Walter Coffey's Blog, page 197

A Failed Presidency

Points to ponder for those who are still undecided on Election Day…

The presidency of Barack Obama has been one of the least successful in American history. Nearly every aspect of American life and government has gotten worse since Obama took office, making it difficult to understand why so many are willing to give him a second term. Here is a brief summary of some of the most important failings under Obama.

The Economy and Jobs

Obama has incurred more debt than any other president in history, including unprecedented spending after campaigning to cut the national deficit in half. He has been so fiscally irresponsible that he is the only president to have never presented a budget that Congress has approved. The obvious result of massive spending and lack of budgeting—inflation—has begun in the form of rising food and energy prices.

The “stimulus” of 2009 was supposed to keep unemployment below six percent. Instead, unemployment has lingered around eight percent throughout Obama’s term. The “stimulus” did nothing to curb unemployment, instead actually causing more damage to the economy.

Today, more Americans are on food stamps and living in poverty than ever before. And as Obama consistently lectured Americans that they must cut back and do more with less, he has enjoyed dozens of vacations and golf outings at taxpayer expense.

National Defense

In the Afghan War, Obama approved a watered-down troop surge, then announced a troop withdrawal before their objectives were met, thus undermining the U.S. war effort. Obama has also greatly increased the number of Predator and drone attacks, despite arguments that these do U.S. interests more harm than good through civilian casualties.

Americans applauded Obama’s decision to execute Osama bin Laden, but most forgot that Obama had pledged to detain bin Laden, not kill him, if given the opportunity. Obama also authorized the execution of Yemeni cleric Anwar al-Awlaki, a U.S. citizen, without due process of law guaranteed by the Constitution. This makes every American potentially vulnerable to government execution through presidential decree.

With the U.S. already fighting wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, Obama extended the military even further by helping overthrow Libyan ruler Moammar Ghaddafi. But Obama didn’t act fast enough to prevent terrorists from attacking and killing four Americans in Libya this past September 11, even when repeated requests for help were made. We still have no answers as to why the military was ordered to stand down while the attack occurred.

Obama supported a revolution in Egypt that was co-opted by the Muslim Brotherhood, a terrorist organization sworn to destroy America and Israel. Obama also insulted America’s traditional ally, Israel, by demanding that Israelis give up defensible 1967 borders, even though Israel is surrounded by the sworn enemies of Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, and Iran.

Obamacare

After pledging to focus “like a laser beam” on jobs, Obama spent nearly the entire first year of his presidency pushing health care reform through Congress. This culminated with the Affordable Care Act, the most intrusive law on individual liberty in American history. With the country already over $15 trillion in debt, this law promises to cost another $900 billion over 10 years.

The law levies a punitive tax on any citizen who does not purchase health insurance. More Americans will be insured than ever before, but there won’t be enough doctors to meet the demand. This will cause the same rationing that plagues all other countries with socialized medicine. Ultimately, government bureaucrats will decide whether you receive health care, and this reduces personal choices, health care accessibility, and individual freedom. This law must be repealed.

Various “Reforms”

Obama signed a financial reform law that allows the U.S. Treasury to bail out any firm deemed “too big to fail.” Yet the government entities most responsible for the housing crash—Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac—weren’t held accountable. The law also requires all bank loans to be reviewed by government bureaucrats, which bottlenecks the process and harms small business. Banking costs and debit card fees have risen as a result.

Obama also brags about how he “rescued” the auto industry, but bailing out General Motors and Chrysler equated to a $25 billion loss for taxpayers. And much of that money went to unions that heavily contribute to Obama’s campaigns while stealing the bondholders’ entire investment.

Regarding education, Obama claims to champion college students, but student loans and tuition costs have skyrocketed under his term. Obamacare not only put health care under government control, but student loans as well. It’s no coincidence that ever since government began involving itself in the student loan industry, costs have gone up and the quality of education has plummeted.

Food Control

Obama signed the Food Safety Modernization Act of 2010, a bipartisan law that puts stricter federal controls on farming. This law hurts small farmers because Big Agriculture can handle all the extra bureaucratic red tape imposed, but the small farmers can’t. Moreover, the FDA is authorized to scrutinize what family farms and small farmers produce and harvest.

This grants the government power to regulate the people’s right to grow, trade, and transport food. Those not in compliance with federal guidelines can be fined or jailed. Some have called this “the most dangerous bill in the history of the United States” because it could be a slippery slope toward complete government control of the food supply. Incidentally, tyrants have traditionally maintained power by controlling the food supply.

Energy Control

Under Obama the EPA, a group of unelected bureaucrats that aren’t accountable to the people, are making the rules on how businesses can emit carbon from their factories and plants. All these regulations and requirements will only drive up costs, which businesses pass on to consumers in the form of higher prices and fewer jobs.

Solyndra was touted as the model for Obama’s “green energy” initiative. But Solyndra filed for bankruptcy, leaving 1,100 workers unemployed and taxpayers on the hook for over $500 million due to an Obama “stimulus” loan guarantee. The House Energy and Commerce Committee and the Washington Post have revealed that not only was this a bad investment, but it was rife with corruption.

When the BP oil spill began in the Gulf of Mexico, Obama initially chose golfing instead of addressing the problem. Then he overreacted by banning all offshore drilling, making the U.S. more dependent on foreign oil. On top of this, Obama rejected construction on the Keystone pipeline that could have created jobs in a struggling economy. Meanwhile, billions of taxpayer dollars have been given to Brazil and other countries to conduct their own offshore drilling, and gas prices have skyrocketed since Obama has taken office.

