violence, but rightwing extremists may be gaining new recruits by playing on their fears about several emergent issues. The economic downturn and the election of the first African American president present unique drivers for rightwing radicalization and recruitment.

Rightwing extremism in the United States can be broadly divided into those groups, movements, and adherents that are primarily hate-oriented (based on hatred of particular religious, racial or ethnic groups),and those that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely. It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration.

• a) Call the company to register a complaint about the service plan
• b) Change service providers
• c) Complain to those around you, effectively doing nothing
• d) Call out to other customers who are unhappy with the service plan and as a group attempt to get it changed
• e) Come to Congress asking for committee hearings and more Government control

If you answered a, b, c, or d then you are exersicing your choices as a consumer and being a responsible citizen.  If you answered e, then you must be a member of the Free Press "consumer advocacy" group or another like minded organization.

It seems that Time Warner Cable is establishing a pay-for-use internet plan that would charge customers a flat rate for a certain amount of bandwidth usage per month and then charge overage fees when going beyond that limit.  It seems that many of their customers and internet watchers aren't happy with that plan and they took their complaints to the company who altered it's initial plan.  All good steps in the process of free enterprise and a capitalist economy.  Unfortunately for "we know better than you" activist groups like Free Press, this isn't good enough.  They believe it is time for Government to step in and stop this activity that they do not approve of.  Of course this is the same group that wants to force more "disadvantaged" group ownership of media companies and supports the idea of Universal Government Broadband coverage.  So this move is not suprising.

So now to the question I posted as the title of this entry.  Do you want to know why the Government meddles in our lives so much?  Because we have activist groups that "have our best interests in mind" who run to the Government to control what those of us "who just don't know better" can use, eat, read, watch, listen to, or consume in general.  From overbearing "christian" family advocacy groups that demand that our so-called public airwaves be free of smut, to health advocacy groups that demand our air be free of smoke and our food is free of "bad" fats, to consumer advocacy groups that demand that we have free healthcare, free internet, gas-efficient cars, and any number of green appliances.

When these groups reach out to change the world do they come to the consumers and organize?  Do they attempt to change society and company behavior by education and getting consumers to demand changes in the products they buy?  Do they organize boycotts or encourage new companies to offer better products?  No they run to the Government and demand that it meets their needs and the Government is happy to oblige.  After all it is easier to maintain power and control when people become dependent on you and getting re-elected each time is easier when you can offer people bribes than actually offering leadership.

Think about it next time you call for Government to reform, ban, regulate, limit, or otherwise control a product, company, or organization that you don't approve of.  Think about how when you cried out for Government control when they start limiting the choices that you have.  Think about how you have enabled this juggernaut of Government to run your live and then shut up and stop complaining when they roll over you, because you have been part of the problem.

You want Government to leave your freedoms alone?  Then don't encourage Government to limit someone else's.

Evil Out

"I say to them tonight, there's not a liberal America and a conservative America — there's the United States of America,"

 

"We worship an awesome God in the blue states, and we don't like federal agents poking around our libraries in the red states. We coach Little League in the blue states and have gay friends in the red states. There are patriots who opposed the war and patriots who supported it. We are one people, all of us pledging allegiance to the stars and stripes, all of us defending the United States of America."

"They sense, deep in their bones, that with just a slight change in priorities we can make sure that every child in America has a decent shot at life and that the doors of opportunity remain open to all,"

Does any of that sound familiar?  Compare those quotes to some from one of his recent speeches in Prague:

"None of these challenges can be solved quickly or easily. But all of them demand that we listen to one another and work together; that we focus on our common interests, not our occasional differences; and that we reaffirm our shared values, which are stronger than any force that could drive us apart. That is the work that we must carry on. That is the work that I have come to Europe to begin. "

"Together, we must confront climate change by ending the world's dependence on fossil fuels, tapping the power of new sources of energy like the wind and sun, and calling upon all nations to do their part"

"We are demonstrating that free nations can make common cause on behalf of our common security."

There is this common message of "unity of purpose" that fills most of President Obama's speeches.  In fact, if you tear into almost any Obama speech since the start of the campaign that has been an undercurrent in all of his speeches, it is one of the messages that resonates with many people.  People who think that the absence of conflict or division is something to be desired or achieved.  At least, as long as that unity is achieved by agreeing with them.  This is one of the rhetorical tricks that he uses often.

Another tactic central to his speeches is his use of straw men to paint his opponents in a light that is not true.  This was very noticable during the run up and attacks during the process of passing the stimulus bill.  He stated often that his opponents wanted "tax cuts alone" to solve the problem.  This position, however, was not the Republican position during the debate.  Mostly the argument was about the amount of the spending and where the money was going.  Again, a quote from the Prague speech:

"Some argue that the spread of these weapons cannot be checked _ that we are destined to live in a world where more nations and more people possess the ultimate tools of destruction. This fatalism is a deadly adversary. For if we believe that the spread of nuclear weapons is inevitable, then we are admitting to ourselves that the use of nuclear weapons is inevitable"

Now ask yourself, who on the international stage is actually arguing about the "inevitable" spread of nukes?  The only people who are truly looking to expand the world's nuclear arsenals are those who don't have them at the moment and want them.  The position of those nations is nothing about "inevitable" nuclear expansion, but is more about their own protection or their potential arms sales.  Often the problems or solutions of the opponents in Obama's speeches are mythical or fictitional and have little to do with the real arguments that are going on.  Once again, this tactic helps to sell his positions, but has little in the way of substance or truth.

