We all want to do well. I don’t know of one person who emerges from the womb with an inherent need to “settle”, to NOT do well for themselves. We all have aspirations and goals, no matter how big or small they seem to someone else. We have our own paths to follow, and our own lives to create and maintain, and we should be able to do that, without fear of reprisals from government.

If we want to enjoy what we’re doing, but don’t care how much money we make while doing it…That’s our right. If we don’t care about enjoying what we do, so long as we earn a nice ‘chunk o’ change’ while doing it,…That’s our right. And yes, we all have our own responsibilities to society as well — we should strive to be decent people, to be of good heart and good nature, to treat people with respect unless they give us a reason not to do so, and to take care of those less fortunate, so long as we have a means to do so and trust that our help will not become a ‘crutch’ or a hindrance for them. But, this IS a free country, and if someone doesn’t feel they should do those things,…That is also their right. We may not agree with it, but it is their right.

Still, one very LARGE falsehood the leftist/socialist ideology cannot live without, is this myth: If one has means beyond their needs, they are inherently evil, they did not earn it honestly, they do not care for anyone but themselves and their interests, and they should be made to feel guilty for their overages.

I.E. – If you have more money than they think you should have, you should feel guilty about it, and you should WANT government to do with it as they see fit. Even though government didn’t earn it…Even though you pay every tax levied against you (be it sales tax, gas tax, income tax, etc etc)…Government should have the power to regulate your income…Or so they believe.

An aside — Clue for you: They already do. In many ways and on many different levels. Here’s just one: If you find yourself on “food stamps”, but you also earn $25 a week by chopping wood for your elderly neighbor, and you use that money exclusively to help pay your bills…Your “food stamp” allotment will be lowered. See what I mean? If you take the “free stuff” government offers, you will eventually be forced to dance to their ‘tune’. Welfare is nothing more than another form of slavery. Liberals know this…Have for years. Yet, the goal should be to get everyone off welfare, right? So, in all the years the liberals controlled congress and the white house, why wasn’t anything done about it? If they care so much for the “downtrodden”, why not help lift them OUT of their situations, for good?? I’ll tell you why…Those “downtrodden” are a voting block, and a political “toy” the liberals LOVE to use, ever few years, when their power is threatened. They trot them out, parade them around and say “these poor people need someone in government to help them”. And as soon as the “downtrodden” aren’t needed anymore, they are placed back into their economic “abyss”, handed a few food stamps, and told to keep their mouths shut. Some help, ay?

But I digress…

Anyway — at some point, and in better economic times, we all have the ability to make a decent wage, and hopefully, are rewarded for our hard work, by way of promotion or retention, or whathaveyou.

Alas…In the world of all-things-obama, that’s not the way it should be. As the vetting continues, yet another facet of his pre-white house arrogance, comes to light (via Breitbart and the Hyde Park Citizen newspaper, circa 12/28/95):

by Ben Shapiro
15 hours ago

In a newly-uncovered interview from the Hyde Park Citizen newspaper circa December 28, 1995, Barack Obama explains his philosophy on income inequality in the United States, especially in light of economic difficulties:

In an environment of scarcity, where the cost of living is rising, folks begin to get angry and bitter and look for scapegoats. Historically, instead of looking at the top 5% of this country that controls all the wealth, we turn towards each other, and the Republicans have added to the fire.

In that interview, Obama explains that his perspective on the “top 5%” was shaped by his experiences abroad:

It’s about power. My travels made me sensitive to the plight of those without power and the issues of class and inequalities as it relates to wealth and power. Anytime you have been overseas in these so-called third world countries, one thing you see is the vast disparity of wealth of those who are part of power structure and those outside of it.

These comments are reminiscent of both the most radical Occupy Wall Street rhetoric and Obama’s infamous comments in San Francisco in April 2008 in which he stated that Americans suffering difficult economic times “get bitter” and “cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them.”

