Haven’t posted in a while. Demoralized. A couple of months ago, I thought to myself, “Well, this isn’t as bad as I thought.” Recently, that’s changed to, “Wow, this is far worse than I could have imagined.” Banks and car industries nationalized. Embryos being harvested for stem cells. Massive deficits. Weakness on defense and a rollback of liberty throughout the world (sorry, Iranian protesters, that we weren’t there for you). Huge increases in utility prices, at the cost of American manufacturing competitiveness. The prospect of socialized medicine. A census that violates the people’s privacy and will feature ACORN going door to door.

…and it’s only been 6 months. How much worse is it going to get? The mind boggles.

What is there to say? I told you so? It was no secret what Mr. Obama was–the community organizer, the Senator who had a more liberal voting record than the one avowed Socialist in the Senate. Everyone knew who he was, but the 52 voted for him because he talked pretty. As Public Image Limited said, “This is what you want, this is what you get.” I only hope the 52 enjoy their years of economic hardship that Mr. Obama’s transnational progressive policies are designed to bring.

No Reagan without a Carter. I just hope we make it until then. Awful, just awful.

Having said that, I’ve got a camera full of pictures I need to upload. I think I’ll stick with those for a while.

Advertisements

Millionaire Socialist Michael Moore is a big fan of Mr. Obama’s recent firing of the head of General Motors.

In the link above, he describes a vignette where he went to see The Constitution at the National Archive.

What he doesn’t mention is what part of the Constitution gives the President the authority to fire the CEO of a private business. The powers enumerated to the Executive Branch are quite limited, so I’ll include them below:

Article II – The Executive Branch Note

Section 1 – The President Note1 Note2

The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together with the Vice-President chosen for the same Term, be elected, as follows:

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.

(The Electors shall meet in their respective States, and vote by Ballot for two persons, of whom one at least shall not lie an Inhabitant of the same State with themselves. And they shall make a List of all the Persons voted for, and of the Number of Votes for each; which List they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the Seat of the Government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate. The President of the Senate shall, in the Presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the Certificates, and the Votes shall then be counted. The Person having the greatest Number of Votes shall be the President, if such Number be a Majority of the whole Number of Electors appointed; and if there be more than one who have such Majority, and have an equal Number of Votes, then the House of Representatives shall immediately chuse by Ballot one of them for President; and if no Person have a Majority, then from the five highest on the List the said House shall in like Manner chuse the President. But in chusing the President, the Votes shall be taken by States, the Representation from each State having one Vote; a quorum for this Purpose shall consist of a Member or Members from two-thirds of the States, and a Majority of all the States shall be necessary to a Choice. In every Case, after the Choice of the President, the Person having the greatest Number of Votes of the Electors shall be the Vice President. But if there should remain two or more who have equal Votes, the Senate shall chuse from them by Ballot the Vice-President.) (This clause in parentheses was superseded by the 12th Amendment.)

The Congress may determine the Time of chusing the Electors, and the Day on which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the United States.

No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

(In Case of the Removal of the President from Office, or of his Death, Resignation, or Inability to discharge the Powers and Duties of the said Office, the same shall devolve on the Vice President, and the Congress may by Law provide for the Case of Removal, Death, Resignation or Inability, both of the President and Vice President, declaring what Officer shall then act as President, and such Officer shall act accordingly, until the Disability be removed, or a President shall be elected.) (This clause in parentheses has been modified by the 20th and 25th Amendments.)

The President shall, at stated Times, receive for his Services, a Compensation, which shall neither be increased nor diminished during the Period for which he shall have been elected, and he shall not receive within that Period any other Emolument from the United States, or any of them.

Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:

“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

Section 2 – Civilian Power over Military, Cabinet, Pardon Power, Appointments

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to Grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.

Section 3 – State of the Union, Convening Congress

He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in Case of Disagreement between them, with Respect to the Time of Adjournment, he may adjourn them to such Time as he shall think proper; he shall receive Ambassadors and other public Ministers; he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed, and shall Commission all the Officers of the United States.