Illegal Immigration

Obama has deported more illegal immigrants than George W. Bush, and he has also increased funding for the drug wars along the American-Mexican border. However, Obama’s administration conducted “Operation Fast and Furious,” a program in which guns were sold to Mexican drug cartels that were later used to kill U.S. border agents. Documents have revealed that Justice Department officials knew about and supported this program. And despite increased funding, American and Mexican casualties in the drug wars exceed the U.S. casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan combined.

The administration has sued various states for trying to enforce federal illegal immigration laws since Obama refuses to do so. When Mexico complained about Arizona’s efforts to enforce federal laws, Obama sided with Mexico against his own country. And Obama has repeatedly opposed states’ efforts to address social and economic problems through reasonable immigration laws.

Moreover, Obama bypassed Congress to issue an executive order refusing to deport the children of illegal aliens. He has consistently supported amnesty for illegal aliens while making no significant move to secure the border. No comprehensive plan for border security has even been considered during Obama’s presidency.

Eroding Civil Liberties

Despite his criticisms of George W. Bush’s disregard for civil liberties, Obama has been even worse in this department. Under Obama, the TSA is forcing Americans to undergo intense groping and seizures in airports that violate the Fourth Amendment and resemble police state tactics. After railing against the Patriot Act, Obama approved an extension that allows for even more government surveillance than there was under Bush.

Obama also signed the National Defense Authorization Act into law, which is a bipartisan effort authorizing the military to indefinitely detain Americans suspected of terrorist activity. This makes all Americans vulnerable to military detention without habeas corpus or due process, violating the basic freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution.

Broken Promises

For the sake of brevity, only a few examples are cited here. President Obama pledged not to use “signing statements” (i.e., announcements that he would not honor parts of a bill he signs into law), but he has routinely used them. Case in point: in April 2011, Obama announced he would not enforce the portion of the budget law that defunded his special advisors (i.e., “czars”).

Obama pledged to have no lobbyists in his administration; this pledge was broken in his first month in office and his administration is now teeming with lobbyists. As a senator, Obama criticized George W. Bush for raising the national debt $4 trillion in eight years, but Obama has raised it another $6 trillion in less than four years. And Obama has kept Guantanamo Bay open after pledging to close it on “day one” of his presidency.

Conclusion

This past week, Obama put aside campaign stops to direct federal relief efforts for victims of Hurricane Sandy and visit disaster areas in New Jersey. But he failed to even address the terrible suffering in New York City by those still without water and power. And during his term, Obama made no effort to visit the devastated sites of the Nashville flood, the Alabama tornado, or the Texas wildfires. Maybe this is because these other disasters didn’t give Obama an opportunity to pretend showing leadership a week before an election.

No president has ever consolidated so much power so quickly into the executive branch of government than Barack Obama. This centralization is a threat to our constitutional republic and our individual liberty. It sends us down the slippery slope toward tyranny, which will arrive on our shores like a thief in the night if we are not vigilant. It is up to the American people to stop it on Election Day.

This Week in the Civil War: Oct 29-Nov 4, 1862

Wednesday, October 29.  Skirmishing occurred in Missouri, Texas, and Virginia. President Abraham Lincoln wrote to General George B. McClellan about the Army of the Potomac’s return to Virginia: “I am much pleased with the movement of the Army. When you get entirely across the (Potomac) river let me know. What do you know of the enemy?” Confederate President Jefferson Davis wrote the Alabama governor about the difficulty in defending so many points at once: “Our only alternatives are to abandon important points or to use our limited resources as effectively as the circumstances will permit.”

U.S. General William S. Rosecrans

Thursday, October 30.  General William S. Rosecrans assumed command of the Federal Department of the Cumberland, replacing General Don Carlos Buell. Emperor Napoleon III of France proposed that Russia and Great Britain mediate between the U.S. and the Confederacy to end the war. Prominent Federal General Ormsby M. Mitchel died of yellow fever at Beaufort, South Carolina.

Friday, October 31.  Skirmishing occurred in Virginia and Federal forces began a two-day bombardment of Lavaca, Texas. Federal troops began concentrating at Grand Junction, Tennessee in preparation for General Ulysses S. Grant’s upcoming offensive against Vicksburg, Mississippi.

Saturday, November 1.  General Benjamin Butler, commanding Federal occupation forces in New Orleans, imposed stricter pass requirements and authorized the liberation of “slaves not known to be the slaves of loyal owners.” In North Carolina, a Federal expedition began from New Berne and featured several skirmishes.

Sunday, November 2.  Skirmishing occurred in Virginia, as General McClellan’s Federal Army of the Potomac began concentrating in the Blue Ridge. First Lady Mary Lincoln visited New York City.

Monday, November 3.  A Federal expedition began along the coasts of Georgia and eastern Florida. Among the Federals was one of the first black regiments, the First South Carolina Volunteers under Colonel Thomas W. Higginson, even though it would not be officially mustered into service until next year.

Tuesday, November 4.  In the midterm Federal elections, Democrats made substantial gains in the Senate and the House of Representatives. In New York, Democrat Horatio Seymour was elected governor. Democrats also won many seats in New Jersey, Illinois, and Wisconsin. These Democratic gains were largely attributed to war weariness and northern dissatisfaction with President Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamantion. Nevertheless, the Republicans retained their congressional majority with victories in New England, California, and Michigan. In Tennessee, Federal troops under General Ulysses S. Grant occupied La Grange and Grand Junction, which were important supply depots for his upcoming offensive against Vicksburg.

