Half Are Paying for the Other Half

We've hit a critical moment in Obama's march to the welfare state:

Another eye-popping number was the percentage of Americans who don’t pay income taxes, which now accounts for nearly half of the U.S. population. Meanwhile, most of that population receives generous federal benefits.

“One of the most worrying trends in the Index is the coinciding growth in the non-taxpaying public,” wrote Heritage authors Bill Beach and Patrick Tyrrell. “The percentage of people who do not pay federal income taxes, and who are not claimed as dependents by someone who does pay them, jumped from 14.8 percent in 1984 to 49.5 percent in 2009.”

That means 151.7 million Americans paid nothing in 2009. By comparison, 34.8 million tax filers paid no taxes in 1984.

The Obamatons have done it, they've made half the country reliant on the government in one way or another. It's about as un-American as anything we've ever seen in modern American politics. This was indeed their goal as a populace that gets a taste of European-style socialism will become addicted to that style...regardless of who pays.

Can we ever go back to the point where people will want to work as hard as they once did? Sure as hell this is unsustainable for any length of time without massive tax increases.


Pathetic. And who's going to pay for the health insurance of all these people? That was rhetorical.

Obama Has Succeeded in Making Us a Socialist State

Obama promised that he would institute his far left policies and the majority of voters got caught up in his propaganda. Some weren't fooled and wrote about it on a daily basis.

Obama knew exactly how he had to proceed; he knew that once people got wise to his game, they would be appalled. When they showed resistance, he rammed his agenda through. The public is hip to the game and are poised to rectify the huge mistake they made as soon as possible, which means November.

Alas, it's too late. He's succeeded in ways that Carter, Clinton, LBJ and FDR could only have dreamed of. He's made a huge swath of the country dependent on handouts and dependent on The State:

WASHINGTON — Government anti-poverty programs that have grown to meet the needs of recession victims now serve a record one in six Americans and are continuing to expand.

More than 50 million Americans are on Medicaid, the federal-state program aimed principally at the poor, a survey of state data by USA TODAY shows. That's up at least 17% since the recession began in December 2007.

Note the first line, "victims" is how the media phrase it and how Obama implemented it. Liberals thrive on supposed victimhood whether it be "victims" of "big business", those who sell cigarettes and junk food or any other non-government entity. The simple fact that government policies have made these people victims either escapes the reporter or, more likely, is conveniently not commented upon.

We now have one out of every six of our countrymen addicted to government handouts and the rest of us are forced to pay for them.

Now don't get me wrong, I'm all about helping someone when they are down but what we've just seen put into play by Obama is no different then what drug dealers do. They give a taste and then just a little more; pretty soon, you are relying on what they are pushing. Come on man, just a little more, just another 26-weeks of unemployment and I'll get straight and get off the dole. But instead one ends up living life on welfare, unending unemployment, food stamps and government blocks of cheese. You can't have that gravy train end so you vote Democrat so you can keep the trip going.

Note this:

I want to focus here on another dimension of the Obama administration's policies: the expansion of unemployment-insurance eligibility to as much as 99 weeks from the standard 26 weeks.

The unemployment-insurance program involves a balance between compassion—providing for persons temporarily without work—and efficiency. The loss in efficiency results partly because the program subsidizes unemployment, causing insufficient job-search, job-acceptance and levels of employment. A further inefficiency

...These numbers provide a stark contrast with joblessness today. The peak unemployment rate of 10.1% in October 2009 corresponded to a mean duration of unemployment of 27.2 weeks and a share of long-term unemployment of 36%. The duration of unemployment peaked (thus far) at 35.2 weeks in June 2010, when the share of long-term unemployment in the total reached a remarkable 46.2%. These numbers are way above the ceilings of 21 weeks and 25% share applicable to previous post-World War II recessions. The dramatic expansion of unemployment-insurance eligibility to 99 weeks is almost surely the culprit.

