In the story that Fox ran, it indicated that the government was investigating threats that emanated from responses to an article on Alex Jones’ website “Infowars” and a story entitled: “The Cost Of Defying Obamacare: $2,250 a Month And IRS Goons Pointing Guns At Your Family“.  The story title is in reference to the newly expanded powers of the IRS and the government under the Health Care bill.  Under this sweeping legislation the IRS has authority to prosecute, fine and imprison you if you do not have health insurance.  When the provisions of the bill go into effect, it will literally be illegal to not have health care.  Think about that for a moment.  You will be considered a federal felon if you do not have health care and it will be the IRS that enforces this provision.  I’m sorry but what part of our right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness does this law fit under?  But back to our story.

In response to Alex Jones’ article, people posted many angry comments protesting this tyranny and some of them included comments that “IF” the IRS tried to enforce this law, they would be met with violence and the people would defend their constitutional rights with force.  While these comments may sound frightening, they need to be taken in context.  They were not threats made directly TO the IRS.  These people did not pick the phone up and levy a threat.  They did not send a threat electronically.  They did not send threats to the IRS through the Federal mail.  Nor did they levy threats in person.  These people made comments in anger over another travesty of justice and liberty.  I often wonder what Americans today would do if someone today composed a speech excerpting from out founding fathers very direct, very blunt and very passionate writings on the meanings of liberty and what must be done to obtain and protect it.  But I digress.  While we have not read all the comments, it is the context and the principals that are what matter here.  The bottom line is that these people were exercising their right to free speech and are no being treated as public enemy of the government.

Not only was this a violation of their right to free speech and association, the first violation was actually the method used to obtain said threats.  According to the FOX news article:  “The health care law has sparked protests on radical anti-tax and anti-government Web sites and within their private, password-protected e-mail lists and message boards.“  How does the IRS know what was said in private, pass word protected emails and message boards?  Simple, they completely violated these peoples constitutional rights.  Where are the search warrants issued for each persons account?  There aren’t any.  How do I know that, because there is no constitutional basis on which to obtain them for these random people and their postings.  This is your government at work.  This should serve as a very clear warning that nothing you say electronically is private anymore.  So what is the IRS proposing to do in response?

The FOX article explains that the IRS is responding to these so-called threats, with a show of force:

“According to an IRS office memorandum outlining policy for the use of armed guards during the current tax season, the inspector general will provide armed escorts under the following conditions in April: …. “When an IRS employee has contact with a taxpayer who has been designated as a Potentially Dangerous Taxpayer (PDT) by the IRS Office of Employee Protection.”  The IRS’s office of criminal investigations will provide armed escort assistance in other situations, the memo said.”

So the question is: what is a “PDT” or “Potentially Dangerous Taxpayer”?  What do you want to bet that this list will include anyone fitting the “right wing terrorist” watch list put out by Home Land Security last year.  If you will recall, this list included such hostile terrorist types as people who had pr0-life bumper stickers or constitutional party bumper stickers or Ron Paul bumper stickers or anyone who is pro-gun rights and don’t forget those particularly dangerous characters, our military returning from overseas (yes the list really included our veterans.  See the following post for the full list to see if your are a right wing terrorist threat:

http://libertasperveritas.wordpress.com/2009/05/05/are-you-a-rightwing-extremistaccording-to-the-us-government/.

What is truly ironic about this is the fact that Alex Jones’ article talked about armed IRS agents coming to your door and people were upset by this.  So how does the IRS respond, by stating they will send armed IRS agents to your door if you dare to speak out against them or in defense of your constitutional rights.  And yet the citizens are considered to be  the terrorists and extremists?  What is wrong with this picture?

DISCLAIMER – Just in case big brother is watching – we are not endorsing violence or making threats to anyone.

Fox article:

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/03/30/irs-investigates-death-threats-employees-health-approval/

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2010-03-04-federal-pay_N.htm.

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=115719.

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=108696

1. What does this say about our real rights to free speech under the Obama administration?
2. Why is it that national left wing media can openly express desires that a vice president be dead (remember when VP Dick Cheney was at the location of a terrorist attack) which certainly smacks of treason, yet there was barely any media coverage and certainly no no visits from the Secret Service?
3. What will this mean for those who really try to speak out in the future?

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=107263.