Section 4 – Disqualification

The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

I missed the part where the firing was constitutional.

But remember, folks–Michael Moore has earned every penny of his bloated…savings account. Why, it would be wrong to cap how much money HE can make. He’s an ARTIST, for Pete’s sake. He’d grab his Big Mac and a torch and pitchfork were the executive branch to ever attempt to cap his salary. He’d be screaming about tyranny if Bush had ever fired, say, the head of Air America (or perhaps, more aptly, the head of National Public Radio, since they take taxpayer money).

Funny how that works….

If something is wrong, it’s wrong regardless of whether it was done by someone you like, Mr. Moore. It just goes to show, if you give this kind of power to the government, you cannot be surprised when they wield it against you. The government that has the power to give you everthing can take everything away.

I was not in favor of bailouts for anyone, regardless of whether it was President Bush or Mr. Obama doing the bailing. I don’t believe in “too big to fail” and I was convinced from the outset that GM was doomed. Regardless of all that, Mr. Obama had no authority to fire Mr. Wagoner.

Glenn Beck made the point today that what we’re seeing isn’t so much Socialism as Fascism–not the Fascism that ends in concentration camps and guys calling themselves Il Duce, but an unhealthy alliance of business and government, and increasingly onerous rules put on the people for “the national good.” I’ll need to think on that for a while. Mr. Obama is the child of two Socialists, was mentored by Socialist Frank Marshall Davis growing up, wrote in his books about how he identified with the Socialists in college, became a community organizer, got his start in Chicago politics with the socialist New Party, worked with Socialists Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn, and was rated a more liberal Senator than the Senate’s one avowed Socialist. That’s a lot of evidence for Socialism rather than fascism. I think Mr. Obama’s meddling in business is a means to an end, not an end in itself. It’s an interesting theory, though, and there’s obviously a continuum there.

N.B. This is NOT saying “Obama is Hitler” or “Obama is Mussolini.” Obviously, this tendency has been growing in government for some time, under both parties. The rot is going deeper, that’s for sure, but it can’t be placed solely at Mr. Obama’s feet.

You have to give the Democrats credit–THIS is how they won. Young people, and ACORN, and any number of lefties actually going out there with missionary zeal and telling people about how The One has a wonderful plan for their lives. The Right couldn’t match that: due to a flawed primary system, we ended up with a candidate very few of us could get worked up about. Republicans were excited about Giuliani and Thompson, but they both ran the saddest and most pathetic of campaigns. I gave every dime I could, and I held my nose and voted for John McCain Sarah Palin, but only because I KNEW what 4 years of Socialist rule would do to this country. The Republicans didn’t bother to try to warn the people, and the left did the above–send shiny, happy, positive, well-scrubbed youth out to spread the good news.

Is it all a bunch of Alinskyite hogwash? Sure. Are many of The One’s youthful supporters going to put down the bong and go and ring doorbells every weekend over something as dull as a trillion-dollar budget? Probably not. But some will, and as the video points out, it’s not so much to get support for the budget as it is to populate that database with people who can be counted on to support Mr. Obama. It’s a creepy cult of personality, and it has a specific goal–get Obama re-elected in 2012. I have to hand it to the Community Organizer–he’s probably the most successful community organizer the world has ever known.

These are the people who will be doing the census next year–leftists who love to populate their databases. Should be a fun year. What could possibly go wrong?

Please, please, please let one of these naifs come visit the Gulch. I’d love to plumb the depths of their knowledge about the Obama Plan. I suspect it won’t take long.

Wow, that’s a lot of logo in that video. Take a drink each time you see the O. See you at the Betty Ford Center.

Feinstein: Don’t Spoil Our Deserts With Solar Panels

I love it when lefties come out against green energy, maybe because I love the smell of hypocrisy in the morning. Smells like…Democrats.

Senator Feinstein doesn’t want solar panels in the California desert because some tortoises may be inconvenienced.

