Articles & Correspondence by Dan Spalding

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

See an Audiologist!

February 23, 2010

President Barack Obama

cc:: Senator Bill Nelson, Congresswoman Suzanne Kosmas, Senator George LeMieux

Dear President Obama:

Please, I beg you, see an audiologist immediately!

It is very concerning to have read the summary of your healthcare plan only to learn that you cannot hear the majority of the American citizenry who are quite loudly rejecting any plan that remotely looks like either the Senate or House versions.

Why do you think compromise of the two plans will be any more favorably received? Oh, wait. I forgot. You’re deaf, so how would you know?

Still, duty demands that you be informed your untreated affliction is going to take down your beloved Democratic party and maybe the country with it.

Oh, well. I’ve tried, but you’re probably blind, too.

God save the Republic!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

On Federal Healthcare Reform
The Ghost of Patrick Henry, January 20, 2010

The questing before the House [and Senate] is one of awful moment to this country. For my own part, I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery… Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country…

… it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. [And a majority did in the last presidential election]…

…I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past. And judging by the past, I wish to know what there has been in the conduct of [progressives, liberals, socialists, communists, fascists and collectivists of all ilk]… to justify those hopes with which [Democrat leaders] have been pleased to solace themselves [in] the House [and Senate]…. Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves. Sir, we have done everything that could be done to avert the storm which is now coming on. We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we … have implored [Presidential] interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the [Federal bureaucracy to be established by the House and Senate]. Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional… insult; [we] have been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with contempt, from the… [President and his minions]! In vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of… reconciliation. There is no longer any room for hope. If we wish to be free-- if we mean to preserve inviolate [our unalienable rights]… --if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle --we must fight [with our voices and our votes]! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! [Speak out!] An appeal to [voting]… is all that is left us!

They tell us, sir, that we are weak; unable to cope with so formidable an adversary [as the Chicago political machine]. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when [an Acorn or SEIU] guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance by lying supinely on our backs and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have [denied us the vote and the right of free speech on the airways]? Sir, we are not weak if we make a proper use of those means which the God of nature [and our forbearers] hath placed in our power. The millions of people, [fired up] in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us… The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. …There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are being forged [in the House and Senate]! [Yesterday, a response to] their clanking [was] heard on the plains of Boston! …

It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace-- but there is no peace. …[The] gale [of press coverage] that sweeps from the north [has brought] to our ears the [crash] of [dynastic political machinery]! Our brethren are already in the [voting booth]! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Conditional Call for Impeachment

Cc:  Congresswoman Suzanne Kosmas, Senator Bill Nelson, Senator George LeMieux,
       Chief Justice John Roberts

December 29, 2009

President Barack Obama
The Whitehouse

Dear Mr. President:

It is my understanding that in the early days of The Republic the Presidents vetoed those bills they believed were unconstitutional.  It was not money that was at stake.  It was freedom.

You will likely have an opportunity to rise to your predecessors’ example.

Should the greatest beacon of freedom the world has ever known, our nation, have thrown off the tyranny arising from the divine right of kings merely to be enslaved by the tyranny of the Congress?

A bill requiring the purchase of a product or service merely because one exists is suited not to a nation of free men, but rather to one of subjects.  It is a tax on existence.  It turns the inalienable right to life into a privilege of government.  Such provision is clearly not constitutional no matter what the corrupted Senatorial majority of small people and minor kings have voted.

I implore you.  Use reason to throw off the lies of your own indoctrination.  You must veto every bill containing a provision requiring the purchase of healthcare insurance or having any other similar requirements.

Sincerely,

Richard D. Spalding

P.S.  If you fail to carry out your constitutional duty in this regard, thereby breaking your oath, I am, hereby, instructing my representative to initiate argument for your impeachment.

P.P.S.  If you can cite for me convincing Constitutional authority for Federal regulation of intrastate healthcare, and particularly for the Federal mandated purchase of health insurance, I shall withdraw my constitutional argument.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Harry Reid Graciously Allows State "Opt Out"

By Dan Spalding,  October 26, 2009

Governor Charlie Crist:                                              Cc:  Senator Bill Nelson
                                                                                           Senator George LeMieux

Dear Governor Crist:

Outrage and tyranny!

Senator Harry Reid today graciously allows that States will be able to “opt out” of using the Senate Democrats’ premised federal government health care insurance system.  What temerity! 