Primary source: The Civil War Day by Day by E.B. Long and Barbara Long (New York: Da Capo Press, Inc., 1971)

Obama and the Constitution: The Libyan Failure

Nearly everything President Obama has done regarding Libya has been wrong. First he unconstitutionally put U.S. military personnel under NATO commanders to invade the country. Now we’re learning that the murder of a U.S. ambassador and three other Americans in Benghazi was (contrary to administration claims) an act of terrorism that the administration knew about all along. Libya is the crowning achievement of Obama’s failed foreign policy.

Obama had declared that the U.S. would be the world leader in supporting democracy. But when Libyan rebels began efforts to overthrow ruler Moammar Gaddhafi, Obama needed to be prodded by France to join the NATO coalition aiding the rebels.

Obama had declared that the U.S. would not commit military forces to any country that didn’t threaten U.S. interests. But he committed U.S. troops to Libya, despite the assertion by Robert Gates, Obama’s own defense secretary, that Libya posed no threat to U.S. national security.

Obama had declared that he would not make George W. Bush’s mistake of invading Muslim countries just to depose brutal dictators. But he committed U.S. troops just to topple Gaddhafi. Other than being weaker, Obama’s foreign policy has been strangely similar to Bush’s.

When Obama committed U.S. troops to join NATO in overthrowing Gaddhafi, little attention was given to the fact that the rebels opposing Gaddhafi were affiliated with al-Qaeda. Why were we siding with our sworn enemy in Libya?

Obama violated both the Constitution and the War Powers Act by committing troops to a foreign legation without congressional consent. At least George W. Bush received congressional approval to invade Iraq; Obama didn’t even bother to ask. Even U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder endorsed a legal opinion that Obama needed congressional authorization to continue the U.S. commitment. When Obama didn’t like that ruling, he got a second opinion from the State Department, which endorsed his dictatorial deployment.

Obama justified U.S. intervention by stating we had a “responsibility to protect” human life in Libya. But then why has Obama done little about Syria, where a civil war is raging that’s even more terrible than Libya’s? Instead of taking a firm stand on Syria, Obama meekly complied with the United Nations, where Syria’s allies Russia and China vetoed a resolution calling for U.N. intervention. This lack of consistency is not lost on world leaders.

Since Gaddhafi has been toppled in Libya, a new, equally oppressive regime has taken power. The Libyan people haven’t been liberated; they’ve just been put under a different dictatorship. So much for protecting human life in Libya, but that’s the typical result of a foreign policy predicated on “leading from behind.”

We are beginning to see the result of this failed policy: the U.S. ambassador to Libya and three other Americans were killed on the anniversary of 9/11. The Obama administration took no action to stop the attack until eight hours after it began. But emails were sent to the White House, the Pentagon, the FBI, and the CIA two hours after the attack began. The administration did nothing for six hours, during which time drones filmed the attack in real time and four Americans were killed.

The emails reported the attack, requested assistance, and named Ansar al-Sharia (an affiliate of al-Qaeda) as claiming responsibility. This suggests it was a premeditated act of terror. But for five days after the attack, Obama’s U.N. ambassador, Susan Rice, claimed it was a “spontaneous” reaction to an anti-Islam video. Obama himself suggested the same thing in an address to the U.N. This directly contradicts the contents of the emails sent just two hours after the attack began.

Several State Department employees testified that the U.S. embassy in Libya had requested additional security for several months, especially considering the anniversary of 9/11 was coming. But not only did the Obama administration ignore these requests, both President Obama and Vice President Joe Biden denied they ever knew the requests had been made. How could Obama and Biden not know that their Libyan embassy, which had been a prior target of threats and demonstrations, need extra security for 9/11?

By first pleading ignorance about the attack, and then calling it a “spontaneous” reaction against a video, the Obama administration has clearly lied to the American public ever since the tragic event took place. This demonstrates that Obama should have never committed U.S. military personnel to Libya in the first place. It also demonstrates Obama’s blatant disregard for the Constitution, and his foreign policy failures will only bring more tragedies and disasters if he is reelected.

Obama and the Constitution: Illegal Immigration

This is part of a series of articles examining President Obama’s disregard for the Constitution, which must be considered before Election Day.

The Obama administration has filed suit against states that have enacted stricter laws in an effort to reduce illegal immigration. These laws have been highly criticized by Mexico. Thus, the U.S. government has sided with a foreign country against its own states.

Arizona, along with other states, passed these laws out of desperation because the federal government, which is constitutionally required to protect the individual states, has refused to enforce its own laws. Taxpayers in these states pay billions of dollars per year for medical and education benefits to illegal aliens. Instead of helping solve this problem, the federal government has sued these states for trying to defend their own sovereignty.

People have routinely looked the other way while employers pay illegal aliens slave wages and force them to work grueling hours in unsafe conditions. Some argue that illegals do the work that Americans won’t do. But the truth is that illegals do the work that Americans can’t do because Americans must adhere to minimum wage laws. This is the 21st century equivalent to slavery.

If cheap labor floods the market, wages naturally go down. Smaller wages hurt all American workers. And when workers are hurt, minorities and the poor always get hit first. In a free market, helping illegal families invariably harms legal families.