Puts me in the mind of a film I recently saw. My dad loves Omnimax films; he has ever since I took him to see ‘Everest’. So, I took him to see “Colorado: River At Risk,” even though I knew in my heart it was going to be manmade global warming propaganda.

All I can say is, bring your headphones and listen to music while you watch the film, which is beautiful if you ignore the propaganda. Film is narrated by Robert Redford, but he actually speaks very little. Most of it is about anthropologist Wade Davis (author of “Serpent and the Rainbow,” which became a pretty cool horror flick in the 80s) and his hot, privileged daughter whitewater rafting down the Colorado with Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. (!) and his hot, privileged daughter. (When Bobby Kennedy Jr. got into the raft, I turned to dad and said “Hey, look, another Kennedy who’s good in the water!” My elderly dad, another evil right-winger, LOLled.)

Anyway, much railing against the Glen Canyon and Hoover Dams and the wicked ways of Las Vegas ensued. At the end of the film, the hot, privileged daughters told us how to save the earth through low-flow toilets, expensive irrigation methods, planting cactus in our front yards, and proper car-washing techniques.

Here’s the thing, though. Bobby Kennedy Jr. railed against putting a wind farm out in the Atlantic Ocean because it would destroy the view from his family’s multi-million dollar compound.

So let’s work our way through various energy methods and see which ones the watemelons (green on the outside, red on the inside) approve of:

  • Foreign oil? Nope
  • Domestic oil? Oh, hell to the no
  • Natural gas? No
  • Coal? Please
  • Nuclear? Argggh, scary atoms!
  • Wind? Turbines ruin the Kennedys’ view and kill birds, so no
  • Solar? Inconveniences tortoises in the desert, so no
  • Hydropower? No, dams are evil
  • Wood-burning? You know that kills trees, poor innocent trees, right?

And so we get to the point. Liberals don’t care about saving the earth. Just as they long to enforce a climate stasis on the earth that the planet has NEVER known, so too are they opposed to ANY form of energy use…by the United States. If they truly cared about the environment, they’d put pressure on the greatest polluters in the world–China, India, and Russia–rather than constantly tying the hands of Americans. Literally NO form of energy is agreeable to them. We can’t put solar panels where the sun shines most, and we can’t put wind turbines where the wind blows most. They’d be happier if we froze to death in the dark–would solve over-population and keep the view nice for privileged liberals.

Another point: California is going down the tubes financially while it sits on at least $50 BILLION of oil that it refuses to drill. My give-a-damn is broken for California until it chooses to solve its own problems. If you’re broke while the second most valuable commodity in the world after gold literally wells up through the ground in Los Angeles, that’s your problem.

3000 Points

March 6, 2009

Ponder that number for a while.

Pretend you’re a member of the mainstream media. A Republican has been elected President. Between the election and SIX WEEKS after the inauguration, the Dow collapses from 9625 to below 6600. The retirement funds of millions of voters lose hundreds of billions in value.

Think there’d be hysterical stories playing constantly about the President? Think the loyal opposition would be screaming their heads off? Think the new GOP President would have an approval rating of about 1%? I do.

Funny how that’s not happening now. Mr. Obama’s approval rating sits at 60% after he passed the largest spending bill in history. Magazines and newspapers still celebrate the majesty of Mr. Obama and the First Lady. Mr. Obama feels so confident in his abilities that he’s working to nationalize health care.

Sometimes I think I’m living a nightmare. When I hear the words “President Obama” I still have a feeling of unreality about it. 52% of the people voted for a Socialist, the most liberal member of the Senate (Mr. Obama had a higher liberal rating than even avowed Socialist Bernie Sanders), during a recession. That man is now following his Alinskyite training to talk down the market and worsen the crisis to prepare the people for change. He has said he intends to bankrupt the coal industry. He has created a deficit that future generations will curse us for. His own Treasury Secretary is on the warpath against one of the few profitable businesses left. And a new spending bill and crippling taxes and fees on the productive are coming.

