“Hell is full of good intentions or desires.”

~ Saint Bernard of Clairvaux (1091-1153)

 The American people do not like or trust Hillary Clinton.

For Hillary Clinton the feeling is mutual.

She actually believes she knows what is best for the American people–more government spending and higher taxes –an expanded welfare system and nanny state. 

Hillary Clinton: I Will Change Our Country 

“…Hillary Loves The 70s

As Hillary’s campaign platform demonstrates, she seeks to return the country to 1970s-style liberalism, with its limitless faith in the power of government to create a “fair” society in a world characterized by ecological crisis, a zero-sum economy, and diminishing expectations.  All of Hillary’s major domestic policy initiatives — socialized medicine, reduced energy consumption, mandating “equality” between the sexes — come straight from the Democratic playbook of that era.This was the worldview that Ronald Reagan confronted and defeated more than twenty-five years ago.  Reagan recognized that at the heart of contemporary liberalism lies a profound pessimism about the ability of ordinary Americans to manage their own lives in a responsible, productive, and decent manner.  Reagan rejected this pessimism with every fiber of his being.  This is what people really are referring to when they speak of Reagan’s “optimism.”Hillary Clinton will never be mistaken for an optimist like Reagan.  She clearly does not believe in the ability of the American people to govern their own lives, make their own decisions, and abide by the consequences of their actions.  Turning Reagan’s famous aphorism on its head, Hillary believes that government is not the problem, it is the solution.In 1980 the American people stood up and loudly proclaimed that they still believed in a country based on individual liberty, self-reliance, and limited government, however tattered those notions have become over the years.  Hillary Clinton claims they now are “ready” for a new way. Indeed, I believe that the 2008 election will be a referendum, not on the War in Iraq, but on whether the future of this country lies in freedom or socialism.  Let’s hope the American people make the right choice.”

http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/09/hillary_clinton_i_will_change.html

What the American people want is for Hillary Clinton to mind her own business.

Just please leave the American family alone.

Let the American people choose how to spend their money.

The Power of Choice - Milton Friedman 

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBB7l-SfoK4&feature=related 

The road to hell and serfdom is paved with good intentions.

What should the Federal government do?–significantly less.

Which Federal Departments should be eliminated?–quite a few!

Milton Friedman on Libertarianism (Part 4 of 4)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=64mr-cjxZfU&feature=related  

The 4 Ways to Spend Money by Milton Friedman

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Un4-eI1T71E&feature=related

Milton Friedman on Plagarizing Ideas

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=POswB0Kjbe8

Charlie Rose - An Appreciation of Milton Friedman  

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-pbHo_fQCFg

Hillary Clinton is a social engineer, control freak, and statist.

She does not understand either the limits of knowledge nor the resulting unintended consequences.

HUMAN IGNORANCE AND SOCIAL ENGINEERING 

“…”The recognition of the insuperable limits to his knowledge ought indeed to teach the student of society a lesson in humility which should guard him against becoming an accomplice in men’s fatal striving to control society–a striving which makes him not only a tyrant over his fellows, but which may well make him the destroyer of a civilization which no brain has designed but which has grown from the free efforts of millions of individuals.”(2)

Hayek opposed any attempt to engineer — that is, centrally to plan and to coordinate — the structure of society. He believed that such engineering actually destroyed rather than created society which was the result of human action but not of human design. Alongside the Austrian economist Ludwig Von Mises, Hayek provided what are arguably the best critiques of the ‘constructivist’ theories and policies that have grown in popularity during the twentieth century.