I also want to point out something Shapiro either ignored, or didn’t catch, when he wrote this piece. This comment by obama:

instead of looking at the top 5% of this country that controls all the wealth

— leaves me wondering something. I’ve read other comments online, over the years, from liberals who believe that “the Jews control this” and “the Jews control that”, always referring to the media, the banks, or…Money.

And with that…I leave you to your thoughts…

Lots of stuff to get to in this post, so, let’s get to it…

First off, we have…Are you sitting down?…We have an actual article posted on the CBSNews website, which states that under the obama administration, our national debt has increased more, than under George W Bush. Oh but wait…Under obama it’s not “debt”, it’s “investments”, right?

After you get up off the floor, click this link to view the entire piece. Here’s a snip:

March 19, 2012 6:55 PM
National Debt has increased more under Obama than under Bush
By Mark Knoller

(CBS News) The National Debt has now increased more during President Obama’s three years and two months in office than it did during 8 years of the George W. Bush presidency.

The Debt rose $4.899 trillion during the two terms of the Bush presidency. It has now gone up $4.939 trillion since President Obama took office.

The latest posting from the Bureau of Public Debt at the Treasury Department shows the National Debt now stands at $15.566 trillion. It was $10.626 trillion on President Bush’s last day in office, which coincided with President Obama’s first day.

The National Debt also now exceeds 100% of the nation’s Gross Domestic Product, the total value of goods and services.

Mr. Obama has been quick to blame his predecessor for the soaring Debt, saying Mr. Bush paid for two wars and a Medicare prescription drug program with borrowed funds.

The federal budget sent to Congress last month by Mr. Obama, projects the National Debt will continue to rise as far as the eye can see. The budget shows the Debt hitting $16.3 trillion in 2012, $17.5 trillion in 2013 and $25.9 trillion in 2022.

Federal budget records show the National Debt once topped 121% of GDP at the end of World War II. The Debt that year, 1946, was, by today’s standards, a mere $270 billion dollars.

Mr. Obama doesn’t mention the National Debt much, though he does want to be seen trying to reduce the annual budget deficit, though it’s topped a trillion dollars for four years now.

Next, we have a perfect illustration of irony in action. For this one, posting the actual article titles is about all I need to display the utter idiocy of the liberal mind-set on this issue:

Link: Food Police: Bloomberg Bans Home-Cooked Meals for the Homeless
Link: Obama Dining With Supporters for $35,800 a Plate

In the “dumbass” category, we have two of our favorite dumbasses, michael moore and the “occupy” movement. Just yesterday, the “occupiers” voiced their displeasure with tub-o-turd michael moore. What can this teach us? Well, for one, it seems there are some things that even fecal material will not stick too. So, in order to get back into their ‘good graces’, dear ol’ michael took time out from stuffing his face with recycled lard, to say “thank God for anarchists”. As noted at BreitbartTV, which features the video clip of moore flapping his yapper: ‘rich dude moore roots for revolution’. He’s not fooling anyone with the ‘revolution’ talk. He just wants all the food for himself.

Meanwhile, the “occupy” dumbasses are spouting off, more and more, about becoming “more radical”. In this video clip (posted at BreitbartTV), a spokesman for the “movement” talks about the supposed upcoming increase in radicalism. If we couple this supposedly shocking news with the rumors that the “movement” will be using more violence, on a massive scale…We may be in for one very long, hot summer. But, as I noted in this piece:

If your “movement” (fecal and otherwise) starts using more and more violence to disrupt the day-to-day goings on in this country, prohibiting We The People from going to work, getting our kids to school, getting food for our families…It will NOT be violence from the police you’ll need to worry about. It will come from We The People…And if you think I’m kidding — Just watch us.

There’s a reason why the citizenry has left you alone for so long. Learning your tactics and movements over the past year has been most beneficial. And if you make any real attempts, nationwide, to destroy what remains of our country, sending it into a chaotic tail-spin where “occupy” rioters “own” the streets and regular citizens dare not go outside their homes…Your little “movement” will find itself BEGGING the police to protect you.