To get a rough quantitative estimate of the implications for the unemployment rate, suppose that the expansion of unemployment-insurance coverage to 99 weeks had not occurred and—I assume—the share of long-term unemployment had equaled the peak value of 24.5% observed in July 1983. Then, if the number of unemployed 26 weeks or less in June 2010 had still equaled the observed value of 7.9 million, the total number of unemployed would have been 10.4 million rather than 14.6 million. If the labor force still equaled the observed value (153.7 million), the unemployment rate would have been 6.8% rather than 9.5%.

The evidence is clear, extending unemployment or any benefits results in the reduced will to work and prolongs the economic agony. People have grown used to the "new normal" in which the Obama administration has produced an America where people just stop paying their mortgages, squat in the house they probably couldn't afford in the first place until they get evicted and then rent a place they can handle on their unemployment stipend they know isn't going to run out as long as the Dems rule everything. Why take a job at Home Depot when you get the same from the government.

But then, the government doesn't get money from unemployment checks. Instead, those of us who are working carry the load until more and more people grow comfortable with living off Uncle Sam's largess and then all of a sudden it's half of us paying for the other half. It's a spiral that's not only wrong but inherently un-American...which was Obama's goal anyway.

Wednesday Afternoon News & Notes

Still in Pensacola, FL with my son who's playing in the USSSA World Series in Pace. Won today 3-0 and my son caught a good game while the starting pitcher pitched a complete game, two-hit shutout. The pic at right is the view from the house me and other families are renting for the week. Nice and the fishing is excellent. I pulled up some catfish, several sting rays and my boy caught a huge redfish.

Here's what's new in the world:

-We all knew that global warming swindlers had the ultimate goal of destroying wealth and wealth redistribution. They have actually let it slip out this time.

-Obama and the Dems are going to soak the steadily declining "rich". But hey, why stop at the "rich" when you can destroy the leading sector for jobs creation as well.

-Furthermore, why stop at the "rich" and small business when you can go after families as well. These people want to control everything in a Big Brotheresque way.

-Smokes don't actually cost 23 quadrillion dollars, they just seem that way.

-Yasir Arafat is still dead. How much did Mahmoud Abbas have to do with it? Politics as bloodsport.

-The Obama administration says "please, please pretty please give up your nuclear intentions, Iran" while threatening a stern scolding and a timeout if they don't comply. Unleash the Israeli Air Force for crying out loud. Then denounce them for taking action so you don't lose any cred on the "Arab street".

-The soldier who claims he doesn't have to go to Afghanistan because Obama was not born in the US so doesn't have the authority has won his case. I still think the guy is a puss for not going just as I believe a conscientious objector is as well but he scores points for originality.

-Cap and Tax Trade would probably be a boon for Timmy Geithner's and Jon Corzine's cronies at Goldman-Sachs.

In Obamanation, Capitalist Lawyers are "Terrorist"

In Obamanation, the safest job in the world is a terrorist so it would seem the guy has nothing to be concerned with. But oh no, in the new domestic war on terror, these terrorists are standing in the way of "progress" and the creation of our new socialist utopia so they must be debased and punished.



Note the last part:

The important part comes at the end: an email exchange between Matthew Feldman, attorney on the President’s Auto Task Force, and Robert Manzo, Chrysler restructuring expert. Manzo is basically pleading to further negotiate to prevent bankruptcy, but Feldman is having none of it. Here is the exchange:

Robert Manzo, Chrysler restructuring expert: “I hope you think it’s worth giving this one more shot.”

Matthew Feldman, attorney on the President’s Auto Task Force: “I’m now not talking to you. You went where you shouldn’t.”

Manzo: “Sorry. I didnt’ mean to say the wrong thing and I obviously did. I was trying oto make sure that if we had to contribute to the solution you knew we had some room. Sorry I did not realize the mistake!!”

Feldman: “It’s over. The President doesn’t negotiate second rounds. We’ve given and lent billions of dollars so your team could manage this properly….And now you’re telling me to bend over to a terrorist like Lauria? That’s B.S.”