In addition, illegal aliens pay little or no taxes, and many send millions of dollars out of the U.S. to their home country. Illegals are also more likely to use taxpayer-funded social services than citizens. They are entitled to free health care, education, and food stamps. Over $4.7 billion a year is spent on illegal aliens.

One of the key reasons why the Roman Empire crumbled was because it based its economy on slave labor. A reliance on slave labor is also one of the key reasons why the Confederacy was defeated in the War Between the States. The South couldn’t match the northern industrial and military might that free labor produced. Slave labor weakens countries by reducing exports, hindering technological innovation, and turning employers lazy since they are virtually guaranteed profit at low cost.

No nation has ever prospered without defending its borders. Open borders not only invite violence and national security issues, but they also inevitably result in a country importing poverty while exporting high-paying jobs and wealthy, educated citizens. This only leads to massive deficits, growing unemployment, and fewer wealthy taxpayers to support them all. It is no coincidence that deficits and unemployment have increased while wealthy taxpayers have decreased since Obama became president. His policies regarding illegal immigration play an important role in these trends.

It is true that there have been more deportations under President Obama than any other president. However, there has also been more illegal entry into America under this president than any other. By suing states for trying to protect their own borders, Obama proves he is not willing to fulfill his constitutional obligation to protect the states. And America cannot truly prosper until we have a president who will take the necessary steps to stop rampant illegal immigration.

This Week in the Civil War: Oct 22-28, 1862

Wednesday, October 22.  General Braxton Bragg’s Confederate forces continued withdrawing from Kentucky following the Battle of Perryville. Confederate cavalry under General Joseph Wheeler captured London, Kentucky. Various skirmishes occurred in Arkansas, Missouri, and the Indian Territory.

Thursday, October 23.  Bragg’s Confederates successfully returned to Tennessee; President Abraham Lincoln was angry with Federal General Don Carlos Buell for allowing Bragg to escape. President Jefferson Davis wrote about his concerns with pro-Union sentiment in eastern Tennessee. In Kentucky, Federals destroyed the Goose Creek Salt Works near Manchester.

Friday, October 24.  General Buell was replaced by General William S. Rosecrans, primarily due to Buell’s failure to prevent Bragg’s escape back to Tennessee. Rosecrans assumed Buell’s command as well as the new Department of the Cumberland following his recent successes at Iuka and Corinth in Mississippi. Various skirmishes occurred in Arkansas, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, and Louisiana.

Saturday, October 25.  President Lincoln wired General George B. McClellan, commander of the Army of the Potomac. McClellan’s forces had been mostly inactive since driving General Robert E. Lee’s Confederates out of Maryland. An angry Lincoln wrote, “I have just read your despatch about sore tongued and fatiegued (sic) horses. Will you pardon me for asking what the horses of your army have done since the battle of Antietam that fatigue anything?” McClellan responded that his cavalry was conducting several reconnaissances and raids. General Ulysses S. Grant assumed command of the Thirteenth Army Corps and the Department of the Tennessee.

Sunday, October 26.  Over a month after Antietam, George McClellan’s Federals began crossing the Potomac River into Virginia to pursue Robert E. Lee. President Lincoln wrote to McClellan that he “rejoiced” over the crossing. Braxton Bragg’s Confederates completed their return to Tennessee, reaching Knoxville and Chattanooga. General Samuel Heintzelman replaced Nathaniel Banks as the commander of Federal defenses around Washington. In Texas, Federal gunboats captured Indianola.

Monday, October 27.  The Federal blockade along the southern coast continued strengthening as two Confederate commerce raiders were captured.

Tuesday, October 28.  George McClellan’s Federals continued moving into Virginia, moving east of the Blue Ridge. Robert E. Lee’s Confederates began moving southward in the Shenandoah Valley to avoid being outflanked by McClellan. General John C. Breckinridge assumed command of the Confederate Army of Middle Tennessee.

Primary Source: The Civil War Day by Day by E.B. Long and Barbara Long (New York, NY: Da Capo Press, Inc., 1971)

Obama and the Constitution: Financial “Reform”

This is part of a series of articles examining President Obama’s disregard for the Constitution, which all voters must consider before Election Day.

President Obama has been touting the Dodd-Frank “financial reform” law he signed in 2010. He has declared that it puts big business in its place and levels the playing field for all. But if he would’ve actually read it before signing it, he would’ve seen that it props up big business even more at the expensive of the people he claims to champion.

The U.S. Treasury Building

Under this law, the Treasury Department can seize control of any company on the brink of bankruptcy that has been deemed “too big to fail.” This enables the government to take over any private business and replace its leaders (who are accountable to the stockholders) with unelected political bureaucrats (who are accountable to nobody). What would stop the administration from taking over firms that have contributed to its political opponents? Will this make companies more reluctant to support the administration’s opponents in future elections? This only opens the door to more of the corruption that helped cause the economic downturn in the first place.

Under this law, no penalties or additional restraints are placed on the two biggest mortgage companies, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, even though they were primarily responsible for the housing bubble that began the economic crisis. This only encourages them to build yet another housing bubble that will one day burst, beginning the disastrous economic cycle all over again.

Under this law, a “rescue fund” is supposed to bail out big banks and other politically-connected businesses. What incentive will these firms have to be financially responsible when they know they will have a taxpayer-funded safety net to cover their bad business decisions? This not only rewards failure, but it paves the way for even more corruption through campaign donations, lobbying, and bribes.

