Tuesday, March 31, 2009



"In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself." --James Madison, Federalist No. 51


"The ideal tyranny is that which is ignorantly self-administered by its victims. The most perfect slaves are, therefore, those which blissfully and unawaredly enslave themselves. A truth's initial commotion is directly proportional to how deeply the lie was believed. It wasn't the world being round that agitated people, but that the world wasn't flat. When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic." --author Dresden James


"The Modern Liberal believes in the supremacy of the state, thereby rejecting the principles of the Declaration and the order of the civil society, in whole or part. For the Modern Liberal, the individual's imperfection and personal pursuits impede the objective of a utopian state. In this, Modern Liberalism promotes what French historian Alexis de Tocqueville described as a soft tyranny, which becomes increasingly more oppressive, potentially leading to a hard tyranny (some form of totalitarianism). As the word 'liberal' is, in its classical meaning, the opposite of authoritarian, it is more accurate, therefore, to characterize the Modern Liberal as a Statist. ... The Statist ... knows that despite his successful usurpations, enough citizens are still skeptical and even distrustful of politicians and government that he cannot force his will all at once. Thus he marches in incremental steps, adjusting his pace as circumstances dictate. Today his pace is more rapid, for resistance has slowed. ... The Conservative does not despise government. He despises tyranny. This is precisely why the Conservative reveres the Constitution and insists on adherence to it. An 'effective' government that operates outside its constitutional limitations is a dangerous government. ... The Conservative is alarmed by the ascent of a soft tyranny.... He knows that liberty once lost is rarely recovered. He knows of the decline and eventual failure of past republics. And he knows that the best prescription for addressing society's real and perceived ailments is not to further empower an already enormous federal government beyond its constitutional limits, but to return to the founding principles. A free people living in a civil society, working in self-interested cooperation, and a government operating within the limits of its authority promote more prosperity, opportunity, and happiness for more people than any alternative. Conservatism is the antidote to tyranny precisely because its principles are the founding principles."
--author and radio talk-show host Mark Levin in his book "Liberty and Tyranny"


"President Barack Obama has gotten a lot of mileage out of his appeals to people of faith. He portrays himself as one of them, a convert who found Jesus and a new purpose for living through community organizing in Chicago. His attempts to portray the audacity of hope, however, have been stymied by the manner in which he has responded to the nation's economic crisis. He may call it 'investment,' but his stimulus package represents old-fashioned government spending. Our children will be left with the legacy of his spendthrift ways. However, to hear Obama tell it, you would think that he was saving our nation's poor by running up deficits. Don't worry about the final bill, he's telling us -- let's live for today. He may even try to wrap his spending package in the guise of Christian charity."
--columnist Nathan Tabor


"When a business or an individual spends more than it makes, it goes bankrupt. When government does it, it sends you the bill. And when government does it for 40 years, the bill comes in two ways: higher taxes and inflation. Make no mistake about it, inflation is a tax and not by accident." --Ronald Reagan


"Maybe it's just me, but I find federal legislation titled 'The GIVE Act' and 'The SERVE Act' downright creepy. Even more troubling: the $6 billion price tag on these bipartisan bills to expand government-funded national service efforts. Volunteerism is a wonderful thing, which is why millions of Americans do it every day without a cent of taxpayer money. But the volunteerism packages on the Hill are less about promoting effective charity than about creating make-work, permanent bureaucracies and Left-wing slush funds. ... Taxpayers GIVE their money to SERVE a big government agenda under the guise of helping their fellow man. It's charity at the point of a gun."
--columnist Michelle Malkin