The fact that liberals have had no qualms in the past "bend(ing) over to terrorists" it seems as if they shouldn't this time as well. But when you have instituted policies in the auto-wrecking jihad like the Obama team has done--policies that would make Vito and Michael Corleone cringe--you don't bend over to capitalist "terrorists".

Welcome to Obamanation where hard-working men and women--people willing take risks and create wealth--are labeled "terrorists". Lord help us over the next 3 1/2 years.

Via Hot Air.

Public Won't Buy From Government Motors

A large majority of GM owners say that no, they would not be interested in buying a GM vehicle in the future:

Only 42% of those who currently own a General Motors car are even somewhat likely to buy a GM product for their next car. That figure includes just 30% who are Very Likely to do so.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that 43% of current GM owners are not likely to buy another GM car, while 16% are not sure.

Democrats who own GM cars are somewhat more likely than others to buy their next car from GM.

i was discussing this with someone the other day and said the exact same. I would buy a Ford since they've not gone into bankruptcy but never a GM. I'm not sure if it's the fact that the union that sank them was handed a gift of ownership or the fact that those who invested were given the finger that bothers me so bad but both do.

No thanks, if the quality was suspect before, it's going to be atrocious now and the unions will get a good idea of just how bad things are for those of us who don't have the government to bail us out. They took our money and acted smug about it so now they'll understand that socialism is a cancer and they were the reason it was foisted on us.

I'm kind of mixed on this as GM is the test case for Obamanomics and he won't let it fail. He'll pour more money into the black hole and we'll be paying for it for decades. Even so, I'm not buying from Obama Motors.

Hat tip: Hot Air who also brings us the stunning news that more people trust the GOP with the economy than BHO.

Update: SCOTUS stays sale of Chrysler.

Whither America? GM Now Government Motors

It is incomprehensible but yet it is true. Here we sit on June 1, 2009 and GM-- a company that is synonymous with America--is now owned by America and the unions who were instrumental in the downfall of the once-proud manufacturing behemoth.

We now own stakes in banking firms, insurance firms and now two automobile manufacturing firms. in short, we've become a socialist nation that nationalizes industries under the guise of saving them.

There once was a time that a company that couldn't survive was allowed to claim bankruptcy, work deals out with their creditors and then re-emerge slimmer and more productive. Not so anymore; Obama saw his opportunity and he took it. He gave the unions a gift and men and women who invested their hard-earned money the finger. It's a sad day to be an American in what is now fully Obamanation.

Michael Moore--as usual--gets it as wrong as anyone could. Other thoughts here.

Obama Throws America Under the Bus

It's all coming clear now. President Obama truly believe what his wife once said about not being proud of America until now. Liberals scoffed at us when we defended this nation as one of opportunity, freedom and hope versus the idea that America as was a nation that had a great many things to apologize for as espoused by Michelle Obama.

Case in point:

PORT-OF-SPAIN, Trinidad and Tobago -- President Obama endured a 50-minute diatribe from socialist Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega that lashed out at a century of what he called terroristic U.S. aggression in Central America and included a rambling denunciation of the U.S.-imposed isolation of Cuba's Communist government.

Obama sat mostly unmoved during the speech but at times jotted notes. The speech was part of the opening ceremonies at the fifth Summit of the Americas here.

Later, at a photo opportunity with Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper, Obama held his tongue when asked what he thought about Ortega's speech.

...A senior administration official declined to criticize Ortega, saying the president wanted to focus on the future.

And so you have it. A thug socialist leader of a nation that is so poor the citizens leave in droves and trek thousands of miles to sneak into America is telling us that we are terrorists. Nicaragua is a nation that uses torture and violence to sway elections and they are belittling us? Obama sits there and takes it and then doesn't even speak to rebut the slander. Why? Because he agrees with it. America is evil--or was until January 20th of this year.

Obama is on a tour that has taken him from Europe to the Caribbean with the only goal to apologize for America's supposed past misdeeds. The 2009 America Sucks tour is in full-swing and Obama is the star of the show (along with his teleprompter) disparaging a country that allowed him--the son of an African immigrant--to attend an Ivy League university, make millions of dollars and rise to become its most powerful politician.