Government health insurance is unconstitutional.  When challenged to explain how it can be otherwise there is only silence from both the U.S. Senate and House.  It adds insult to injury to suppose, as does Senator Reid’s cheeky statement, that the States could be REQUIRED to participate in the upcoming legislative abomination.

You and all the other Governors should rise up.  Rise up, I tell you!  Directly confront the tyrants.  Explain that they shall not presume to levy unconstitutional obligations of any kind on any or all of the States.  Do it publicly!

If the Democrats in Congress keep up this nonsense it will be a miracle if any of them remain after the 2010 elections.

God save the Republic.

Sincerely,

Richard Spalding

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Letter to Senators and Members of Congress on Anita Dunn

By Dan Spalding,  October 14, 2009

This evening I have seen a video of Ms. Anita Dunn, who I understand is charged by the White House with making sure Fox News is not lying, and who has publicly accused it of not providing real information.  The video shows Ms. Dunn talking to high school students, in what appears to be a church setting, wherein she describes Mao Tse-Tung as one of two of her “favorite political philosophers”.

Perhaps Ms. Dunn wishes we did not know that Mao, like Hitler and Stalin, was responsible for the murder of literally tens of millions of his own people.

Who is it that is populating the White House with communists like Dunn and Jones?  Do you not have a duty to ask?  Are you not concerned that President Obama is being ill served?

The other cited favorite political philosopher of Ms. Dunn was Mother Theresa.  I seriously doubt Mother Theresa was a political philosopher.  Further, using Mother Theresa juxtaposition to the human butcher, Mao, poses a grossly false moral equivalency.  No matter to a lying communist, no doubt.  This is especially true, I’m sure, when the task at hand is the poisoning of our children’s minds.  DO YOU GIVE A DARN?

P.S.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Letter to President Obama Regarding Congressional Mandates

By Dan Spalding,  September 23, 2009

Dear President Obama:                                                       Cc: Senator Bill Nelson
                                                                                                        Senator George LeMeuix
                                                                                                        Congresswoman Suzanne Kosmas
                                                                                                        Speaker Nanci Pelosi
                                                                                                        The Washington Post
                                                                                                        The Orlando Sentinel

I am most distressed that the House and Senate seem hell bent on putting you into the very embarrassing position of either signing into law a clearly unconstitutional measure or rejecting the Democratic Party’s basic orientation.  I have written Speaker Pelosi about this, but she is very busy and has not advised me she has taken action on it.  Perhaps you can prevail on her and Senator Reid to stop while the issue is merely a potential, rather than a real, problem.

I write, of course, about the thrust to REQUIRE purchase of health insurance.  Such an undignified mandate is not worthy of a government of free men, but is, rather, one suited to the governing of slaves and subjects.  I see no power under Article I Section 8 of the Constitution authorizing the Congress to do any such thing.  That is one facet of the problem.  The more troubling facet is that if the usurpers actually exercise this unconstitutional power then all of the following items can also be mandated by the Congress.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Letter to Suzanne Kosmas Regarding Czars

By Dan Spalding,  September 7, 2009

Dear Congresswoman Suzanne Kosmas:

Fox News background checkers are wrong.  This morning, Fox anchors have asserted that U.S. Senate confirmation for Presidential appointees, commonly called “Czars”, is not required.

U.S. Constitution, Article II, Section 2 (Excerpt)
“[The President] shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, … 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,…”

Government minister – a person appointed to a high office in government.

Clearly, “czars” are ministers.

Given your oath of office you have no choice, but to support, and vote for, H.R. 3226, “CZAR Accountability Act of 2009”.  Please do so.  It is time to curtail the runaway executive branch!

Regards,

Richard D. Spalding
<contact information removed to support wide distribution>

Cc: Senator Bill Nelson, The Orlando Sentinel

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Letter to President Barack Obama Regarding Van Jones

By Dan Spalding,  September 2, 2009

Dear President Obama:
I presume you are unaware that your Green Jobs Advisor (Czar?), Van Jones, reportedly has a criminal background and that he is a self avowed communist.
As recently as this past March, Mr. Jones was video recorded saying, “Give them [native americans] the wealth!”  This begs the question, from whom will the wealth be confiscated and why?   Further, combining a previous video recorded statement wherein Mr. Jones said, “white polluters and environmental activists are pushing toxins into the black community,” with his last March statement, “we are spraying poison on them [illegal immigrants] because we have the wrong agricultural system” is a chilling intellectual exercise.