We The People are tired of your collective ‘hissy fit’, but for the most part, you’ve been nothing more than a stinky, shitty, pissy boil on the butt of humanity.

But – the minute your “movement” starts using violence, on a major scale…All bets are off.

No quarter asked…NONE given.
Choose wisely…

R.I.P. Andrew Breitbart…

In other words…Bring it, sonny boy.

Finally, a special word about the Ayers family mailman. I’m going to post this link, without a whole lot of commentary on the subject-matter. I’d rather our readers deciper this one for themselves. I WILL say, however,…The info is VERY interesting, and I believe it shows yet another purposely hidden ‘facet’ to who barack obama really is, and reveals just one more thing about his pre-White House life, which the press did their best to keep secret in ’08. The real question is…Why?

(PS: Hat-tip to @Miller51550 on Twitter for the link on the ‘mailman’ story)

This whole “republican war on women” crap…Is anyone REALLY buying into this? I mean, seriously…Most women in our society these days are smart, educated and extremely savvy. If you strip away the politics behind this political “football” the liberals like to toss around every few years, you are left with those same smart, educated, savvy women.

So why would smart, educated, savvy women fall for this lame-ass leftist argument? Well, in truth, they wouldn’t. See, here’s the thing,…And this is a bit if full disclosure I’m not sure I’ve shared with our readers…I am a woman. Yes, that’s right, the main contributor to Liberty’s Leviathan is a woman. I was born and raised in Iowa, and still live there today. I spent the first 25 years of my life as a die-hard liberal.

I’m smart, educated and quite savvy, if I do say so myself.

And you know what…THE ONLY reason why some women run down the field and catch this political “football”, everytime the liberals let-fly a ‘hail mary’…Is because of POLITICS. That’s it. No other reason. No smart, educated, savvy woman, who respects her self, the other women in her family and in her life, and the entire feminine sex as a whole, would fall for this line of verbal fecal material…Without politics playing into it. Trust me…I’ve “been there, done that”, and I’ve seen how the liberals play this game.

So, what does this prove? Well, a number of things, but the biggest (in my view) is: Outside of some of the most basic of liberal “tenants” which specifically apply to women, lefist politics inherently promotes a disengaged thought-process amongst women.

Those “basic tenants” of liberalism I’m referring to are (and this isn’t a complete list, by any stretch of the imagination):
A. Right-leaners want you ‘bare-foot and pregnant in the kitchen’.
B. Right-leaners think you shouldn’t earn as much money as a man, for the same job.
C. Right-leaners think your only “lot in life” is to be married with 3.5 kids.

Beyond those points, at the heart of leftist politics is the idea that government, not a woman’s own skills, merits, and contributions, will make her a valued member of society. And from that core idea, springs a lack-luster thought-process. The women who buy into this crap somehow feel guilty if they think for themselves, outside of the liberal mantra and spin they are brain-washed to believe. Why should they think, at that point? It’s all been done for them, right?…By dear, sweet big mama government.

I call upon all women to wise the hell up!! Stop playing ‘nurse maid’ to the liberal mind-set…Stop being that ‘good little girl’ they can trot out of the political closet every so often, then use you like a $5.00 whore, and put you back in that closet, gagged and bound, so you’ll keep your mouth shut, and they can keep their girly play-toy. (Think Cindy Sheehan here….)

For laughs, here’s that RNC video (another bit of full disclosure: normally I don’t post ANYTHING that comes directly from the RNC. Don’t like ‘em…Haven’t for years. But, every now and then, even a blind squirrel finds a nut):

For an extra-special laugh, I’m linking this piece by Bristol Palin, in which she writes (in part):
(snip)

Mr. President, When Should I Expect Your Call?
Posted on March 18, 2012 by Bristol Palin

Dear President Obama,

You don’t know my telephone number, but I hope your staff is busy trying to find it. Ever since you called Sandra Fluke after Rush Limbaugh called her a slut, I figured I might be next. You explained to reporters you called her because you were thinking of your two daughters, Malia and Sasha. After all, you didn’t want them to think it was okay for men to treat them that way:

“One of the things I want them to do as they get older is engage in issues they care about, even ones I may not agree with them on,” you said. “I want them to be able to speak their mind in a civil and thoughtful way. And I don’t want them attacked or called horrible names because they’re being good citizens.”