The shining city upon a hill has always been a ghetto according to Obama and the world is eating it up. They like America as a blubbering, feminized wimp. They are licking their chops to take us down as many pegs as possible and Obama is helping them to do so.

Hope and change my ass.

Update: I neglected to post this earlier:



That picture says more than I ever could. A socialist dictator who has fomented terror who has wished nothing but ill-will to our nation is enjoying a nice moment with the new prez. I want to friggin' puke.

Update: Gateway Pundit (with a spiffy new look) has some thoughts and notes that Obama did "mildly rebuke" Ortega. If someone slams my country the way Ortega did, they'd receive more than a mild rebuke.

Owning a Carmaker Too Socialist, Even for Sweden

While the US in barreling headlong into socialism under the "leadership" of The One, the most socialist of nations is acting more like our founders expected us to be:

Which makes it all the more wrenching that the Swedish government has responded to Saab’s desperate financial situation by saying, essentially, tough luck. Or, as the enterprise minister, Maud Olofsson, put it recently, “The Swedish state is not prepared to own car factories.”

When even Sweden says that a government can't run a car company, it makes one think why the US should. Sweden takes care of every citizen from cradle to grave through extreme socialist programs and have done so for several generations.

The IHT notes that Sweden has a "center right" government, which means they are somewhere in the area of Nancy Pelosi by Swedish standards as they the Times-owned paper tries to cover for Obama but the simple fact is the Swedish model that Obama subscribes to is saying no to nationalizing one of their key companies.

In America, the new administration is not only quite excited about their foray into nationalization--a view that makes Hugo Chavez look like a capitalist--but is looking to destroy another industry huge industry as well.

America after Obamanation will take years to pull out of the mess this guy has made in just three months.

Via Ace.

Barney Frank: Let's Reduce Defense Spending 25%

Hey, we need to get those who have been repeatedly beaten down by evil capitalists some money asap so we'll just take 25% of our military funding while we're at war to do it:

Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) said Democrats will push for a stimulus package after the November election, and called for a package reducing defense spending by 25 percent while saying Congress will "eventually" raise taxes.

Frank told the editorial board of the SouthCoast Standard-Times that he wanted to reduce defense spending by a quarter, meaning the United States would have to withdraw from Iraq sooner.

"The people of Iraq want us out, and we want to stay over their objection," he said. "It's extraordinary."

Frank also said the post-election stimulus package will focus on spending for building projects, extending unemployment benefits, and further supporting states' healthcare costs. "We'll have to raise taxes ultimately," Frank said. "Not now, but eventually." Frank told the Standard-Times that if Democrats cannot secure the votes they need in November, they will try again in January, when they will likely have stronger majorities in the House and Senate.

So Rep. Frank wants to make sure our infrastructure, unemployment benefits and health care is intact at the expense of our military. That'll make Osama bin Laden really happy.

People like Frank will ensure that 2010 looks like 1994 all over again. We have two weeks to make our case that these people will destroy America. It's probably too damn late.

Add It to the List: Calling Obama Socialist is Racist

Cool, another thing that makes me a racist. Thus far I can't question him about Jeremiah Wright, Tony Rezko, William Ayers, or probably even Richard Daley without being tainted as a Bull Connor. I'm a bigot if I say anything about Michelle Obama, ACORN, voter fraud or his penchant for garbling words when not speaking from a teleprompter.

Now we have a new cause to be called racists:

The hysterical accusations of socialism from conservatives echo similar accusations leveled at black leaders in the past, as though the quest for racial parity were simply a left-wing plot. Obama may not actually be a socialist or communist, but his election would strike another powerful blow to the informal racial hierarchy that has existed in America since the 1960s, when it ceased being enforced by law. This hierarchy, which holds that whiteness is synonymous with American-ness, is one conservatives are now instinctively trying to preserve. Like black civil-rights activists of the 1960s, Obama symbolizes the destruction of a social order they see as fundamentally American, which is why terms like "socialism" are used to describe the threat.