There was a great article covering this in the Investors Business Daily (see link at end of article).  In the article, the author indicates that they approached the  House Ways and Means Committee to confirm their interpretation of this section of the bill.  The committee confirmed the reality that this section means you will lose the ability to choose private health care insurance if you make a change or if you have previously never been insured. Private health care will be outlawed under this bill.  It is fact and it is only a matter of time!

There is also a recorded conference call interview with bloggers, in which bloggers who actually support the president brought up this section of the bill and asked the President if it was true that this would prevent private insurance for new insureds or those changing insurance.  The President’s answer: “You know, I have to say that I am not familiar with the provision you are talking about.”  This is astounding!  One of the most important sections of this bill, which he has trumpeted over and over, he now claims he is not familiar with this section.

Private health care insurance will be outlawed under this bill.  It is fact and it is only a matter of time!  Even if you do not change your insurance, you will eventually lose it.  Why?  As the insurance companies are unable to get new insureds, because they all go under the government plan, it is only a matter of time before they will not have the revenue to stay in business and they will fold to the inevitable government monopoly.  This is not the only provision in the bill which would kill private insurance option, but it is the most poignant and it is undeniable!

The government has no right, what so ever, to tell anybody what insurance they should have!  This is the diametric opposite of the freedom we are suppose to have in this country.  This bill is not about insuring the uninsured, it is about controlling the entire health care system.  It is nothing less than the definition of socialism.  A system of government that has proven to rob people of their rights, retard economic development and limit the overall welfare of the general population (excluding the elites in charge).  The fact is that no socialized medical system in the world provides better overall health care options than the United States private party system.  It is not even a close comparison.  That is why people come from other countries regularly access our health system – even though they are paying for it out of their pocket!  The government run plan, will not improve our coverage.  It will only limit it in the end.  Just as this bill limits our private insurance options – it will limit our actual health service options, dramatically!

You must tell our government to stop this bill.

Investors Business Daily link :

http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=332548165656854

http://www.detnews.com/article/20090803/METRO/908030305/1408/Michigan-may-get-Guantanamo-inmates

“According to the Somerville Times in 2007, as a Harvard Law School student, Obama got 17 parking tickets during 1989-1991 from the Cambridge Police Department that he left unpaid until just weeks before he announced his bid for the presidency.”

www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=104935

So here we have a President, who went to law school, practiced law, was a community “organizer”/ figure head, and served as an elected represenatative of the United States, with a promise to uphold the laws of the land.  All the while, he had 17 unpaid parking tickets.   Again, throughout all of his legal and public service career, he ignored 17 tickets he had racked up.  It was not until weeks before he ran for President that he had these paid off.  If the election were not invloved and this was a genuine act of conscious to do the right thing, we might overlook this.  But it clearly was not.  This is a true reflection of this man’s character.  Many of us have had and fought tickets.  We might even say that decent people may have let a ticket or two go unpaid, but 17 tickets?  No this is not an oversight or momentary lapse in judgement.  It shows a wanton and blatant disregard for the law and for moral obligation.  You do not need to be the moral majority to see this is a problem.  But the majority of media does not see this, nor do they want to.   America, we must wake up and speak out.  If the President of the United States of America is above the law, then we have no rule of law.

Isn’t interesting how quickly he turns on his union base, when it suits his agenda.  We also saw this clearly when the union pension funds becamse the target of his anger, when they were trying to protect their pension funds invested in Chrysler.  The President publicly beratted these selfish bondholders for not signing on to his agenda for Chyrsler.  He trotted out the compliant banks as an example of team players that the bond holders should follow.  This was a malevolent use of coersion.  First and foremost, the bondholders, as secured creditors, are legally supposed to be the first people paid in full in a bankruptcy, as opposed to the 29 cents on the dollar Obama stuck them with.  Also, let us not forget, that the bondholders were not recipients, past, present, or future, of the massive TARP funds which Chryslers bankers had and would receive.   Sorry for the digression, but it is important for union workers to realize, that their votes did not buy them any real loyalty.  Think about all the retirees, who lost 71% of their investment in Chrysler.  This is their pension, their retirement, they had every legal right to count on.  But with one decision of King Obama, the money is stolen and given to Fiat, the government and some of their union brethren.  What a tangled web we weave!

Back to the story at hand.  We have a President who by his words, has cast a disparaging picture of all law enforcement, based on a complete lack of understanding of the facts.   He is the one who has profiled and done so egregiously.  Yet, we have no real apology or effort to make it right.  See the following article for great coverage of this:

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=104935