"President Obama inherited from George Bush a $500 billion -- and growing -- annual budget deficit and a ballooning $11 trillion national debt. Obama nevertheless promised us an entirely new national health plan, bigger entitlements in education and a vast new cap-and-trade energy program. But there is a problem in paying for the $3.5 trillion in budgetary expenditures that Obama has called for in the coming fiscal year. Proposed vast additional taxes on the 'rich' still won't be enough to avoid tripling the present budget deficit -- and putting us on schedule over the next decade to add another $9 trillion to the existing national debt. During the Clinton years, we got higher taxes but eventually balanced budgets. During the Bush administration, we got lower taxes but spiraling deficits. But now during the era of Obama, we apparently will get the worst of both worlds -- higher taxes than under Clinton and higher deficits than under Bush. In other words, we -- through our government -- are spending money that we don't have."
--Hoover Institution historian Victor Davis Hanson


"Maybe we have it all backwards. Here's the basic story President Obama wants to tell. The last eight years were an economic disaster because President Bush and the Republicans ignored necessary government regulations and 'investments.' The economic crisis has discredited 'market fundamentalism,' as some liberals call it. Now, thanks to Bush's hands-off approach to the economy, Obama has no choice but to get government much more involved. ... Indeed, Obama doesn't feel compelled to merely remedy the mistakes of his predecessor; he believes it is vital that we renew the New Deal-style economic policies we strayed from when Ronald Reagan was elected. ... What if they're looking at the economy through the wrong end of the telescope? For starters, Bush was hardly a laissez-faire president who ignored Obama's oft-stated domestic priorities. Sure, Bush was more laissez-faire than Obama. But that's not a very high bar. Education spending under Bush rose 58 percent faster than inflation. Medicare spending, thanks largely to Bush's prescription drug benefit (the largest expansion in entitlements since the Great Society), went up 51 percent during the Bush years. Spending on health research and regulation rose 55 percent. Spending on highways and mass transit went up by 22 percent. Maybe that's too little in Obama's eyes, but it hardly validates Obama's fictions about the last eight years."
--National Review Editor Jonah Goldberg


"[At Obama's last press conference, there] was a question by CBS' Chip Reid about the $2.3 trillion difference in the size of the debt between the Administration's estimates and the Congressional Budget Office. 'Some Republicans,' he said, 'called your budget ... the most irresponsible budget in American history.' Obama may be sitting in the Oval Office and he might have promised to open the post-partisan era, but his answer was: 'First of all, I suspect that some of those Republican critics have a short memory, because as I recall, I'm inheriting a $1.3 trillion deficit, annual deficit, from them.' Return with me now to January 3, 2007 when John Boehner, Republican of Ohio was elected Speaker of the House following the 2006 mid-term elections. Whoa! What? Nancy Pelosi became Speaker? And the Democrats controlled the House? And the Senate? And they have controlled the budget committees for the past two years? So the '$1.3 trillion deficit, annual deficit' was adopted by the Democrat-controlled Congress? Well, then, which Congressional Republicans could President Obama have been talking about? Must have been those Republican Chairmen of the House and Senate Budget Committees, U.S. Rep. John Spratt (D-SC) and Sen. Kent Conrad (D-ND)."
--political analyst Rich Galen


"When I wrote last week's column, before the AIG fury erupted, I argued that we in Washington should dial back our rhetoric because public passions were already dangerously high -- and we have so many hard decisions in probably hard times ahead of us that we need to face as a united people. Little did I expect that within hours of my writing those words, congressmen would be calling for the names and addresses of AIG employees to be made public -- even though the congressmen had been told that the lives of the employees' children had been threatened as a result of the uproar. Congressmen who would risk the lives of innocent children to save their own political skins are not likely to provide noble leadership in the months and years to come. Sound policy is unlikely to be formed when the screaming voices of a multitude are ricocheting off the legislative chamber's walls. Yet rather than speak to calm the anger and the passion, many of Washington's finest figures fed it. Rather than stand athwart the onslaught, they chose to lead it."
--columnist Tony Blankley