Perhaps we've labeled Obama as "socialist" because he meets the classic definition of a socialist. Merriam-Webster defines "socialism" this way: "any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods". Obama favors big government over big business. He has introduced one the most overt programs for the redistribution of wealth from the rich to the poor that is done through the government. Nothing racist at all except to a paranoid socialist who sees racism everywhere.

Obama is not a socialist purely in the historic sense, he's more of a neo-socialist whereby he is ideologically a socialist but mixes in capitalistic tendencies because hey, what fun is socialism if you're poor? Call it socialism full of greed.

This drivel continues:

This phenomenon extends beyond Obama's candidacy. The conservative explanation for the mortgage crisis falls neatly into this narrative, too; the country is at risk because Democrats allowed minorities to disrupt the natural social order by becoming homeowners. Never mind that this defies all data, logic, and history, the narrative resonates because it allows Obama, a living symbol of black folks rising above "their station," to become a focus for conservative economic anxieties.

You see, us conservatives believe that "black folks" have their place and owning a house is not considered them staying in their place. I guess the fact that it was a republican who elevated a two "black folks" far above "their station" to the jobs of Secretary of State and National Security Advisor while every Democrat administration installed them in token positions like Secretary of Commerce is lost on the author. Note also the highly biased nuanced piece they linked to which I debunked yesterday.

I can't seem to recall or find a single conservative writer who said it was "black folks" or even Hispanics who were responsible for the mortgage meltdown. As I've written, it was any person--black, white or purple--who was given a loan they could not afford--in concert with governmental (socialist) policy that lead us to where we are now. Add in some Wall Street greed and you have a toxic stew of bad loans.

Finally:

Conservatives, now and in the past, have turned to "socialism" and "communism" as shorthand to criticize black activists and political figures since the civil-rights era...

Of course, according to Karl Marx, a socialist could be a communist if they applied themselves a bit more. I don't recall anyone calling Obama a "communist" although he may have some communist tendencies. But it's funny, when I think communist, I think Russia. There ain't too many "black folks" in Russia.

So, today ends our lesson on what is and what is not racism. It's pretty simple really: anything a Conservative says is racist even though it may hard to detect the actual racism. We use code words that are given to us at the Ronald Reagan School during the David Duke course. Anything a liberal says can't be racist even if includes actual slurs (made by a former Kleagle in the KKK who is the senior Democratic Senator)and not code words because they, being liberals, are incapable of being racist.

Come back again next time when we discuss how calling Sarah Palin a c*nt is acceptable political discourse but asking Obama about an unrepentant terrorist who bombed a police station and the Pentagon is not.

George Soros Helping Dems Craft Bailout Legislation

As if the GOP were not indignant enough about the Pelosi speech and the crappy bailout bill pushed by Paulson and Pres. Bush, now the Dems bring in the man Republicans hate more than anyone to help craft revised legislation:

The billionaire financier George Soros, a major Democratic financial backer, is floating his own rescue plan among Democratic lawmakers who are uncertain what to do in the wake of a surprise defeat of a proposed $700 billion rescue package proposed by Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson.

Soros has outlined his plan in an opinion editorial in the Financial Times and circulated a concept paper among decision-makers.

But wait, it gets better (or worse):

...Soros has also contacted Sen. Barack Obama’s (D-Ill.) presidential campaign to share his views on the financial crisis and the best way to solve it.

Great. The Dems have to listen to this guy because he supplies them with a ton of cash but his policies as spelled out in the piece will not save the banking industry or appease Wall Street. As Robert Shaprio noted in the final paragraph:

He said that if the government bought stock in troubled firms, a problem would arise regarding how Uncle Sam would be represented as a shareholder.

“How does the government vote the shares?” he asked. “It puts them in a potential conflict of interest. Regulatory interests may hurt the bottom line.”