And that’s just his economic policies. We haven’t even gotten to the muzzling of free speech, the assault on the 2nd Amendment, the weakness and contempt on defense, and the stripping away of protections for the unborn and those whose consciences are repelled by abortion.

No Reagan without a Carter.

No Giuliani/Cantor without an Obama, I suppose. I just hope there’s a shell of a Republic left when the grownups take back the reins in 2013.

Gonna be a long four years. Prepare yourself–save cash, put aside supplies, be healthy.

And to the wealthy, the people who make this economy work: If I may paraphrase Francisco D’Anconia–

SHRUG!

Don’t let them loot from you. Get out–find somewhere free, while you may. We in America will be here to be the engine of the world once we wake up and throw off our enchantment with Socialism.

Change Has Come

January 22, 2009

(Written on Inauguration Day, and embargoed for a day in the interests of letting Mr. Obama and his voters enjoy their day)

I get it. I understand that today was an historic day. I understand the majesty of the peaceful transition of power. I felt chills when Aretha Franklin sang and Yo-Yo Ma played. I smiled at Sasha and Malia. I recognize the pride that Mr. Obama must have felt as the responsibilities of the free world settled on him.

I probably cannot fully appreciate the momentousness of the occasion for African-Americans. They probably never could have imagined that less than 150 years after the horrors of slavery were ended (by a Republican), less than 46 years after the Civil Rights Act was passed (by Republicans), and less than 42 years after the assassination of Dr. King (a Republican), that an African-American man would win the Presidency by a substantial margin. Standing in the Mall, seeing this happen, must have been like a dream. One can overlook the 87-year-old Rev. Lowery’s benediction, which he ended by hoping that “white will embrace what is right.” He is of the pre-civil rights era. I am of the post Civil Rights Act era, where racism has never been considered anything but vile, and I admit being hurt by the implication.

What astounded me, watching the proceedings, was the utter rapture of the million or so who came to witness. I cannot think of an inauguration in my lifetime with NO protests. I was astonished at the volume of the cheers. The love of so many for this man may truly be unprecedented.

Here’s the thing. I am incapable of being disappointed in Mr. Obama. I know what is coming: a drastic diminution of the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution; removal of all protection for the unborn and for those whose consciences forbid participation in abortion and in the creation of human life merely to harvest embryonic stem cells; the Fairness Doctrine; citizenship rights for illegal aliens; punitive taxes on the productive; the treatment of terrorism as crime rather than an act of war; the weakening of defense and intelligence; the rejection and isolation of Israel; more bail outs with coerced taxpayer money; continuing energy dependence; unconditional negotiation with our enemies; the unfettered growth of government control over the lives of the people. As these things happen, I won’t be surprised. If they don’t happen, I will be pleasantly surprised.

Some of Mr. Obama’s followers will be disappointed. Not all–these changes are what some of them want. “Some people just want to watch the world burn,” as it’s said in The Dark Knight. But when people still have to pay their mortgages; when the earth doesn’t cool; when evil men still want to hurt us for Allah despite our hopey changiness; when Socialism and punitive taxation don’t cure the problems that Big Government has wrought; some of those cheering on the Mall today will be disappointed. A lot of people voted for the pragmatic centrist–they’re going to be appalled when Mr. Obama governs in the only way he knows how–the way that made him the most liberal member of the Senate in his short tenure there. Mr. Obama cannot live up to the heroic estimation of his most ardent followers, or to the media. My opinion of him can only go up–theirs can only go down. That is the seed of the conservative revolutions of 2010 and 2012.

Some of the rapture today was a rest from history. We were shocked and scared when the terrorists committed atrocities on our own soil. We were tired of a war that a much-maligned Secretery of Defense warned us would be a long slog. We believed the media’s tales about how our economic woes were solely the result of evil capitalism. A majority of us freely voted for the man who promised to take war away, to deal with terrorism as crime, to win back “the world’s” love for us, to provide for our energy, health care, housing, and all our needs. On Inauguration Day, a million or so celebrated that break from history.