"While the president was away in L.A., the first lady played mentor, with the help of some stars. She organized a round-robin of visits to Washington D.C. schools and a White House event for young girls, to demonstrate to them they could grow up to be anything they chose in America. (You know, that country she had no pride in before her husband's nomination?) ...Michelle, judging by the stars she presented as role models, wants the young women to aspire to be singers and actresses, athletes, 4-star generals and astronauts. There was only one woman CEO or entrepreneur mentioned by media -- Debra Lee, the CEO of the Black Entertainment Network; no women small business owners, no top women sales professionals -- not even difference-makers like school teachers or nurses and caregivers or stay-at-home moms raising successful families. Or even political leaders, like, say the successful governor of a fiscally stable state. Like, say, Governor Sarah Palin. She was one of only two women ever to run for vice-president on either of the two major parties' tickets, and a mom. ... No, Michelle presented Alicia Keyes and Sheryl Crow, actresses Fran Drescher and Phylicia Rashad; a couple of athletes; the first black woman to travel in space; and a celebrity make-up artist. What is so significant here is that nearly all the examples-to-aspire-to presented are primarily supported by the economy; not supporters of the economy. Not creators of innovative products, of companies, of jobs. Not women who started some sort of enterprises from scratch and built them into successful businesses. Heaven forbid we should encourage these girls to grow up to be business owners. Better for them to hope for a spin of the wheel of celebrity via American Idol. Particularly appropriate given our celebrity-president."
--author Dan Kennedy


"I sincerely regret that during my college education (many years ago) that I did not have any professor as insightful, intelligent, informed, and easy to understand as Professor Walter E. Williams. His essay, 'States Rebellion Pending,' that you ran in Friday's Digest was wonderful. This gentleman is a national treasure." --Dallas, Texas

"The majority of our problems in the U.S. were bred with the 17th Amendment to the Constitution that made senators popularly elected. At that point, states were no longer represented and both houses of Congress became subject to buying votes with freebees for the voters. The 'teeth' that Walter Williams mentioned are needed with the 10th Amendment laws being passed by states is just to return the Constitution to its original form to have the senators elected by state legislatures. That one thing will restore much in the way of states' rights." --San Diego, California


"This year federal government spending will rise to 28.5 percent of GDP, the highest level ever, with the exception of the peak of the Second World War. The 44th president is proposing to add more to the national debt than the first 43 presidents combined, doubling it in the next six years, and tripling it within the decade. But to talk about it in percentages of this and trillions of that misses the point. It's not about bookkeeping, it's about government annexation of the economy, and thus of life: government supervision, government regulation, government control. No matter how small your small business is -- plumbing, hairdressing, maple-sugaring -- the state will be burdening you with more permits, more paperwork, more bureaucracy. And don't plan on moving. Ahead of this week's G20 summit in London, Timothy Geithner, America's beloved Toxic Asset, called for 'global regulation.' 'Our hope,' said Toxic Tim, 'is that we can work with Europe on a global framework, a global infrastructure which has appropriate global oversight.' 'Global oversight': Hmm. There's a phrase to savor. 'We can't,' he continued, 'allow institutions to cherry pick among competing regulators and ship risk to where it faces the lowest standards and weakest constraints.' Just as a matter of interest, why not? If you don't want to be subject to the punitive 'oversight' of economically illiterate, demagogic legislators-for-life like Barney Frank, why shouldn't you be 'allowed' to move your business to some jurisdiction with a lighter regulatory touch?"
--columnist Mark Steyn


Monday Brief
Vol. 09 No. 13
30 March 2009
Veritas vos Liberabit -- Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus, et Fidelis! Mark Alexander, Publisher, for The Patriot's editors and staff.


Barack Hussein Obama aka Barry Soetoro

is a usurper

because he is not eligible to be President of the United States
because he is not a Natural Born Citizen
as required by Article Two, Section One, Clause Five
of the United States Constitution regardless of
where he was born (Mombassa, Hawaii, Chicago, or Mars)
because he was not born of TWO PARENTS
at the time of his birth. His father was a subject/ciitizen
of Kenya/Great Britain
and his mother was too young to pass on her citizenship
according to the law in effect when he was born.
Check it out:


His usurpation cannot be corrected by Congress,
it can only be corrected by his removal
by an amendment to the Constitution.

No comments:

Post a Comment