You must

If you do not do this, then the Congress has a duty to remove you from office for failure to abide by your oath.
Why? Allowing criminals to serve in government is an outrage.  Racism in government is antithetical to the Constitution and badly serves the advances that have been made against it in over 200+ years.  Communists cannot abide the Constitution’s protection of the individual, as an individual, and its underpinning in the rights to private property and general freedom effected through constrained government.  Communists look to undo, not protect and defend, the Constitution.   Your and Congress’s duty is to not afford them the opportunity to do so from within our own government.
Sincerely,
Richard D. Spalding
<contact information removed to support wide distribution>

Cc:  Congresswoman Nanci Pelosi, Congresswoman Suzanne Kosmas, Senator Harry Reid, Senator Bill Nelson, Senator George LeMieux, various newspapers

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

A Speech Not Given

By Dan Spalding,  August 30, 2009

What’s in a name?

Liberal, Socialist, Progressive, Communist, Marxist… All these labels are other names for what they really are, collectivist.  And they are dangerous.

Why are collectivists dangerous?

They see the individual – YOU! – as an expendable servant to the supposed superior judgment of the government collective.

Collectivists kill the American Dream of becoming better off through ones own honest work because Collectivism makes everyone equally poor.

What weirdly twisted thing do all the following people have in common?

Karl Marx, Vladimir Lenin, Benito Mussolini, Adolph Hitler, Mao Tse Tung, Ho Chi Minh, Fidel Castro, Yaasar Arafat, Pol Pot, Osama Bin Laden, Saddam Hussein.

No, the answer is not their socialist bent.  That is too obvious.

They all believed they were “doing good” by their actions!

In 1983 I was privileged to have a Veteran of the Pacific Theater in WWII work for me.  He repeatedly pointed out, “I’d rather elect a crook than a do-gooder.”  At the time that seemed strange.  It no longer does.

The most dangerous government is one made up of do-gooder, crook, collectivists!  And that is exactly what our supposed “two” party system, along with a cooperative media, has put into power.

Do not be fooled into supporting government collective healthcare or health insurance to do good for the uninsured.

Do not be fooled into supporting carbon emission control schemes known as “cap and trade” to do good for the planet.

Do not be fooled into supporting unsecret union balloting known as “card check” to do good for the workers.

STAY VIGILANT!  SPEAK UP!  DO SO IN PERSON, IN THE MAIL, ON THE PHONE, AND IN E-MAIL! 

AND, MOST IMPORTANTLY, REMOVE THE DO-GOODERS FROM PUBLIC OFFICE AT EVERY OPPORTUNITY.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

August 20, 2009

Dear Congresswoman Kosmas:

Thank you for taking an hour or so of your valuable time to conduct your telephonic town meeting relating to government healthcare last evening Wednesday, August 19, 2009.  You may appreciate having these few perhaps unworthy observations relating to it.

The use of the telephonic electronic polling on particular related topics during the “meeting” was an interesting use of technology.  Why did you not ask us, “Do you want the federal government to enact new healthcare reform legislation?”  Or, “Do you favor the federal government being a healthcare provider?”  Could it be you do not care about our opinions on the overall subject?  Or, is it that you think the people that elect you are too ignorant or too stupid to have a rational judgment on this overall subject?

By the way, given the state of technology, it is clearly possible the facilitators who determined which questioners were selected could know at least the political party affiliation of each caller in advance.  Did they?

Why was the premise of the “meeting” centered on “do [we] have a question for you?”  Is it your view that town hall “meetings” are conducted merely so you can correct your constituent’s “misunderstandings” of the social engineering legislation that is being proposed?  Why not say, “if you have an opinion you’d like me to hear or a question then press star 3?”  If you did that you’d likely receive voter direction for your actions.  Don’t you favor democracy?

Falling into the “trap” of having to ask a question, mine was going to be, “What is the U.S. Constitution’s authorization for Congress to enact government healthcare or healthcare regulation?”  If you cannot cite such authorization aren’t you, and every other Representative and Senator as well as the President, obligated by your oath to vote against all such legislation?  And, if you do not vote against unconstitutional legislation, aren’t we, the sovereign people, dutifully obligated to remove you, our supposed representative, from office?

In answer to a couple of questions you said that the new healthcare programs would be paid for through the elimination of waste, fraud, and abuse, rather than through tax increases.  Clearly you are referring to the existing Federal government healthcare / health insurance programs in this respect. Yes?  It seems to me you must be because, surely the newly proposed legislation will be set up to not support waste, fraud, and abuse.  Right?  Anyway, why not merely eliminate the waste, fraud, and abuse in the existing programs.  New government healthcare programs aren’t needed to do that. Right?

