Senate bill has requirement for MONTHLY ABORTION Premium for all enrollees of gov't plan!

A call to arms, people! Call both your senators TODAY to stop this destructive health care bill!

Here we go: AP is putting 11 people to "fact check" Palin's book. They haven't done that for others.

Sarah Palin, Back In The News

You can actually feel the cringing coming from the liberals: Sarah's back in the news. And, predictably--because liberals are simply incapable of doing anything else--they are quick to jump all over Sarah and her book. You will pretty consistently hear them whine that her book is a whine-fest. The truth is that liberals make an art form of whining...just look at Al Gore and his completely fictitious ranting about global warming (which has since changed to "climate change", now that REAL science is showing that we've been on a 10-year cooling trend, contrary to his cohorts' computer models). He's parlayed this pack of lies into a multi-billion dollar franchise culminating in Cap & Tax. Talk about the consummate con!

I was watching Bernie Goldberg being interviewed about what he calls the "lame-stream media" (and apt moniker, in my opinion) and how they are again going after Sarah Palin. He said something I thought was profound. The reason, he suggests, that liberals so absolutely hate Sarah Palin, why you never hear the feminist groups like NOW come to her defense, is because Sarah is the most talked-about woman in the world, draws tens of thousands wherever she appears....and she's not one of THEM. I think he nailed it.

It's not just the liberals who go after her, either. It's a good many so-called conservatives. She is the face of the schizm that has opened in the Republican Party. What you have is the Old School Republicans, mostly from the northeast and the beltway, who have sat on their fat butts, pontificating about various fiscal issues, all the while hypocritically raping this nation and their own party, figuratively speaking. They lack almost all integrity, but they've owned the party for decades. But after 8 years of George Bush, who essentially sold true conservatives out, but just wasn't liberal enough for the leftist fanatics, the Republican Party quickly lost favor and support from those who had long-been members. I count myself as an example. Toward the end of Bush's first term I ceased membership. There were no real conservatives left in charge.

Then here came John McCain. Democrat-lite. There is no conservative who felt the drive to get behind him. That is, not until Sarah Palin came on the scene. She is the only reason that McCain didn't get trounced as badly as he could have. And now who still gets a lot of air play? Does anyone really care what John McCain has to say? I certainly don't.

So, what we have now are liberals of any flavor clinging to the Democratic Party. They are political strumpets, as far as I'm concerned, and are about as shallow as one can get. We also have people who still hold significant ownership of the Republican Party who are almost as shallow, and are mostly fiscal conservatives but either socially liberal or they simply don't care about social issues. Both of these groups predictably agree on one argument: If the Republican Party wants to make a go of it, it must be more "inclusive" and more "moderate".

And they are WRONG. I need only point to the New York 23rd District race to make my case. The Old School cancer that infects the Republican Party backed the wrong candidate, Scozzafava, who was objectionable as Olympia Snowe or Arlen Specter. Let me give you a question to ask yourself: What is the purpose of having two political parties if we say they should both be "moderate"? Do you know what Jesus said about being lukewarm? I'm convinced that what we are seeing is the lukewarm being spit out...the truly hot and cold are becoming more defined. The best thing that has happened to conservatives is Barrack Obama. He is so blatantly liberal, so clearly socialist (bordering on fascist) that he creates a stark difference from a true conservative. People who actually like what he's doing to this country will NOT settle for lightweight liberalism that so-called "moderate" Republicans might sell themselves off as. And, increasingly, conservatives are not going to settle for the "lesser of two evils" by choosing a RINO. I, for one, would rather keep losing on principle, sticking to my philosophy as a conservative and as a Christian.

We're seeing rumblings that the independents who swallowed the tainted bait of the Obama campaign are experiencing buyers remorse. The TEA parties, which are still going on, and the town hall meetings are proof enough of the backlash. People are asking, "Why are Obama and the Democrats pushing so hard to get junk legislation through on all these social and fiscal issues SO quickly, not giving anyone enough time to read it, much less seriously debate it?" Because that's been the plan all along. Get strong majorities and ram all this in, knowing that once a program has begun in government it's almost impossible to remove. Impossible because once people are dependent on it you don't dare take them off "life support". This is a fact, people. Obama and the Democrats are very aware that we are waking up to the reality of the socialist country and they know their time is running out. They stand a serious chance of losing a number of seats in both the House and Senate, even if not enough to lose majorities, in the 2010 election. And by the time 2012 comes around and people start to feel the deadly effects of all this social and fiscal destruction they'll be ready to repeat 1994 all over again. So, yes, they have to act quickly and with an eye only on short-term impunity.