It leads us back to the problem many Conservatives have and that is that government has no right owning businesses. That was the main misgiving with the Paulson plan. Soros wants nationalization because he supports socialism and wants to see America move in that direction like Europe has. The Democrats are amenable to his ideas on the subject.

If the government owns stock and simultaneously regulates companies in which it has a stake, isn't it like the fox guarding the hen house?

I'm sure House Republicans will not approve a Soros-backed plan but the fact that he is advising Obama is what really raises my hackles. The GOP is pushing a revised option that includes business tax cuts and would be pro-growth while helping shore up banks and lending firms.

A Liberal Conundrum

Libs love hybrids as a whole and the Toyota Prius in particular. They get a smug expression as soon as they get behind the wheel because they are saving the planet by driving green don't you know?. They can't even keep the cars in stock and dealers have been doing that most capitalistic of things: gouging.

That said, they now have to make some hard choices. You see, libs believe in the environment, unions and workers rights. Apparently, Toyota has their own thoughts on the workers rights question:

The American and Japanese people have a lot in common. In both countries, excessive corporate power and greed are destroying the middle class as income disparity soars, enriching the few while the vast majority of us are left behind. As the two largest economies in the world, the people of the U.S. and Japan should, and could, have a very powerful voice in helping to shape a global economy that fosters respect for human and worker rights, protects our environment and promotes social and economic equality. There needs to be more dialogue among labor, environmental, human and women’s rights organizations and students in the U.S. and Japan. If corporations are the only ones talking to one another, we will just get more of the same.

Savor the verbiage, folks. Right out of Mao's Little Red Book or Lenin's fetid mouth.

In the U.S., we produce too many gas guzzlers. But they are made by well-paid, middle class union workers who have a democratic voice on the shop floor. In Japan, companies like Toyota make some of the best hybrids. But their unions are weak and lack independence—allowing the widespread exploitation of cheap temporary workers in their plants, along with a parts supply chain that is riddled with sweatshop abuses, including human trafficking. We have a lot to learn from each other.

Right now, Toyota and the U.S. auto companies are locked in a race to the bottom, which will inevitably lead them to adopt each others worst practices.

This is all lefty tripe of course but I am savoring the communists who wrote this piece slamming the car that every socialist is eager to own. It's an internecine battle between two far-left ideologies: One that believes Marx and Trotsky were gods and another that thinks Gaia is the one true god (with Marx as a prophet).

Sorry, I'll continue to buy the best made car regardless of who makes it or where it's made. I'm a capitalist through and through and as such will buy the best product for the best price. Period.

Oh Che Do You See? Guevara Flag in Obama Staff Office

A local Fox affiliate toured Obama's campaign offices and lo and behold what did the office staff have hanging on the wall?

Of course, many didn't seem to have a problem with posting a flag potraying a man who was instrumental in the deaths of tens of thousands and helped sentence Cubans to half a century of despair. People like the misguided John Cole who wrote this:

BTW- Is there anyone except the troglodyte right who thinks our Cuba policy has been a success and doesn’t need to be thought through? I mean, if you want to look at long-term failed policies, Cuba could be right up there at the top. What exactly has been accomplished?

Uh, John, what if that were a Nazi flag, say, hanging in McCain's workers office? Or maybe a rebel flag in Huckabee's campaign staff's office? Weren't the KKK revolutionaries in their own minds? Castro would have equaled Hitler's murderous treachery had he had more people and another Che.

The most telling thing about this is not that Obama workers tend to be deeply socialist or even communist but that people like Cole are so knee-jerk about their reactions. Ed said it so John Cole has to be opposed regardless of the offense the flags presence may cause many Cubans who have lost relatives to the vile Castro regime.

No, in John Cole's world, suffering of fellow humans is not nearly as important as trying to score meaningless political points with the 1/10th of one percent of who care to read blogs. But hey, you got some nice hits off Cap'n Ed and Memeorandum John, it was a good day I guess.

Gas-Rich Region Secedes From Socialist Bolivian Government

This isn't going to be pretty:

(CNN) -- Tensions were rising in Bolivia on Saturday as members of the country's four highest natural gas-producing regions declared autonomy from the central government.