Under this law, the Federal Reserve oversees any institution deemed risky to the financial system, and sets standards on compensation for executives of unsound firms. Considering that the Fed was partly responsible for the economic crisis through onerous manipulation of the currency and interest rates, this is like the wolf guarding the henhouse.

Under this law, a new consumer protection agency reviews all loans extended by all businesses in the U.S. This will be a bureaucratic nightmare because the flood of paperwork will bottleneck the loan process. This bottleneck will stifle consumer spending, which in turn will hurt businesses, kill jobs, and slowly strangle the economy.

One of the primary purposes of this legislation was to place more regulation on derivatives markets. But the bill’s sponsor, Connecticut Senator Chris Dodd, caved to Wall Street lobbyists and removed that portion from the Senate version. So this is a derivates market-regulation bill that doesn’t even regulate the derivatives markets.

While this law is supposedly intended to stop abuses by big firms such as Goldman Sachs, it actually enables them. Is it any wonder why Goldman Sachs was the top contributor to the 2008 campaigns of President Obama, Senator Dodd, and many others who supported this bill?

As usual, the big losers under this new law are the taxpayers and small business owners. Taxpayers are still responsible for funding bailouts of privileged institutions, just like they were with TARP in 2008. Nothing has changed.  Small businesses can’t compete with larger ones when the larger ones have a bailout safety net. The bigger firms can use bailouts as leverage to drive smaller competitors out of business. Less competition means less choice; less choice means less consumer spending; less spending means less production; and less production means fewer jobs. So this bill not only hurts taxpayers and small businesses, but it’s a job-killer as well.

This is just another instance of betraying this country’s founding principles by allying government with business against the people. And after four years, Obama hasn’t learned that these types of laws are exactly what got us into this economic mess in the first place.

Obama and the Constitution: Reckless Spending

This is part of a series of articles examining President Obama’s disregard for the Constitution, which all voters must consider before Election Day.

Throughout his term, President Barack Obama has blamed his predecessor for the crisis he “inherited” while conveniently hiding the fact that he’s only made matters worse with the most reckless and irresponsible spending spree in American history.

After promising to cut the budget deficit in half by the end of his first term, Obama proceeded to spend more than nearly all previous presidents combined. This included a “stimulus” that stimulated nothing, wasteful earmarks after campaigning against them, a fabricated budget crisis that led to the country’s first credit downgrade ever, and a hard push toward national bankruptcy.

What Did Obama Inherit?

It is true that President Obama inherited a bad situation caused by bad decisions from the Bush administration. However, continuously blaming his predecessor is disingenuous. It was the Democrats who took control of Congress in 2007, just before the economic chaos began in earnest, and all spending originates in Congress. This means that all the reckless spending by George Bush from 2007 to 2009 was done with the consent of the Democratic-controlled Congress, including one Senator Barack Obama of Illinois.

On top of it, Obama made matters worse by signing unprecedented trillion-dollar spending bills in 2009 and 2010 to fund the endless line of government bureaucracies and unconstitutional czars. He also helped push the disastrous Affordable Care Act into law, which will cost nearly $1 trillion over 10 years at a time when the country is in deep recession. These actions have proved disastrous for the country’s fiscal health, and Obama didn’t inherit them. He created them.

Furthermore, just because President Obama inherited a bad situation does not entitle him to make it worse and still blame his predecessor. Although he has never admitted it, this is Obama’s economy now. George Bush drove the country near the cliff. Barack Obama hit the gas and is heading straight for the edge. When the car crashes, it won’t be Bush’s fault.

The Failed “Stimulus”

Immediately after taking office, President Obama chose to hurry a “stimulus” bill through Congress as a quick fix to the recession so he could spend the rest of the year focusing on health care reform. This was one of the worst miscalculations by a president in history. Obama promised the “stimulus” would keep unemployment below eight percent. When it became clear that the “stimulus” didn’t work, Obama refused to readdress the issue, instead keeping his attention on health care while pledging to focus “like a laser beam” on jobs. Real unemployment has not fallen below ten percent since Obama became president, which is one of the worst job records by a president in modern times.

Why is Obama’s record on jobs so bad? Because the “stimulus” was not designed to create jobs. It was designed to reward political cronies for supporting Obama’s election. According to a study by the Mercatus Center at George Mason University, the money allocated not only failed to go to those most in need, but it went primarily to affluent Democratic districts. The “stimulus” was little more than a slush fund for Obama and his supporters. This is a typical unintended consequence of government involving itself in the private sector—funds are almost always spent for political, not practical, reasons.

The billions of dollars that were spent not only put the country deeper into debt, but it made unemployment worse. Why? Because governments cannot generate wealth. Only increased production on goods and services that consumers want to buy can generate wealth . Money spent by the government is money that must first be taken from the private sector in the form of borrowing, taxing, or printing. And money taken from the private sector leaves businesses with less money to increase production and create jobs. With these facts, it’s no surprise that more jobs have been lost than created since Obama took office.

Obama has bragged that the “stimulus” included tax cuts for 95 percent of families. However, what he doesn’t say is that this monstrosity will cost each American family roughly $6,300. Smothering this country in debt trumps any miniscule (and temporary) tax cut that the stimulus offered. The cost of this fiasco will be passed onto citizens in the form of inflation and high interest rates brought about by insurmountable and unsustainable national debt. And that will only get worse if Obama wins a second term.

No Earmarks?

The $862 billion “stimulus” was just the beginning. On top of that, the president signed bills to spend $410 billion to keep government running in 2009 (which included nearly a thousand unrelated pork-barrel projects) and hundreds of billions of dollars to fund the wasteful, unconstitutional bureaucracies and czars he created upon taking office.