Why did you not engage in at least some dialogue with your questioning constituents?  Answering a question without allowing the questioner an opportunity to say, at least, “You did not answer my question” is a technique that tends to make the meeting merely a platform from which you get to espouse your positions without much challenge.  This seems to me to be a form of opinion manipulation.  Was that the intent of the forum?

Another question I had was, “Are you going to vote against all healthcare legislation that does not include an explicit prohibition on the use of an individual’s age to assess his or her societal value when determining if a medical action is authorized?”  You know, the kind of system advocated by Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, who is a health care adviser to the President, and who, according to an internet source, wrote in a 2008 article, “Vague promises of savings from cutting waste, enhancing prevention and wellness, installing electronic medical records and improving quality are merely 'lipstick' cost control, more for show and public relations than for true change.”  Do you not wish to especially consider this particular view or Dr. Emanuel considering your own statements along these lines?

This begs yet another question, “Have you studied the views of Dr. Emanuel and do you agree with them enough that you could see Dr. Emanuel playing a key role in the new government healthcare system?” If you are unaware of Dr. Emanuel’s views, you can read more on them as they relate to a ‘Complete Life System’ for rationing scarce healthcare resources at http://pfarrerstreccius.blogspot.com/2009/08/obamacares-complete-lives-system.html

I sincerely hope some of these questions are useful to you in deciding to vote against all new federal government healthcare and health insurance proposals.

Regards,

Richard D. Spalding

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The following unsolicited comments were recently received from a long-ago Marine Sergeant who Dan Spalding had audit parts of main House Bill on healthcare reform.

“Well, those pages you had me read are the equivalent of the "Enabling Act" of Germany, giving uncontrolled power to virtual dictators.”

“Lastly, I had the thought recently that if we cave and adopt NHS [National Health Service], it will have an unseen, deadly effect.  Once there is no longer a free market to innovate drugs, equipment and procedures, and once the profit incentive is gone from being a doctor or bio-medical engineer, health care innovation will slow to a crawl.  There is no other place on earth where there is a free market for innovation in medicine.  Companies come here from Europe, because they cannot operate there except under the extreme socialist structure.  So the unseen effect of NHS will be to kill people who would otherwise be saved by our innovation.” 

August 3, 2009

Senator Max Baucus:

An argument you have likely not heard, before. Please pay attention.

Our government – you – are instituted “… to secure [our] [unalienable] rights…” The right to be uncharitable or charitable is unalienable. Charity, or lack of it, emanates from one’s personal belief and action and is, in fact, inseparable from the individual. If the government – you – force a citizen to be charitable it directly contravenes the government’s – your – reason for being and it is a gross violation of the citizenry’s authorization to you under the Constitution.

When one receives healthcare for which one does not pay full free market price, or if it is provided free of charge, such healthcare is obtained only through charity.

No more government healthcare or health insurance plans! Get the government out of all healthcare and health insurance.

GOVERNMENT HEALTHCARE AND HEALTH INSURANCE ARE UNAUTHORIZED ABROGATIONS OF THE GOVERNMENT’S DUTY TO PROTECT OUR UNALIENABLE RIGHTS.

BESIDES THAT IT IS, AND WILL BE, A DISASTER.

D O Y O U R D U T Y!

Your website statement “It is the duty of the next President and the next Congress to reform America’s health care system. In 2009, Congress must take up and act on meaningful health reform legislation that achieves universal coverage while also addressing the underlying problems in our health system. The urgency of this task has become undeniable” is demonstrably a fallacy and you should immediately remove it.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Will Florida secede from the federal health care reform union?

Floridians should hope so! The Tenth Amendment Center.com reported on Wednesday that the Florida legislature has introduced a state constitutional amendment HJR37 that would guard Floridians from any federal government imposed health care policies. The proposed amendment was introduced by Florida State Senator Carey Baker R-Eustis and State Representative Scott Plakon R-Longwood.

HJR37 would protect Floridians and Florida businesses from the ability of any new federal law to impose demands, restrictions or penalties on health care choices for Floridians. Baker and Plakon believe this action is necessary due to insurance coverage mandates that are included in some of the versions of proposed federal health care reform legislation.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

During the week of July 20, 2009, Dan Spalding provided the following information to his U.S. Representative with respect to HR3200, The House version of the Healthcare Bill.

