Ford Discovers We no Longer Live in Henry Ford's America - GM Sends Their Government Heavys...

polifrog

That oh-so-appropriate Ford advert? Just memories...

The Detroit News:

As part of a campaign featuring "real people" explaining their decision to buy the Blue Oval, a guy named "Chris" says he "wasn't going to buy another car that was bailed out by our government," according the text of the ad, launched in early September.

"I was going to buy from a manufacturer that's standing on their own: win, lose, or draw. That's what America is about is taking the chance to succeed and understanding when you fail that you gotta' pick yourself up and go back to work."

That's what some of America is about, evidently. Because Ford pulled the ad after individuals inside the White House questioned whether the copy was publicly denigrating the controversial bailout policy CEO Alan Mulally repeatedly supported in the dark days of late 2008, in early '09 and again when the ad flap arose.

For Ford's success they receive, in part, the burden of GM's failure as well as the constraints of speech limited.

The liability incurred by the successful when forced to socialize the cost of the failure of others is more than just financial; it is a loss of liberty, for as our nation trades the benefits of success for the benefits of failure, it trades liberty for something less.

Make no mistake. This is one more step in Obama's diminished America.

.... And we have idiots who believe corporations run the nation

H/T HotAir

Update:
Advert here:






out

More of That Wikileak Truth Serum - This Time Exposing Climate Talk Nitwittery.......

polifrog



Why is any of this considered a leak?

But more importantly, why is our government involved with any of this climategate proven nitwittery at all? There is no way an agreement from these talks will result in anything but a limiting of liberty for US citizens. The vary fact that our leaders are involved in these negotiations is evidence that they do not represent the interests of the citizenry.

With that in mind ... withdraw, let the rest of the world agree to cut their own throats while we prosper on the fruits of our liberty.

But no.

Guardian:

Hidden behind the save-the-world rhetoric of the global climate change negotiations lies the mucky realpolitik: money and threats buy political support; spying and cyberwarfare are used to seek out leverage.

Once again the embarrassment is not the leak, but rather our government's willingness to involve itself (with a reliance on the unethical) in an unethical sham, this time the Global Warming nonsense -- a concern of statists and enemies of liberty.

Once again Wikileaks shows us that if our leaders respected liberty these "leaks" would be inconsequential.




out

Rep Brad Miller (NC-13) -- On Abortion and Parental Rights...

polifrog



Only a man bereft of soul could muster the votes cast below....

It would come as no surprise that Brad Miller, a Democrat, supports abortion. Brad Miller is, after all, an unimaginative Democrat Party lemming with a voting record that goose-steps with Nancy Pelosi at near 100% consistency.

But just how pro-abortion is Brad Miller? Just what are his moral limits?

A look at Brad Miller's congressional voting record is warranted.

First up...A bill to prohibit Partial-Birth/Late Term Abortion. Brad Miller voted NO.

(This is) a bill that would prohibit any individual from knowingly performing the procedure known as intact dilation and extraction, in which a fetus/unborn child is partially delivered before it is aborted. The only exception is if the life of the woman is endangered by a physical disorder, illness, or injury.

Only an extremist could support the ending of ones life before taking his or her first breath while while at the same time being bathed in the air we all breath. This is a vote in favor of infanticide and an example of Brad Miller's deep immorality.


Second....Abortion Pain Bill (Information for the mother not to be) Brad Miller voted NO.

Requires the physician to provide the woman with the following information or material: the approximate age of the fetus/unborn child; the "Unborn Child Pain Awareness Brochure"; the possibility that drugs administered to the mother may not prevent pain for the fetus/unborn child; and risks and costs associated with the use of pain-reducing drugs (Sec. 3).

-Requires the "Unborn Child Pain Awareness Brochure" to state that evidence exists suggesting fetuses/unborn children 20 weeks or more into development are capable of experiencing pain, and that the woman may request pain-reducing drugs for the fetus/unborn child, and that there may be additional risks associated with the use of some pain-reducing drugs (Sec. 3).

-Allows the woman to waive receipt of the brochure by signing an "Unborn Child Pain Awareness Decision Form" (Sec. 3).

It seems to me that if we are to allow the taking of a child's life that we should go out of our way to make sure that there is as little pain involved for the aborted as possible. Death Row inmates are grated this right under "cruel and unusual" when their time comes. Brad Miller, though, does not think that a child rises to the level of a criminal and thus feels perfectly comfortable with a vote that increases the pain of the aborted. Beyond immoral...Sadistic.


Third....The Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act. Brad Miller voted NO.

-Makes it illegal, excluding the minor's parents, to knowingly transport a pregnant minor across state lines in order to obtain an abortion, as a way to escape state laws requiring parental consent (Sec. 2).

Apparently Brad Miller does not believe in parental rights, as those rights may hinder additional abortions. What other reading can be gleamed from such an immoral vote? There is no justification for a politician to limit a law abiding parent's right to raise their child. None. Yet in this vote, Brad Miller expresses his lack of respect not only for the unborn, but for parents as well. Deeply Immoral and not reflective of North Carolina or his constituency.


Not only does Brad Miller not represent North Carolina in these votes, but he does not represent humanity. If he had humanity would have long since been extinct.

Only a man bereft of soul could muster the above votes.




out

Rep. GK Butterfield (NC-1) -- Wielding the club of Broken Consent yields Distrust...

polifrog



Obama, Reid, Pelosi and GK Butterfield have found a new tool in their quest to pass legislation against the interest of the American people. That is the tool of broken consent.