Both Hayek and Mises had witnessed the devastation of classical liberalism which had been brought on by two world wars, but most particularly by World War I. Wartime governments had clamped a centralized control over the private sector in order to ensure a continuing flow of armaments and the other goods deemed necessary for victory. Governments had inflated their money supplies to pay for massive military build-ups. And war had strangled the flow of free trade that classical liberals considered to be a prerequisite to peace, prosperity, and freedom. In short, both Hayek and Mises had watched nineteenth century classical liberalism being replaced by twentieth century statism.

http://www.zetetics.com/mac/soceng.htm

The Meaning of Hayek 

“…Hayek’s thesis in The Road to Serfdom is that one intervention inevitably leads to another. The unintended consequences of each market intervention are economic distortions, which generate further interventions to correct them. That interventionist dynamic leads society down the road to serfdom. …”

“…Many credit President Ronald Reagan’s defense buildup with the downfall of the communist countries. If Hayek’s analysis is correct, however, communism collapsed because of the inner contradictions of that economic system. I think the evidence shows that Hayek was correct, and it was Reagan’s free- market economic policies, which transformed not only the United States but much of the rest of the Western world, that won the Cold War. Understanding that point has important implications for current debates over fiscal priorities.

The chief paradox of the post-Cold War era is that the idea of central planning is discredited intellectually where it was actually tried, but it lives on in the West, particularly in the United States. …” 

http://www.cato.org/pubs/policy_report/pr-nd-gd.html

HillaryCare 2.0

“…It’s also a sign of how she has wised up since her famous debacle early in her husband’s first term. For a liberal seeking to expand government-run health care, it’s not necessary to create new, elaborate governmental mechanisms that are vulnerable to parody and frightening to voters. Simply building on the status quo is enough to hasten us toward national health insurance. That’s because we have a hybrid system of private insurance and government health care that is increasingly tilting toward government. As the conservative writer Ramesh Ponnuru points out, only 12 percent of health-care costs are paid out of pocket, and the government already pays almost half of health-care costs. Liberals need only push this system toward its logical conclusion. …” http://www.townhall.com/columnists/RichLowry/2007/09/17/hillarycare_20 

1993 Clinton health care plan 

“…The First Lady’s role in the secret proceedings of the Health Care Task Force also sparked litigation in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, in relation to the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) which requires openness in government. The Clinton White House argued that the Recommendation Clause in Article II of the U.S. Constitution would make it unconstitutional to apply the procedural requirements of FACA to Hillary’s participation in the meetings of the Task Force. Some constitutional experts argued to the court that such a legal theory was not supported by the text, history, or structure of the Constitution. [12]Ultimately, Hillary Clinton won the litigation when the D.C. Circuit ruled narrowly that the First Lady of the United States can be deemed a government official (and not a mere private citizen) for purposes of not having to comply with the procedural requirements of FACA.[13]In 1993, the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, along with several other groups, filed a lawsuit against Hillary Clinton and Donna Shalala‎ over closed-door meetings related to the health care plan. The AAPS sued to gain access to the list of members of the task force. Judge Royce C. Lamberth found in favor of the plaintiffs and awarded $285,864 to the AAPS for legal costs; Lamberth also harshly criticized the Clinton administration and Clinton aide Ira Magaziner in his ruling.[14] Subsequently, a federal appeals court overturned the award and the initial findings on the basis that Magaziner and the administration had not acted in bad faith.[15] …” 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton_health_care_plan 

2 of 5 - Hillary Clinton on Meet the Press - 1/13/08

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7mYptsE0-yo

Charlie Rich “Behind Closed Doors” (1980)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tJVKHZ3l380

Background Articles and Videos 

 Hillary Diane Rodham Clintonhttp://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=18

Milton Friedman (December 26, 2005) 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jNrMQazZHDc 

Milton Friedman on Libertarianism (Part 1 of 4)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0PaN9M4WwHw&feature=related 

Milton Friedman on Libertarianism (Part 2 of 4)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUDV0YII6lk&feature=related 

Milton Friedman on Libertarianism (Part 3 of 4)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zhgy0ymD-NI&NR=1

Milton Friedman on Libertarianism (Part 4 of 4)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=64mr-cjxZfU&feature=related