And I totally agree your kids should be able to speak their minds and engage the culture. I look forward to seeing what good things Malia and Sasha end up doing with their lives.

But here’s why I’m a little surprised my phone hasn’t rung. Your $1,000,000 donor Bill Maher has said reprehensible things about my family. He’s made fun of my brother because of his Down’s Syndrome. He’s said I was “f—-d so hard a baby fell out.” (In a classy move, he did this while his producers put up the cover of my book, which tells about the forgiveness and redemption I’ve found in God after my past – very public — mistakes.)

(Read the whole thing at the link…)

I know folks don’t like it when men say nasty things about women…So I will: Any woman who falls for this BS, time and time again, deserves the society and government she ends up with. Women will always disagree with each other, on one thing or two (or three, or many)…But, one thing women should be able to agree upon is just which political ideology wants a woman to be her own individual, and enjoy the constitutional Liberties and Freedoms guaranteed to her, and which political ideology would rather a woman “rent out” the space in her head to a few bullet-points, and just sit back and be a slave to big mama government for everything else.

BWAHAHAHAAA!!!!

Link: COPS BUST UP PADDY’S DAY BASH AT OCCUPY NY
Awww…No ‘wearin’ of the green’ for those who HATE money — which, oddly enough, is green.

Link: Dozens arrested at Occupy’s 6-month anniversary rally – “‘This Is Our Spring Offensive’…”
By the smell of ‘em, they’re already plenty ‘offensive’…Get off your IPad and take a bath, snot-nosed punks.

Link: St. Patrick’s Day turns violent in Ontario – Mayor of London, Ont. says rioters ‘will pay’ for chaos
Remember ‘occupiers’…The more people you piss off, the less likely YOU will be allowed to piss wherever you’d like. See, there’s this thing called a toilet…and unless you didn’t get enough mommy/daddy time (or maybe perhaps you got too much?)…Anyway, unless your parents didn’t teach you to use one, I’ll fill you in: It’s where one is supposed to urinate and deficate. If you want to go outside like an animal, at least use a litter box. Or maybe, just start going all over each other, since you already smell like a whore-house at low tide.

Over and over again…This President has done what he’s needed to do, in order to have his way. Be it ‘obamacare’ (passed in the dead of night, and having never been given proper time for debate), or ‘cash for clunkers’, or the unstimulating ‘stimulus’…We could go on and on. He refuses to listen to We The People.

And now…He’s made sure he legally never has to listen again:

Link: President Signs Law Placing Prior Restraint on Free Speech
(snips)

Written by Joe Wolverton, II
Monday, 12 March 2012 17:21

Daniel Webster warned: “It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters.”

Without fanfare, on March 8, 2012, President Barack Obama signed into law H.R. 347 the Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011.

Readers may assume that there was no grand announcement of this law’s enactment as its name sounds like something to do with giving gardeners guidelines for sprucing up the lawns around government buildings in Washington.

Alternatively, perhaps one could see some of those “good intentions” that Daniel Webster described. Most media coverage of this bill paints it as a beefed up effort to protect the President and other top-rank government officials from assassination attempts and other threats of violence.

As readers of The New American will suspect, there is much more to this law than mainstream media reports or President Obama’s brief announcement of his signing of it would indicate.

For example, in one section of this new legislation, individuals are expressly forbidden under penalty of law from trespassing onto the grounds of the White House. Of course, such an encroachment was already illegal, so why the new provision?

There is already a D.C. ordinance that prosecutes White House trespassers. Violation of this provision of the city code was a misdemeanor.