Just because we hide from reality, it doesn’t stop being there. When the people finally realize all they have voted for, the buyer’s remorse will be immense. May it not come too late.

Will conservatism be there to pick up the pieces? One can hope for the change.

*******************

From today, Obama Snubs Medal of Honor Ball. Change!

In “House, M.D.,” the irascible drug-addict genius doctor played by Hugh Laurie says this to long-suffering compassionate oncologist Dr. Wilson while locked out of his office. It’s also on an awesome t-shirt given to me for Christmas by a friend who just may know me too well. This also ties in well to the awesome fellow WordPress blog Stuff Geeks Love that posits that geeks like me adore obscure t-shirts, especially those related to television shows.

While wearing that shirt with pride the other night, I got to thinking about President Bush’s “compassionate conservatism.” Back when Saturday Night Live was funny, Mike Myers used to do a skit called “Coffee Talk with Linda Richman.” Once, she came up with a topic–“The Holy Roman Empire was neither holy, nor Roman, nor an empire. Discuss!”

Bush’s compassionate conservatism was neither compassionate nor conservative. “Compassionate” implies that conservatism without some mealy-mouthed modifier is not compassionate. That is ceding the moral high ground entirely too easily. What is NOT compassionate is creating an underclass of people dependent on the government, as liberalism has done. It’s not compassionate to try to push through an amnesty for illegal aliens; indeed, it’s cruel and unjust to those immigrants who follow the rules and obey the law. It’s not compassionate to combine with Senator Kennedy to create yet anther bloated public education establishment of dubious utility. It’s not compassionate to create a massive entitlement–the Medicare Drug coverage–out of thin air and lay more burdens on the taxpayer. It’s not compassionate to compel by force the Atlas of the American taxpayer to shoulder the burden of failed companies to the tune of trillions of hard-earned dollars.

Even when I was a liberal, President Clinton’s lip-biting statement of “I feel your pain” made me cringe. No, he didn’t. Furthermore, it’s not a President’s job to be “Pain-Feeler-in-Chief,” thank God. That way lies dependence, that way lies people lining up in front of the Superdome after Katrina without even a toothbrush or a container of water, expecting government manna to immediately fall from heaven. The government that feels your pain has enough power that it can cause it, as well.

It’s one of the many themes in Atlas Shrugged. The feckless socialist ninnies who took over the businesses talked about their high ideals and brother love as they drove their companies into the ground, ruining the lives of all employees…the most productive and creative employees first. The government kept sending ships full of aid to the “People’s States” of Europe as the lights dimmed and the people grew hungry in the US as a result of the relentless government attacks on productive people and business.

Consider the end of 2007. One of Mr. Obama’s famous whipping boys was the fact that Exxon Mobil made $11 billion in profits in one quarter. Exxon Mobil is a bad guy–un-compassionate, evil–in the minds of liberals. Profits are evil, unless they’re within the “reasonable” limits set by liberals.

But here’s the thing–we the taxpayers weren’t forced THIS year at gunpoint to give hundreds of billions of dollars to Exxon Mobil. They’re doing okay. Instead, two HIGHLY compassionate government-sponsored entities–Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac–enthusiastically gave mortgages for years to people who had no hope of paying for them. Of course they didn’t look too closely at the financials–that would have been discriminatory and un-compassionate. They ruined the lives of millions of otherwise decent people all in the name of “home ‘ownership’ for all.” How compassionate! How caring…right up until the point where the fairy dust collapsed and they brought down the entire economy. Earlier this year, we the people WERE forced at gunpoint to give hundreds of billions of dollars to these FAILURES, and to every other failure who came by with a hand out. It will continue this year, and when we the taxpayers are out of cash, why, first we’ll tax the “rich,” and then we’ll just print more. What could possibly go wrong?