I have received in my e-mail a message indicating about 71 exceedingly bad characteristics of the House healthcare bill (HR3200). Not trusting such things, I have obtained a copy of the bill and I am, along with some other citizens, auditing these professed bad characteristics. The audit is incomplete, but early results indicated that IF YOU VOTE FOR ANYTHING LIKE THIS BILL YOU ARE CREATING A NIGHTMARE FOR US.

Specifically, the audit has the following results relative to 15 of the randomly selected critiques in the received e-mail. EIGHTY percent of the items are judged TRUE and SIXTY SEVEN percent are judged BAD.

Tomorrow I shall be providing a copy of the subject e-mail with its cited bad characteristics to your local office as well as this communication in an attempt to have you actually pay attention to this abomination of legislation.

Having personally reviewed parts of this bill I can only say that I sympathize with those who might like to not study it. What a chore! IT IS HARD TO CONCEIVE HOW ANYONE WITH GOOD INTENT COULD THINK THIS MONSTROSITY OUGHT TO BE PASSED QUICKLY! The President is either a fool or he is complicit in trying to swindle The People and the Congress.

DO YOUR DUTY!!!

UPDATE:

Not yet sent is the following update to the data presented. The more the assertions against the bill are reviewed the worse the Bill becomes!

Bad assertions audited: 30 (almost ½ of total). True: 88%. False: 12%. Bad: 76%.

Auditors, thus far, have included: A Software Engineer, Army Helicopter Pilot Vietnam veteran; A computer company executive, entrepreneur, Marine Corps Reserve veteran; A bank network technical specialist, grandma; A computer training specialist, retired professional Army officer.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

There Is No Right to Healthcare!

(Letter sent to Senators and Representative)

You are on a desert island.

There are three other people with you… a mother, her teenage daughter, and an unrelated teenage girl. You have the only gun. The mother has the only aspirin… a single pill.

You are out of earshot from the others and busy gathering wood to make a fire. The unrelated girl pleads with the mother, “Wow! I have a wicked headache. I need the aspirin. Please give it to me?”

“No”, the mother says somewhat regretfully, “I am saving the aspirin for my daughter or myself in case one of us becomes ill.”

The unrelated girl walks over to you, gets your attention, and petitions, “Make that woman give me her aspirin. I have a killer headache and I need it.”

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

Healthcare is provided to you by other people. It is not your right to make them give it to you. To do so, would violate the other people’s unalienable rights. It matters not if the “making” is direct or indirect (through a third party). Healthcare providers can attend to others voluntarily for free or in fair exchange of value, or they can attend to others under threat of, or actual, force. The latter option is not worthy of a civil society. Further, how good will healthcare be that is provided under threat of or actual force?

By the way, in the short analogy, if you are the government and running healthcare programs, you use the threat of your gun to take the aspirin from the mother to meet the current “needs” of the girl, you put 60% of the pill in your pocket, you wait a day or two (after all, you are busy with important stuff), and then you give the girl the remaining 40% while telling her, “Look what a great job I do for you.” After a month or so, because the mother has forgotten you’re the one with the gun, you look her in the eye and say, “Hey, if you ever need aspirin, I’ve got you covered. Look what a great job I do for you.”

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Email Response to President Obama

Dear President Obama: Thank you for e-mailing me your glowing observations about your Supreme Court Justice nominee, Judge Sonia Sotomayor, and asking me to forward it to other citizens. INCREDIBLE! My observation is that, not only is judge Sotomayor one who thinks racial bias helps make one a good judge, but she has the audacity of contempt to deny to our Senate her documented views. YOU SHOULD WITHDRAW JUDGE SOTOMAYOR’S NOMINATION IMMEDIATELY.

Sincerely, Dan Spalding, July 15, 2009

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Deeper Thoughts:  Moving from Democracy to Dictatorship?1

By Dan Spalding,  July 6, 2009

The current Congressional majority and the President have a strong inclination to think they can enact plans for the American economy that are superior to the independent market place (each of us acting in our own best interests within the rule of law).  They are taking actions to back up their inclinations.  Your freedom is in danger from those actions.  A long time ago it was explained why you are now in danger.