Where once we had representatives who, in their self interest, responded to the interests of the people, we currently have a large percentage who no longer respond to those they represent. Why? They have been freed from the people because they are either retiring or realize they are unlikely to win reelection. They realize they no longer have the consent of the people and as a result feel free to vote for atrocities such as ObamaCare.

Broken Consent yields distrust....According to Pew...

By almost every conceivable measure Americans are less positive and more critical of government these days. A new Pew Research Center survey finds a perfect storm of conditions associated with distrust of government — a dismal economy, an unhappy public, bitter partisan-based backlash, and epic discontent with Congress and elected officials.

Rather than an activist government to deal with the nation’s top problems, the public now wants government reformed and growing numbers want its power curtailed. With the exception of greater regulation of major financial institutions, there is less of anappetite for government solutions to the nation’s problems — including more government control over the economy — than there was when Barack Obama first took office. …

.... Just 22% say they can trust the government in Washington almost always or most of the time, among the lowest measures in half a century. About the same percentage (19%) says they are “basically content” with the federal government, which is largely unchanged from 2006 and 2007, but lower than a decade ago.

Opinions about elected officials are particularly poor. In a follow-up survey in early April, just 25% expressed a favorable opinion of Congress, which was virtually unchanged from March (26%), prior to passage of the health care reform bill. This is the lowest favorable rating for Congress in a quarter century of Pew Research Center
surveys. Over the last year, favorable opinions of Congress have declined by half — from 50% to 25%.

The last time dissatisfaction with governance was as low as it is today was prior to the 1994 Gingrich revolution. The pattern seems to be that liberals require 10 years to reduce the good will Americans have for their government to the point that they are removed from office.




GK Butterfield supports leadership through Broken Consent with his vote for ObamaCare...

He harms America
He harms North Carolina
He harms the people of North Carolina




out

A PBS History of Rep. Brad Miller's Disenfranchising of His Constituency Via His Self Drawn District...

polifrog




There is an often repeated charge that Rep Brad Miller drew the lines of his district. Although, I didn't doubt the validity of the charge I felt it was tainted by the kookiness factor. Now, I no longer feel that way due to a quick history lesson via WFAE 90.7 (PBS) out of Charlotte.

NC was not always a state subjected to gerrymandered districts and the resulting party rigidness gerrymandered district create. Our gerrymandered districts are the result of two court decisions and an utter disregard for the NC State Constitution since the 1980's.

According to PBS's WFAE out of Charlotte, NC:
For most of North Carolina's history, redistricting wasn't much of an issue at all. Our state constitution requires legislative districts to stay within county lines. There wasn't much lawmakers could do about that.

But the US Supreme Court ruled in the 1960s that districts - congressional and legislative - had to be pretty close to the same size in terms of population. It's called the "one person, one vote" rule, and lawmakers had to make exceptions to the county rule to comply.

Then there was the Voting Rights Act of 1965. That required lawmakers to avoid breaking up minority communities into different districts to dilute their voting power. And it required 40 North Carolina counties where there was a history of discrimination at the polls to get clearance from the Department of Justice whenever they change their districts or election laws.

The NC Constitution's requirement that districts be drawn according to county lines imparted too much power to the citizenry as far as the Democrats who were in power at the time were concerned. Democrats found that they could consolidate power through the tools of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and the Supreme Court mentioned above. With these tools Democrats found that they could empower themselves with incumbency at the expense of the citizens they served. Brad Miller was one of those Democrats.

"Since the Democrats were in the majority, it was mainly to protect incumbent
democrats, to keep control of the General Assembly in the hands of the Democratic party," said attorney Thomas Farr.
...
Farr says gerrymandering has led to a lot of corruption in North Carolina politics, because it doesn't give voters the power to hold their lawmakers accountable.

After the 2000 census Brad Miller was involved with redrawing the congressional districts in NC.

Congressman Brad Miller was one of the lead architects of the 2001 plan that Farr took to court. Miller was in the state Senate then, the chairman of the Redistricting Committee.
...
The next year, Miller won his seat in Congress in the new district he helped to draw.

The end result has been increased corruption due to politicians being able to rely on districts so heavily biased toward one part or the other that they often go uncontested.

Brad Miller did not begin his disregard for liberty by ignoring the US Constitution, he first cut his teeth through the disenfranchising of NC voters by ignoring the NC Constitution.

This an yet another example of Brad Miller's immoral governance that concentrates the political power in the hands of the few at the expense of the many.




out

Rep. Brad Miller (NC-13) -- On the wrong side of history...

polifrog

The economy in Britain and much of the world is in dire straits and it would not be an exaggeration to say we have entered a period of history that far from being a 'crisis of capitalism', historians looking back may well call it the 'crisis of regulatory statism'.

The history of American government at this point seems to be little more than a ramping up of governance at the expense of the liberty. Liberals offer staggering increases in government while pretending to be generous with rights that in reality have little economic impact on anything, while conservatives offer only a slowing of government growth and increasing government power in other more subtle ways. Who offers a return to true liberty of the individual and limited government?

It is not hard to look at the various nations around the world and see that economic vitality follows those nations that adhere to limited government and individual liberty. Even China's stellar growth has come with its moves toward liberty and away from total control.

Nations that were once popping with innovation throughout Europe are now stuck in a bureaucratic nightmare of government overreach and near paralysis through regulation as their citizens continue to loose their liberty and ability to cope with the changing world. As a result the whole of the area has been experiencing an economic spin-down for decades and only recently has awoken to the fact. As for the US, America has been walking the dead end path with Utopianist leaders such as Brad Miller Europe seems to have now rejected.

I can only hope that our form of government which has proven resilient while at the same time quite nimble (see the Tea Party) compared to others throughout the world will pivot and put Brad Miller on the wrong side of history.



out