So, Sarah Palin has a chance to start to build her street creds now that she's riding the book tour. She's got an important interview coming up with Bill O'Reilly, who typically doesn't pull punches. He'll press her on important issues to see if she's learned from her experience with the likes of Couric. She has to nail this one if she's going to keep any aspirations of political office alive. She doesn't have the excuse of the poor handlers she was saddled with during the McCain campaign. It's all on her now.

I'm praying for her. I'm still convinced she's got the core, the gut instinct to be a better President than the Marxist In Chief. But she's got to get serious about her homework. If not, then Sarah Palin will be an interesting footnote in 21st century politics.

The Fallacy Of Socialism

I've seen a scary number of people--usually youth--who, when confronted by those of us who understand we're headed full-speed into socialism, seem to find no problem with it. When you try to explain to them that government--any government--is simply incapable of running social programs well, they can't comprehend it. You can't use logic with them because all they can see is the false perception that deep pockets spread wide should be able to solve most problems. Added to this is the fact that our public school system is hugely negligent in the field of teaching history, relying on revisionist propaganda or all-out omissions to keep people ignorant of the foundation of our country and our government. If you ask them about Marx or Stalin or the USSR, you'll get a blank stare, a shrug of the shoulders and maybe a mumble.

I was thinking about why so many seem to be okay with socialism. All you have to do is pose this question to someone to see where their head is at: "Do you think it's good to expect provision from those who have ability, given to those who have a need?" Of course, those who are truly educated will recognize this as the following idea put forth by Karl Marx "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need". This forms the basis for a truly communist society. Socialism is a "half-way house" to getting to communism.

But there are serious problems with communism and serious problems with socialism. In fact, they are too numerous to list, much less go into great detail (but I'd be happy to take on anyone who'd like to argue a point). First, compared to our system of government (or at least how it was first created) and our economic system, no socialist or so-called communist country has every succeeded in accomplishing its lofty claims, much less come close to the success, wealth and standard of living of America. This is precisely why European countries are so determined to convince us to adopt their ways, and why so many liberals in America--including some of our Supreme Court Justices--want us to be more like them. They hate the fact that we ARE so much better.

Second, absolutely, without exception, no socialist country has made the transition to true communism--those in power LIKE the power and will never give that kind of power up. Make no mistake, folks, everything you see Obama, Pelosi and Reid doing is to use crisis (or manufactured crisis) to shift more control and power to the government. Already there are rumblings just under the surface of a movement to either remove term limits for President or at least grant more terms. How convenient for a President and Congress that very obviously has been doing things to grab more power over private industry and individuals. Under the most benevolent circumstances, can you name a single program or entity that government has created (at any level) that eventually got terminated?

Third, as you see it unfold before you, the liberal, secular humanist masses are creating a self-defeating system--but it's impossible for them to comprehend that it could fail. Obama has said it himself, that we should "spread the wealth around". And who, exactly, would be the agent for driving this societal impulse for magnanimity? Why, the government, of course. Naturally, Obama, Pelosi and Reid have frequently used flowery, inspirational words, catch-phrases, all meant to convince us that the way we can participate in this Great Compassion is to dutifully do "the hard stuff" of giving up more freedom, more of our hard-earned income, doing with less, so that those "less fortunate" can have a "level playing field". What a bunch of hooey.

Show me anywhere in our Constitution or the documents of our founders where government is supposed to guarantee a level playing field. One of the more frequent references the liberals like to use is the phrase "promote the general welfare". Ah, but their INCORRECT interpretation is "provide the general welfare". The two are wildly different. If you care to look up what one of our founders said on this topic, James Madison said, "it is still more fully known, and more material to observe, that those who ratified the Constitution conceived — that this is not an indefinite government, deriving its powers from the general terms prefixed to the specified powers — but a limited government, tied down to the specified powers, which explain and define the general terms." In other words, "promote the general welfare" was general term that enumerated a very limited role of government. Promotion. Not provision, not the use of public funds for the purpose of provision. It is a gross injustice to say government's role is to provide universal medical coverage or any number of other socialist agenda items.