And for 2010, he signed a $1.1 trillion spending bill, ostensibly to fund the wars but filled with pork for party cronies, even though while campaigning he pledged not to sign pork-laden spending bills as president. Each year of Obama’s presidency has resulted in a deficit of at least $1 trillion. American cannot continue on this unsustainable course.

The Budget “Crisis” of 2011

Last year, Obama threatened that if the federal debt limit was not raised, the country would default on its financial obligations. But the problem was not having a debt limit that was too low, it is having a government that spends too much.

From the time the federal debt limit was established in 1917 to 2011, the U.S. accumulated a nearly insurmountable $14.3 trillion national debt. It has since exceeded $16 trillion. Raising the debt limit is like a credit card company expanding an individual’s credit limit. But in this instance, the government can decide whether or not to expand its own credit. This unchecked ability has led to a bloated, wasteful, spending-addicted federal apparatus that continuously asks the taxpayers to continue feeding its addiction.

The federal budget doubled from 2000 to 2011. Both parties have been responsible for this mess. But Obama’s call for an immediate debt limit increase without considering cuts or checks on future spending was reckless and irresponsible. Allowing politicians to borrow more without holding them accountable for their spending will inevitably lead to economic disaster.

Obama threatened that if the debt limit was not increased, people may not get Social Security checks. Note—he didn’t threaten to close any government agencies, or stop the lavish spending of his administration, his wife, or himself. He threatened seniors who cannot defend themselves that they would suffer. At the time, there was about $2.6 trillion in the Social Security Trust Fund, and checks are automatically programmed to be issued unless either Obama or Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner intentionally stop the process. Obama’s scare tactic was false and demeaning to his office.

Another scare tactic that Obama employed was the threat that interest rates will rise if the debt limit is exceeded. While this would have been the case in some instances, it did not affect homeowners with fixed rate mortgages, credit card holders with set rates or no monthly balances, or people paying college loans because those loans have been fixed at 6.8 percent according to the College Cost Reduction and Access Act of 2007.

Obama also threatened that credit rating agencies would downgrade U.S. credit if the debt limit is not increased. But the debt limit was ultimately increased and U.S. credit was still downgraded. This was because the increase was not accompanied by massive spending cuts to show creditors a commitment to fiscal responsibility.

Through the years, politicians have routinely given themselves the power to tax, borrow, and spend the people’s money in the belief that the people are not smart enough to handle their money themselves. Obama personified this description when he declared that every family knows “a little credit card debt is manageable.” This insulting metaphor argues that the $16 trillion national credit card debt is both “a little” and “manageable” when both are plainly false. The people have learned what politicians have not—Washington’s addiction to spending is out of control, and giving the addicts more spending power will ultimately destroy this country.

Having Obama lecture the people on fiscal responsibility is ludicrous, not only because of his massive spending increases on the taxpayer’s dime, but because Obama is the only president in modern times that has never had a single budget passed by Congress. And the Democratic-controlled Senate has failed to pass a budget since 2009.

What About the Fed?

President Obama has followed the course of past presidents by refusing to acknowledge that the primary source of our economic troubles rests with the organization empowered to control the nation’s money supply: the Federal Reserve System. Since its inception in 1913, the Fed has printed currency and manipulated interest rates, creating a false prosperity, sparking skyrocketing inflation, and causing the boom-and-bust business cycle over the past 97 years. Until we closely examine our financial system, beginning with the all too-powerful Fed, we will not be able to enjoy true economic stability.

The Audit the Fed Bill, passed by the House but stonewalled by the Democrats in the Senate, could be a step in the right direction. Mitt Romney has pledged to support the bill if it ever passes the Senate. Will Obama make that same pledge? He hasn’t thus far.

Four More Years of This?

The founders of this country understood that only the people, when given the freedom to act without government interference, can pull America through hard times, not some opportunistic politician touting “hope” and “change” without any specifics. Obama’s presidency only proves how ill-advised and ill-informed spending can damage this country.

When an effective solution to the economic crisis would have been to reduce taxation, ease regulation, and cut spending, the Obama administration has followed a completely opposite course. The result has been predictable: ballooning deficits, soaring unemployment, and a stagnant private sector. And if Obama is reelected, we can only expect more of the same misery.

A Soldier’s Letter: Samuel E. Nichols

Letter from Lieutenant Nichols (37th Massachusetts Volunteer Infantry) in Maryland on October 17, 1862

Dear Brother Fayette,

Your letter sent with Phebe’s was welcome, very so. Write often. Do not limit the number of your letters to that of mine. I am forced to plead a lack of stationery, and, what is more serious, a goneness of money. So do not mind if I do not respond as frequently as you write, and urge upon the folks the necessity of keeping me posted in all matters about home. All the matters, those even of minor importance; for everything about home multiplies in interest and in the same ratio as the distance from home and the time since separation have increased.

I give you the idea generally here among the soldiers, namely: that the war is hardly begun yet; that our three years will not see the war closed; that it is a war of extermination. But I believe differently. I may be over sanguine. I know I have seen no fighting service, but I think that does not interfere with my judgment; in fact, I believe those who have engaged in these hard-fought battles are unfit to form a correct opinion as to the durability of this rebellion.