...Council representatives vowed to legitimize the so-called autonomy statutes through a referendum that would legally separate the natural-gas rich districts from President Evo Morales' government.

The move also aims to separate the states from Bolivia's new constitution, which calls for, among other things, a heavier taxation on the four regions to help finance more social programs.

The tide of socialism may well have been halted in Venezuela when Hugo Chavez lost in his national referendum a few weeks ago. This is just further proof that socialist policies divide nations, not unite them.

Imagine if the US government, led by say, John Edwards (shudder) levied an oppressive tax on Alaska because that state has the most oil in the nation under the auspices of using that tax to fund anti-poverty programs in Mississippi. How do you think Alaskans would react? This situation is analogous to that.

While civil war is never good for a nation, many South American nations are in the midst of throwing off the chains of extreme socialism and communism (again) and we'll see this play out in that region more often I would guess.

Map of Bolivia here. Other reactions here and here.

Hugo Chavez Ratchets Up The Rhetoric

Today's the day for Venezuelans to go to the polls and decide if they want to grant dictatorial powers to leader Hugo Chavez. Chavez has pulled out all the rhetorical stops and has essentially said that a no vote to the constitutional changes would be traitorous.

One can only hope that the people of Venezuela pay heed to what this man is saying. He's aligned himself with Castro's Cuba, a nation that is in a constant economic funk and has not advanced in forty years and Iran, a nation that is alienating itself more from other Gulf nations on a daily basis and is led by a theocratic group of mullahs whose policies can be called unpredictable at best. He's attacked a neighbor and is backing an insurgent group against the government in another.

You know that Chavez ideas for reform are really off the wall when the NY Times prints an Op/Ed against the referendum by the former leader of the Venezuelan military and a comrade of Chavez.

Captain Ed has much more on this day of decision for Venezuela (including Chavez threat to cut oil to the US)--will the choose no and stop the march of this egotistical madman or will they vote yes and allow Chavez to lead their nation right over the cliff?

Useful Idiots Help Hugo Chavez Cement Control

Hugo Chavez is the new darling of the political left in America. Now that Castro is on his last legs, they've embraced Senor Chavez as they have no other dictator since Daniel Ortega. Despite (or maybe because of) Chavez' well-known affiliation with Iranian puppet Ahmedinejad, the left has grown ever closer to Venezuelan despot.

The left has become morally bankrupt by allowing themselves to be co-opted into this coalition of oppressors--Ahmedinejad's declaration that their are "no homosexuals" in Iran while speaking at Harvard was by far the most chilling statement uttered this year. This is the guy who the new Castro is cozying up to.

Human rights in Venezuela have been on a precipitous downward slide since Chavez was elected including quashing the freedom of speech, protest and alternative political ideas. In essence, he has created the new Soviet-style state except he has exploited his natural resources to the full extent including fattening his coffers with oil money. Something that--thankfully--the Soviets were never able to accomplish due to the fatal flaw inherent in socialism/communism--freedom to create products and services for profit.

While Hollywood elites such as Danny Glover, Kevin Spacey and Sean Penn kiss Chavez' ring, a woman who knows the oppression of socialism has taken a gutsy and contrarian stand--Maria Conchita Alonso. The actress has been quite outspoken about the curtailing of basic human rights in the South American nation and will face the inevitable backlash by the Hollywood establishment because she has done so. I would go so far as to label it a brave stand as anyone who puts their career and future earnings potential on the line and speaks their mind knowing that repercussions will be swift and painful deserves that label.

Ms. Alonso has been at the front of this warning that the country in which she represented as a beauty queen in her younger years has regressed into a country in which opposition to leadership is brutally suppressed. Perhaps American leftists would refer living there as opposed to the false complaints of oppression they claim are occurring here.

Update: The New York Times is nearly orgasmic about this "charing, folksy and flirtatious" leader regardless of the the fact that he is currently cracking down hard on his own population.