Milton Friedman 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JfdRpyfEmBE&feature=related

FRED THOMPSON ON HILLARY CLINTON’S HEALTHCARE PLAN  

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rue98ewvpoM 

Hillary Hates Freedom

 ”…We know that societies that reject bourgeois freedom – the freedom of individualism, civil society, the rule of law, and yes, you guessed it, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness – in favor of collectivism and economic goods end up with neither freedom nor prosperity. The United States has the most advanced medical care in the world — The rate of death from heart disease in the U.S. was cut in half between 1980 and 2000, for instance – because we have a mostly free and capitalist economy. Mandates and regulations make medical care more costly than it needs to be, and Hillary Clinton now proposes to pile on yet more mandates and regulations. But the really scary prospect of another Clinton presidency is not what she would do to our medical care but what she would do to the “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” that is the foundation of our free society. …”

 http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2007/09/18/hillary-hates-freedom/

 The Return of HillaryCare

“…All is not lost, however. In taking the national stage, Romney has backtracked from the more statist parts of his Massachusetts plan. Upping the ante, Republican presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani has proposed a free-market friendly plan that, on top of other reforms, would create personal health savings accounts and allow Americans to shop for insurance in other states. Health care reform remains an urgent priority, but Republicans won’t get it done by taking their cues from the woman who engineered the greatest health care policy debacle in recent history. As Michael Cannon says, “You don’t fight HillaryCare by offering Hillary-lite.”

http://frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=2199FB72-848A-420D-8C39-BD8E5061F03F

Are Health Care Costs ‘Too High’?

“…The bottom line is that there is only one truly efficient solution to the high cost of health care in this country:  expanding the free market by eliminating mandates and phasing out entitlement programs.  Socialized medicine is not the answer.  Either it will lead to even more health care spending, and therefore higher taxes, because the government will mandate that all Americans receive top quality medical care; or it will lead to shortages, rationing, and lower-quality medical care for most Americans, as a way to reduce total spending.  Neither scenario is desirable.   Indeed, the first scenario inevitably will lead to the second.  Plus, unless the government tyrannically prohibits wealthier citizens from paying separately for private medical care - effectively eliminating property rights - we still will have a mixed system that inefficiently adds to total costs.

Under greater free market conditions, Americans will be required to pay more individually for the health care they receive.  Whether these payments are made out-of-pocket or through rationally priced insurance premiums, this will create the financial incentives to control spending that Samuelson stresses in his article.  Yes, this also will mean that many Americans will not be able to afford the same level of health care that they currently enjoy as a result of government subsidies.  However, the moral and financial responsibility for providing medical care should rest with each individual citizen and his or her family, not the business community or general public.  Where an individual’s resources are not enough, private charity, not the government’s taxing authority, should fill the gap. 

Nevertheless, even in a free market, total health care spending in this country still will be very high.  As noted previously, high-quality health care is extremely expensive, and Americans have enormous demand for the best medical care money can buy.  There is nothing inherently “bad” about this.  The United States is an extremely rich country, and we have enough wealth to expend a large percentage of our gross domestic product on health care, while still providing for our other vital needs, e.g., national defense.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/12/are_health_care_costs_too_high.html

HILLARYCARE?  

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0WgmytTdH0

1 of 5 - Hillary Clinton on Meet the Press - 1/13/08

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SDj8K11Ed1I&feature=related

2 of 5 - Hillary Clinton on Meet the Press - 1/13/08

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7mYptsE0-yo

3 of 5 - Hillary Clinton on Meet the Press - 1/13/08

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gunAMUT6GsM&feature=related

4 of 5 - Hillary Clinton on Meet the Press - 1/13/08

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pO0i2iu8294&feature=related

5 of 5 - Hillary Clinton on Meet the Press - 1/13/08

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=egOPAz4e6GA&feature=related

Charlie Rich-The Most Beautiful Girl

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzBt-2jQ3Iw&feature=related