United Liberty

It’s that time of year again, when we all make resolutions to change something that we do for the betterment of ourselves.  Here’s a resolution everyone should adopt: Move Your Money to a local bank and/or credit union.

It’s our money and we can choose to move it where we wish.  Remember in It’s a Wonderful Life, how George Bailey stands up to Mr. Potter?  We don’t have to deal with these big banks, let’s put our money in the Bailey Building and Loan.

The idea is simple: If enough people who have money in one of the big four banks move it into smaller, more local, more traditional community banks, then collectively we, the people, will have taken a big step toward re-rigging the financial system so it becomes again the productive, stable engine for growth it’s meant to be.

On Tuesday, Brett posted the new regulations issued by the Department of Homeland Security for foreign flights in response to the attempted terrorist attack on Christmas Day.

Yesterday, news broke that the bloggers responsible for bringing these new regulations to light were harassed by TSA agents that demanded to know where they received the information:

The document, which the two bloggers published within minutes of each other Dec. 27, was sent by TSA to airlines and airports around the world and described temporary new requirements for screening passengers through Dec. 30, including conducting “pat-downs” of legs and torsos. The document, which was not classified, was posted by numerous bloggers. Information from it was also published on some airline websites.

“They’re saying it’s a security document but it was sent to every airport and airline,” says Steven Frischling, one of the bloggers. “It was sent to Islamabad, to Riyadh and to Nigeria. So they’re looking for information about a security document sent to 10,000-plus people internationally. You can’t have a right to expect privacy after that.”
[…]
A former federal prosecutor who asked not to be identified told Threat Level that the TSA is being heavy-handed in how it’s handling the matter.

“It strikes me that someone at TSA is apoplectic that somehow there’s a sense that they’re not doing their job right,” he told Threat level. “To go into this one reporter’s house and copy his computer files and threaten him, it strikes me that they’re more aggressive with this reporter than with the guy who got on this flight.”

As 2009 winds down, David Boaz notes that Barack Obama has taken ownership of our wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, which he promised to end as a candidate:

Speaking of Iraq in February 2008, candidate Barack Obama said, “I opposed this war in 2002. I will bring this war to an end in 2009. It is time to bring our troops home.” The following month, under fire from Hillary Clinton, he reiterated, ”I was opposed to this war in 2002….I have been against it in 2002, 2003, 2004, 5, 6, 7, 8 and I will bring this war to an end in 2009. So don’t be confused.”

Indeed, in his famous “the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow” speech on the night he clinched the Democratic nomination, he also proclaimed, “I am absolutely certain that generations from now we will be able to look back and tell our children that … this was the moment when we ended a war.”

Despite that doesn’t have to run for re-election again until 2012, Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE) can’t be encouraged by poll numbers coming out of his home state:

If Governor Dave Heineman challenges Nelson for the Senate job, a new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey shows the Republican would get 61% of the vote while Nelson would get just 30%. Nelson was reelected to a second Senate term in 2006 with 64% of the vote.

Nelson’s health care vote is clearly dragging his numbers down. Just 17% of Nebraska voters approve of the deal their senator made on Medicaid in exchange for his vote in support of the plan. Overall, 64% oppose the health care legislation, including 53% who are Strongly Opposed. In Nebraska, opposition is even stronger than it is nationally.

Fifty-six percent (56%) of voters in the state believe that passage of the legislation will hurt the quality of care, and 62% say it will raise costs.

Granted, it’s just under three years away and so this will change back and forth, but damn…that’s unreal. Are you paying attention, Sen. Nelson?

You know that health care “reform” bill passed by the Senate on Christmas Eve? Yeah, it doesn’t look so good for the middle class, as Bob Herbert explains:

There is a middle-class tax time bomb ticking in the Senate’s version of President Obama’s effort to reform health care.

The bill that passed the Senate with such fanfare on Christmas Eve would impose a confiscatory 40 percent excise tax on so-called Cadillac health plans, which are popularly viewed as over-the-top plans held only by the very wealthy. In fact, it’s a tax that in a few years will hammer millions of middle-class policyholders, forcing them to scale back their access to medical care.

Which is exactly what the tax is designed to do.

The tax would kick in on plans exceeding $23,000 annually for family coverage and $8,500 for individuals, starting in 2013. In the first year it would affect relatively few people in the middle class. But because of the steadily rising costs of health care in the U.S., more and more plans would reach the taxation threshold each year.

Within three years of its implementation, according to the Congressional Budget Office, the tax would apply to nearly 20 percent of all workers with employer-provided health coverage in the country, affecting some 31 million people. Within six years, according to Congress’s Joint Committee on Taxation, the tax would reach a fifth of all households earning between $50,000 and $75,000 annually. Those families can hardly be considered very wealthy.

So, despite what proponents of ObamaCare tell us, you can expect the middle class to get hammered by new taxes that President Obama promised never to impose on them, even though he already has in other ways.

After an attempt to blow up an American airliner, it’s worth pointing out a cold, hard fact: After 9/11, George W. Bush presided over seven years without one terrorist attack on American soil. Barack Obama has been president for a year and we have been subject to two.

This is really serious. Alot of moderate and independent people voted for Barack Obama in 2008 because he appeared as an intelligent, eloquent alternative to the unprepared Republican ticket. This included many foreign policy hawks such as Francis Fukuyama and Christopher Hitchens. If it becomes further evident that American security has weakened under Obama, however, Obama may find himself with a large loss of support in 2012.