It is like this: two armies are about to engage of nearly equal numbers. One side is termed the “South,” the other the “North.” They engage in a terrible conflict. It is doubtful what the result will be. Perhaps the “South,” perhaps the “North,” will be victorious; at any rate, the party that is victorious is almost as badly off as (the party that is) whipped. These men who engage liken the whole contest to this one struggle. They forget that the whole South almost exhausts her resources in getting up this one army and expedition, which is crippled by the almost crippling of one of our armies, while the North has exposed to loss only one of her armies. If the North should checkmate in every battle and each side destroy the other, in that event we should conquer; but you cannot, I cannot, no one can compute at what cost we gain our victory.

Ask father if he would not like to have a darky to work for him when I come home. I presume I might bring one home. Some of them are keen. It is sport to have them round.

The cannonading of yesterday was one continual roar from break of day to sunset. The air was all of a tremble, although the firing was twenty miles distant. I tell you it was exciting, even at this distance, to me. “But what must it be to be there?” I know it is awful, but at the same time it is so exciting as to make men forget themselves in the all glorious struggle.

I wish the thing were through with. You might think I should prefer to see one fight before coming home, but I think I could forego that if the thing could stop here. I have spilled my ink. I’ll stop here. Write often. Be careful with your letters. Nothing like practice in these things.

Your affectionate Brother,

Saml. E. Nichols

Source: The Brothers’ War by Annette Tapert (New York: Vintage Books, 1988)

Obama and the Constitution: Health Care

This article is part of a series examining President Obama’s disregard for the Constitution, which all voters must consider before Election Day.

The Affordable Care Act (i.e, Obamacare) promises not only to violate individual freedoms guaranteed in the Constitution, but it could also destroy the economy by bankrupting this nation. Nobody who cherishes their liberty should rest until this law is repealed. Why is this so important? Here are some points to consider:

Unsustainable Expenditures

This country cannot afford such a massive expenditure. Regardless of what the media tries to tell us, America is still languishing in an economic recession, and the deficit has skyrocketed since Barack Obama took office. Despite claims that a health care program will be “deficit neutral,” the truth is that somebody always pays the price for government intervention.

The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office has estimated that health care reform would cost nearly $900 billion over 10 years. Meanwhile, trust funds for other federal programs (Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid) are shrinking much sooner than previous government estimates. How can such a fiscally irresponsible government be trusted to run a program that will control nearly one-sixth of the country’s entire economy? Why should we entrust our health care, one of our most personal and private rights, to government bureaucrats?

The Chinese government, which has bought much of America’s debt, has expressed concerns that such a massive federal program could be unsustainable. The fact that a communist regime doubts the fiscal policies of a supposedly capitalist country should be enough to show that such expenditures are not wise.

Unsustainable Costs

Proponents argue that the new law will control health care costs. But history shows that when government attempts to control costs, it usually just inflates them instead. This distorts the free market, and free market distortions always bring unintended consequences.

It is no coincidence that health care prices have soared over the past 40 years, after the federal government imposed price controls through the Medicare and Medicaid programs. The failure to control costs through these programs shows that what is needed is not more government intervention in the health care industry, but less.

Excessive Taxation

The massive new program features a long list of new taxes to pay for it. The wealthy would be taxed more. Private insurance plans would be taxed more. Employers would be taxed more. And everyone not enrolled in a mandated health plan will be taxed. Imposing new taxes during a recession, when everyone is struggling, will only make the current economic situation worse.

Employers will be forced to offer health insurance to their employers or face a tax penalty. Paying more taxes means collecting less revenue that could be used to create jobs. This can negatively impact relationships between employers and their employees, which could severely harm the economy.

There is a limit to how much the government can tax, borrow, and print. There is also a limit to how big a tax burden can be placed on the people before there is resentment and resistance. Excessive taxation will bury this country in insurmountable debt and turn this and future generations into permanent tax slaves.

Reform Current Programs First

Current federal health care programs include Medicare for the elderly, Medicaid for the poor, and SCHIP (Supplemental Children’s Health Insurance Program) for children. All these programs are swimming in debt, waste, and abuse. The end result is that despite these well-intentioned government programs, it’s more difficult than ever for the elderly or the poor to receive adequate health care. Why should a new program be implemented that will be susceptible to the same inefficiency and corruption without first fixing what already exists?

Inevitable Health Care Rationing

Proponents of a federal health care program proudly declare that 40 million more Americans will be insured. But there is no plan to increase the number of doctors, nurses, hospitals, or clinics to accommodate all these new patients. Therefore, demand will exceed supply, and the inevitable end result will be health care rationing, just like what currently happens in other countries with socialized medicine such as England and Canada.

When health care is rationed, government bureaucrats will decide who is most deserving of care. The first group to be excluded will be seniors because time and resources will not be spent on those who will die soon anyway. Rationing reduces personal choices, makes health care less accessible, and inevitably lowers quality. All of these add up to less individual freedom.

Infringements on Freedom

Various portions of a federal health care plan can give government access to bank accounts and financial records, which violates civil liberties. Once these records are obtained, the government can then determine whether or not people can afford the services they need and whether or not they are worthy to receive health care.

In addition, if a person chooses not to purchase health insurance, he/she is subject to taxation in the form of a fine. Regardless of what the Supreme Court has said, this is an unconstitutional infringement on individual freedom. Many studies have shown that the vast majority of people without health insurance:

Are illegal aliens;
Qualify for an already existing government program but have not signed up; or
Simply choose not to participate

People must be granted the freedom to manage their own health care, and that includes the choice of whether or not to buy health insurance.