The penalties for such trespass are much more severe, now, however. Under H.R. 347, Congress may at its discretion impose federal criminal charges on not only those who enter the White House grounds without prior permission, but on anyone who participates in protests at or near a location falling within the greatly enlarged scope of this new prohibited zone.

(…)

For example, the bill does not require “willful” encroachment into a restricted area, the requisite mental state for committing this new crime is merely the “knowing” encroachment into a restricted area. It is in this nuance that the government lays one of its most well-camouflaged snares.

The distinction between “willful” and “knowing” is a legal construction that needn’t be explained fully here, but for purposes of understanding the implications of the difference on a person’s First Amendment rights of free speech, one need only understand that a protestor would certainly “know” that he is protesting, where he is protesting, and that his protest is an expression of opposition to a person or a policy. However, given the fact that the designation of a restricted zone changes without notice (no special police tape, no signs, no noticeable law enforcement patrolling the area), a protestor would probably not know that he was trespassing into a specially protected “restricted zone” or that he was too close to a person endowed by the President with a Secret Service retinue.

It is possible, therefore, that a person could attend a political speech by one of the GOP contenders or by Attorney General Eric Holder, for example, and unintentionally find himself within the prohibited parameters and be subject to federal fines and imprisonment. Who can deny that this discourages free speech? Furthermore, who can deny that the right to speak out freely against government oppression is one of the chief cornerstones of our Republic?

A straightforward reading of the bill reveals the real threat to the freedoms of association and speech. As written and passed by the Congress, there is nothing that would prevent the application of the relevant provisions of this new act to an innocent person protesting against this or that policy position of a presidential candidate while standing outside a debate venue.

(…)

The United States of America is daily experiencing the “silent and gradual” erosion of our liberties. In the case of H.R. 347, it was packaged to the public in much the same way as was the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). A majority of Congressmen from both parties voted overwhelmingly in favor of both these laws. When confronted by constituents concerned about the assault such statutes make on our Constitution and on individual liberty, representatives respond that neither measure expands the scope of current law, rather they merely clarify laws already enacted. For this reason, supporters contend, Americans have nothing to fear from NDAA or H.R. 347.

This answer is disingenuous. The plain fact is that both the NDAA and H.R. 347 codify grand expansions of the power of the President to monitor, manipulate, and punish activities within the United States that he and he alone deems to be a threat to his person, to his friends, or to the security of “the homeland.”

(Read the whole thing at the link above…)

This is YOUR Liberty they are stealing. The constitutional right to freedom of speech, to petition for a redress of grievances, and to peaceably assemble while doing so…Is no longer intact. In fact, if we take into account just how one is treated if they are right-leaning and dare to speak out against a leftist political “darling”,…Those rights have been slowly erroding away for decades.

However,…Barack Obama was chosen, by the socialist “machine” both inside and outside our country, to bring about a full promotion and forced assimilation to this radical socialist statism. It’s been the dream of every “good” liberal to attach the needs of We The People ever more tightly to big government, forcing us to depend on them for everything from soup to nuts. Once that’s done, it can then be assumed that those who disagree are merely “misunderstood”, and will one day “wake up” to the ‘goodness of government’ in their lives.

That notion is not only sickening, but it is contrary to the very foundation of this country. We are a CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC…And NOT a brazen mix of socialism and facism, the former ruling over policy, the latter ruling over the people.

Why pass such a law? They claim it’s for “security reasons”. Do you buy that? Not even in the shadow of 9/11 was such a permanent silencing of free speech considered. But, consider this: If this president’s detractors start showing up on a massive scale, exercising their right to free speech, petitioning for a redress of grievances, all while peaceably assembling…Other folks might ‘get wind’ of what’s going on, and start to wonder what all the fuss is about, no? That may prompt them to seek the facts, instead of believing the liberal ‘spin’. The obama regime can’t afford to have inquisitive citizens on the loose, now can they?

No no…With the signing of this law, it should be more than obvious that if re-elected, obama and his minions mean to do more harm to this country, and they know their actions will not sit well with the citizenry.