If you look at the social programs, the "entitlements", that liberals have hoist upon us you'll find that they are consistently based on paying for them on the backs of the "wealthy". You will consistently find this administration using terms that cannot be construed in any other light than class warfare. In the latest version of socialized health care legislation it looks like the effective tax rate for "wealthy" will get close to 50%. In other words, let's punish success. Tell me something: Exactly where is the incentive to succeed if what you earn will simply be taken away and given to someone else?

This leads me to my next point. The Utopian world where everyone lives in a "level playing field" (aka, communism, though you'll never get liberals to admit that's ultimately the world they want) can ever be reached, especially under the kind of administration and Congress we have now, because of two important things. First, for there to BE resources available to "those in need" you must have people who realize the potential of "their ability". In other words, you have to have "the haves" in order to support the "have-nots". Human nature is what it is, and you can never ever get away from it. It is human nature to strive to achieve in order to be rewarded for our efforts. It is also human nature to be lazy. This is a constant battle in all societies. Do you actually think that people will continue to work their greatest potential if the payoff will ultimately be taken away and given to those who either refuse to live up to their potential or somehow can't?

No, they won't. And my second important reason partly explains why. We are sinful. It is our nature to be selfish (and we are seeing our society actually become more selfish even as we present the facade of being compassionate). The only thing that ultimately could drive us to work to our potential, regardless of the payoff, is a relationship with Christ. Colossians 3:23-24 "Whatever work you do, put yourself into it, as those who are serving not merely other people, but the Lord. Remember that as your reward, you will receive the inheritance from the Lord. you are slaving for the Lord, for Christ". Now, this should drive all who claim to be Christian, regardless. But you see the problem is that secular humanists are systematically driving every reference, every reminder, every nuance of Christianity out of the public sector. Ultimately, they want you to keep your "religion" in the darkest recesses of your home, and nowhere else. So, ultimately, it will be impossible to sustain a system of spreading the wealth because one of the very influences that might get citizenry to work to their potential, thus supporting the "less fortunate" will no longer be there as an influence.

And, so, their answer is again government. I can promise you that the end result will be a gradual but definite lowering of the overall standard of living. This is proven by looking all over the world. No nation has the standard of living we have. Our poorest people are better off than the poorest in other nations. I'm not saying they are comfortable, but I am saying they are better off.

We cannot achieve the world the liberals have conjured up for you. The playing field cannot be leveled without bringing that entire level WAY down. You cannot expect people to be successful if success is not fully rewarded. And those who would live a Christ-like life cannot, of their own volition, bless those in need if they themselves are not able to achieve. When the Apostles decided to sell their possessions and give to the poor, there was no government program, there was no 'entitlement'. They each, individually, CHOSE to do so on their own, out of love...not obligation, not mandate.

Now Is Not The Time....

My friends, now is not the time to let up. Yes, there were a few nice turnarounds in the elections that just happened. Yes, it provides a little encouragement that maybe so-called independents are experiencing buyers' remorse about last year's election and realize their mistake.

But here's what else it has done: It has scared the pants off of Pelosi, Reid and the rest of the socialists. You cannot use sensible arguments with people like them, nor with their supporters. They are driven exclusively by ideology and emotion. When backed into a corner, faced with the obvious, they will do exactly the opposite that a wise person would do. They are preparing to use any legislative, parliamentary trick they can to take their 2000 page socio-fascist behemoth of a health care bill and get it up to the President for signature. Being faced with the prospect that they may actually be out of power in 2010, they will wreck their careers just to get as much of their agenda passed as possible---socialized medicine, cap and tax, etc--mark my words.

Wise people have applied quite a bit of pressure, publicly, to slow down this train wreck. DO NOT LET UP! To that end, it is important that everyone call their Representatives and Senators on Thursday and Friday of this week and tell them NOT to support this legislation. There is another huge tea party scheduled in D.C. this week for this purpose. Go there if you can. If you can't, don't let this week pass without your Congressmen hearing from you!

All up thrifty folks who have health spending accounts are going to get taxed under Dem plan!