The final tactic that he often uses is so-called double speak.  If you listen closely to his speeches the actions he says he will do and the actions he is actually taking are two different things.  By wrapping up his activities in pretty rhetoric that sounds great, he is able to justify many positions that are in opposition to what he says he is doing.  Much like his talk of tax cuts, when in fact he is speaking of refundable tax credits.  This trend has been noted in many articles going all the way back to the campaign.  Here are a few of them:

Thomas Sowell on his treatment of Jeremiah Wright:

Some are saying that Senator Obama cannot be held responsible for what his pastor, Jeremiah Wright, said. In their version of events, Barack Obama just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time -- and a bunch of mean-spirited people are trying to make something out of it.

It makes a good story, but it won't stand up under scrutiny.

Barack Obama's own account of his life shows that he consciously sought out people on the far left fringe. In college, "I chose my friends carefully," he said in his first book, "Dreams From My Father."

 

These friends included "Marxist professors and structural feminists and punk rock performance poets" -- in Obama's own words -- as well as the "more politically active black students." He later visited a former member of the terrorist Weatherman underground, who endorsed him when he ran for state senator.

Matt Welch on the Bank Bailout:

So in early January, the president-elect lamented that “banks made loans without concern for whether borrowers could repay them, and some borrowers took advantage of cheap credit to take on debt they couldn’t afford.” In February his administration pushed banks to lend still more to risky homebuyers while bailing out underwater borrowers. Technocrat Obama wants to jumpstart the “flow of credit,” which he has described as “the lifeblood of our economy,” but politician Obama wants to somehow surgically remove the “speculators” from the process. “I will not spend a single penny,” he vowed to Congress, unconvincingly, “for the purpose of rewarding a single Wall Street executive, but I will do whatever it takes to help the small business that can’t pay its workers or the family that has saved and still can’t get a mortgage.” The following week his administration authorized another $30 billion in the $163-billion-and-counting bailout of the Wall Street insurance giant AIG.

Robert Samuelson on the Budget:

Obama is a great pretender. He repeatedly says he's doing things that he isn't, trusting his powerful rhetoric to obscure the difference. He has made "responsibility" a personal theme; the budget's cover line is "A New Era of Responsibility." He says the budget begins "making the tough choices necessary to restore fiscal discipline." It doesn't.

This use of double talk happens over and over in his speeches.  In the long run, the masterful speaking abilities of the President end up being little more than Blah, Blah, Blah.  It would be nice to hear a real and honest speech from the man in the Oval Office.

Evil Out

A few weeks ago, Mr. DeFazio voted against the administration's stimulus bill. The comment from Mr. Obama was a presidential rebuke and part of a new, hard-nosed push by the White House to pressure Congress to adopt the president's budget. He has mobilized outside groups and enlisted forces still in place from the Obama campaign.

Senior presidential adviser Valerie Jarrett and her chief of staff, Michael Strautmanis, are in regular contact with MoveOn.Org, Americans United for Change and other liberal interest groups. Deputy Chief of Staff Jim Messina has collaborated with Americans United for Change on strategy and even ad copy. Ms. Jarrett invited leaders of the liberal interest groups to a White House social event with the president and first lady to kick off the lobbying campaign.

There are many of these organizations that have been popping up over recent years, MoveOn.org, Americans for Fair Taxation, Americans United for Change, and Family Research Council are some of the larger ones and there are many others.  Add to these groups other movements like the Neo Tea Parties and you have this large mass of people all screaming for attention.  These groups flood the FCC with petitions when they don't like a program, file petitions to smear news agencies they don't like, go door to door with petitions to support the President's budget, and organize mass rallies on April 15th.  Not to mention sending Tea bags, or at least their tags, to congress members and the myriad of letters, calls, and emails that are sent to politicians each day.

The question becomes how do our elected leaders pull the message from this mass of noise?  Do they really listen?  I know I have sent a number of letters and emails to my elected officials.  The usual response is a automatically generated letter or email with my name pasted in.  I have signed on-line petitions that have generated tens of thousands of emails, but never seen these ideas acted upon.  CNBC hasn't dropped Jim Cramer or changed their "business friendly" ways because MoveOn has flooded them with emails.  The FCC stopped paying much attention to FRC generated outrage once it became obvious that the thousands of outraged letters were questionable in their relative proximity to the programs involved. 

Are we as members of these groups and members of the public who respond to these movements really making a difference or is the message getting lost in the mass of competing voices?  Where is the Signal in the White Noise?

My guess is that most of this does little, but encourage those who hear from their own interest groups.  FCC petitions wouldn't have mattered if the man in charge hadn't been sympathetic thier cries and imigration reform would not have been killed if many hadn't been leaning that direction to begin with.  Sometimes it feels like all we as citizens are doing is playing at working to change our government.  This is why elections truly matter and getting your people out to vote is more important in the long run than tea bags and emails.

Evil Out

For full disclosure I do belong to a grassroots organization myself, Americans for Fair Taxation, and I also "belong" to MoveOn.org (so I can receive their "marching orders" for some light reading).