The federal government cannot force citizens to buy a product or service, even if the Supreme Court has ordained such. Congress is empowered to regulate interstate commerce, not to force citizens to conduct interstate commerce. This law could give the government dangerously excessive (and unconstitutional) authority over our personal lives, potentially turning American society into an Orwellian nightmare.

Rewarding Inefficiency and Penalizing Innovation

The impending federal health insurance plan will adversely affect private insurance plans because the private plans cannot compete with a government plan. Since a federal health care plan will be cheaper than private plans, employers will inevitably switch to the federal plan for their workers. And since the federal plan will be paid for by taxpayers, it won’t have to operate on a budget, be efficient, or worry about ever going bankrupt. In fact, inept bureaucracies such as Medicare and the Post Office have proven that the worse a government agency operates, the more tax dollars will be pumped into it to keep it propped up.

People come to America from all over the world for health care because the free market sparks the innovation needed to provide the most advanced care. With government intervention, the free market cannot operate properly. Government intervention can kill the motivation to innovate, which has put America on the cutting edge of modern technology for the past century.

Questions the Government Cannot (or Will Not) Answer

Any politician pushing to implement Obamacare must be forced to answer the following questions:

The country is trillions in debt, and the new program is projected to cost $900 billion over 10 years… how can we afford this?
Why should employers continue providing health insurance to their employees when it will be cheaper for them to just pay the tax (i.e., fine) for not providing it?
People come to America because we provide the world’s best health care through continuous innovation. That innovation is sparked by capitalism. Why spend time, resources, and money to develop medications to fight illness when the government will dictate what kind of care the people should get?
If millions more people are insured without any plan to hire more medical personnel, how can there not be rationing?
If more people are insured, where will all the new doctors and nurses come from to meet this increased demand?
How can health care spending be cut by ridiculously adding $900 billion to health care spending?
How can we be expected to fund a program that will conceivably comprise one-sixth of the national economy when we are mired in a recession?
If a government cannot run Social Security or Medicare, cannot help citizens recover from a hurricane, cannot manage a stimulus program, the Post Office, or a simple cash-for-clunkers tax dollar redistribution scheme, how can it possibly manage something as comprehensive and enormous as health care for all?
Why should federal intervention in health care even be debated? No government bureaucrat should be able to tell an American how to handle his/her health. Personal health is a private issue between a doctor and patient.
And perhaps most importantly: where in the Constitution does it empower federal politicians to manage individual health care? Under the Tenth Amendment, all powers not expressly delegated to the federal government (including health care) belong to the states or the people. Shouldn’t health care be a state, not a federal, issue?

Conclusion

There is no doubt that the health care industry must be reformed in America so that everyone has full and equal access to quality health care. But reforms must be done with common sense and respect for constitutional rights. Sure, free health care for all sounds wonderful, but the Affordable Care Act should scare anybody who opposes excessive government intrusion into their private lives. This legislation, if ever placed in the wrong hands, could severely curtail individual freedom.

The free market, not politicians or lobbyists, should decide how to operate the health care industry. The sovereignty provided to the states and the people under the Constitution must not be sacrificed in the name of “free, universal” health care. When the federal government has access to the health and financial records of private citizens, it will become the master, rather than the servant, of the people.

This Week in the Civil War: Oct 15-21, 1862

Wednesday, October 15.  Skirmishing occurred on various fronts. Admiral David Farragut reported that the Federals had secured Corpus Christi, Galveston, and Sabine City in Texas. North Carolina Governor Zebulon Vance requested North Carolinians to provide blankets and clothing, for the Confederate Army.

Thursday, October 16.   Federal General George McClellan conducted two major reconnaissances from Maryland and northern Virginia. Confederate General Robert E. Lee’s Army of Northern Virginia was positioned in the northern Shenandoah Valley. General Ulysses S. Grant was given command of the new Federal Department of the Tennessee. The Federal militia draft began in Pennsylvania.

Friday, October 17.  In Pennsylvania, Luzerne County troops suppressed protests against the ineffective Federal militia draft. President Abraham Lincoln asked Attorney General Edward Bates to commission David Davis of Illinois as an associate justice on the Supreme Court.

Saturday, October 18.  In Kentucky, John Hunt Morgan’s Confederate raiders defeated Federal cavalry near Lexington, captured the city’s garrison, then moved on to Versailles. Other skirmishing occurred on various fronts.

Sunday, October 19.  Confederate General Braxton Bragg’s Army of Tennessee began moving through Cumberland Gap during their withdrawal from Kentucky. Various other skirmishing occurred.

Monday, October 20.  President Lincoln ordered a fellow Illinois politician, General John McClernand, to organize and lead a force on an expedition to Vicksburg, Mississippi. Since Vicksburg was in the jurisdiction of Ulysses S. Grant’s new military department, this order conflicted with Grant’s command. Lincoln also issued a memorandum reporting that the Army of the Potomac contained 231,997 men, of which 144,662 were fit for duty.

Tuesday, October 21.  Confederate President Jefferson Davis wrote to General T.H. Holmes in Missouri and shared tentative plans for combining various Confederate forces to drive the Federals out of Arkansas and Tennessee, and reclaim Helena, Memphis, and Nashville. President Lincoln requested civil and military authorities in Tennessee to organize pro-Federal elections for local, state, and national officials.

Primary source:  The Civil War Day-by-Day by E.B. Long and Barbara Long (New York, NY: Da Capo Press, Inc., 1971)