Who is compassionate? The oil business that provides the fuel to run our economy, to power our cars, to do as we please? The company that hires people for good jobs, pays them good salaries and benefits, allowing them to lead the kind of lives we’d all like to have? The company that PAYS billions of taxes into government coffers instead of sucking it out? The company that doesn’t demand taxpayer money at gunpoint, but only offers a commodity for sale to free people? Or is it the government-sponsored company that lured people in with the promise of easy money and home ownership without effort, that offered the shining “American dream” of home ownership, only to collapse under its own contradictions, ruining millions and then demanding hundreds of billions of dollars in taxpayer largesse for their trouble?  

I’ll take the eeeeeeevil successful big business over the “compassionate” enterprise that’s demanding my money at gunpoint to fuel its failure while simulateously driving down the value of what little savings I’m allowed to achieve, any day of the week.

Back in 2001, then Illinois State Senator Barack Obama gave an interview on Chicago public radio station WBEZ FM. His Socialist economic positions and ignorance of the Constitution have never been more obvious:

http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2008/10/socialist-obama-talks-redistribution-of.html

TRANSCRIPT:

MODERATOR: Good morning and welcome to Odyssey on WBEZ Chicago 91.5 FM and we’re joined by Barack Obama who is Illinois State Senator from the 13th district and senior lecturer in the law school at the University of Chicago.

OBAMA: If you look at the victories and failures of the civil rights movement and its litigation strategy in the court, I think where it succeeded was to vest formal rights in previously dispossessed peoples. So that I would now have the right to vote, I would now be able to sit at the lunch counter and order and as long as I could pay for it I’d be okay.

But the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth and sort of more basic issues of political and economic justice in this society. And to that extent as radical as people tried to characterize the Warren court, it wasn’t that radical. It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution, at least as it’s been interpreted, and the Warren court interpreted it in the same way that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. It says what the states can’t do to you, it says what the federal government can’t do to you, but it doesn’t say what the federal government or the state government must do on your behalf. And that hasn’t shifted. One of the I think tragedies of the civil rights movement was because the civil rights movement became so court focused, I think that there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributed change and in some ways we still suffer from that.

MODERATOR: Let’s talk with Karen. Good morning, Karen, you’re on Chicago Public Radio.

KAREN: Hi. The gentleman made the point that the Warren court wasn’t terribly radical with economic changes. My question is, is it too late for that kind of reparative work economically and is that that the appropriate place for reparative economic work to take place – the court – or would it be legislation at this point?

OBAMA: Maybe I’m showing my bias here as a legislator as well as a law professor, but I’m not optimistic about bringing about major redistributive change through the courts. The institution just isn’t structured that way.

You just look at very rare examples during the desegregation era the court was willing to for example order changes that cost money to a local school district. The court was very uncomfortable with it. It was very hard to manage, it was hard to figure out. You start getting into all sorts of separation of powers issues in terms of the court monitoring or engaging in a process that essentially is administrative and takes a lot of time.

The court’s just not very good at it and politically it’s very hard to legitimize opinions from the court in that regard. So I think that although you can craft theoretical justifications for it legally. Any three of us sitting here could come up with a rational for bringing about economic change through the courts.

http://www.investmentnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081012/REG/310139971

So, if the Dem Congress forces this through:

1. Investors in 401(k) programs lose their tax breaks, as do their employers.

2. Employers stop the matching program.

3. People withdraw en masse from their 401(k)s. Stock market collapses for good.

4. People are made dependent on government.

Sigh. Most people of my age got into 401(k)s because we knew Social Security to be a Ponzi scheme that will collapse long before we are able to receive any benefit from it. Both parties are lying about the stability of Social Security. So, Congress, which has mismanaged one retirement program into the ground, wants to apply their tender mercies to another program. In the words of Peter Griffin, they can kiss the fattest part of my ass. If Congress tries to nationalize 401(k)s, I’ll close mine, taxes and penalties be damned, and buy a piece of land for Galt’s Gulch, and hold out until sanity returns to the body politic.

Keep your eyes on this story, and hope that there will be a Republican President to veto the worst of Congress’s ideas.