“In these instances delegation means that some authority is given power to make with the force of law what to all intents and purposes are arbitrary decisions (usually described as “judging the case on its merits").  …Even if by this expedient [of delegating economic planning for various parts of the economy] should succeed in planning every sector of economic activity, it would still have to face the problem of integrating these separate plans into a unary whole.  Many separate plans do not make a whole - …But the democratic legislature will long hesitate to relinquish the decisions on really vital issues, and so long as it does so it makes it impossible for anyone else to provide the comprehensive plan. …the inability of democratic assemblies to produce a plan will evoke stronger and stronger demands that the government or some single individual should be given powers to act on their own responsibility.  The belief [becomes] more and more widespread that, if things are to get done, the responsible authorities must be freed from the fetters of democratic procedure.”

“The cry for an economic dictator is a characteristic stage in the movement toward [centralized government] planning.”

“[A virtual dictator does] not have to destroy democracy; he merely [need take] advantage of the decay of democracy and at the critical moment [obtain the support of many… as] he [seems to be] the only man strong enough to get things done.”

Lest you think this writing is too old to be pertinent here are some up to date observations in its regard.

“In these instances delegation means that some authority is given power to make with the force of law what to all intents and purposes are arbitrary decisions (usually described as “judging the case on its merits").  [Current Example: deciding what businesses get bailed out and which do not.]  …Even if by this expedient [of delegating economic planning for various parts of the economy {Current Example:  multiple presidential administrative ‘czars’}] should succeed in planning every sector of economic activity, it would still have to face the problem of integrating these separate plans into a unary whole.  Many separate plans do not make a whole - …But the democratic legislature [Current Example: Congress] will long hesitate to relinquish the decisions on really vital issues [Current Example: government policy determining who can buy a house, or now, health care planning], and so long as it does so it makes it impossible for anyone else to provide the comprehensive plan. …the inability of democratic assemblies to produce a plan [due to their serving multitudes of special interests] will evoke stronger and stronger demands that the government or some single individual should be given powers to act on their own responsibility.  The belief [becomes] more and more widespread that, if things are to get done, the responsible authorities must be freed from the fetters of democratic procedure.”

“The cry for an economic dictator [emphasis, Spalding] is a characteristic stage in the movement toward [centralized government] planning.” [Current Example:  paraphrase of Sam Donaldson comment on the radio the week of July 1, 2009 – The health care plan is in trouble because the various parts of congress cannot agree.  Pretty soon Obama will have to step in and tell them how things are going to be.]

“[A virtual dictator does] not have to destroy democracy; he merely [need take] advantage of the decay of democracy and at the critical moment [Current Example: As related by an Obama Administration key figure, “do not allow a good crisis to go to waste”] [obtain the support of many… as] he [seems to be] the only man strong enough to get things done.”

1  Quotes are excerpts from “The Road to Serfdom”, by F.A. Hayek, 1944, Chapter 5, Planning and Democracy.  Blue text is Dan Spalding commentary. 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

You Live in a Village

By Dan Spalding,  June 22, 2009

Imagine you live in a village.

The village is greatly indebted to Attila the Hun, but can no longer pay him.  Attila sends messages to your village that he is coming.  You know this means he is going to kill everything - men, women, children, babies, goats, cats, and dogs.  Most importantly, to you, this means you, too.

The village selects a great leader who promises he has a way to deal with the threat.  With unprecedented fanfare and self confidence the leader moves outside the village walls to better protect those behind.  The village toils mightily in preparation.  It sheds blood and treasure to provide the leader with a magic sword and shield.   Already, and by itself, the sword, can kill thousands, including Attila himself!  But, alas, the shield isn’t quite finished.   You watch in horror as Attila’s rampaging hordes crest the nearest hill at the gallop.  No doubt you perceive they are heading directly at you.

     “Quick, quick”, you say along with the rest of the villagers.  “Let us patch the holes in the shield so that it will ward off more of Attila’s arrows!”

     “No, no, friends”, the leader counsels reassuringly.  “That is not necessary.  As I have told you, I have a better plan.”

And, with that statement the leader, standing tall, resolute, and facing what appears to be approaching village doom, throws aside the sword and, then, deliberately, he drops the shield at his feet.  He stands apparently defenseless.  You anxiously await the magic the leader will summon to protect you.  Above the now almost deafening roar of Attila’s army you hear your leader shout.  He strains to be heard above the din.  He cups his hands around his mouth to form a crude megaphone and his great words ring out…

    “Let’s talk,” he pleads.

Your village is America.

The sword is the country’s nuclear weapons.

The shield is the country’s ballistic missile defense.

And, of course, your leader is Barrack Obama.

Pick your own Attila.  There are many from which to choose.

Sleep well.