Welcome to 1984

[noname]

Actually, the NewWorldOrder would like to disarm all the nations and all the peoples of all the nations because there will be no more nations when they take over, just their world military group, in their view.  But, the Bible shows the nations existing even in the last chapter of Revelation.  So, I don't see them being successful.

the NWO already have 716 military bases in 31 countries and they are lighting the fires of unrest and violence all over the world...

[WhiteWings]

Actually, the NewWorldOrder would like to disarm all the nations and all the peoples of all the nations because there will be no more nations when they take over, just their world military group, in their view.  But, the Bible shows the nations existing even in the last chapter of Revelation.  So, I don't see them being successful.

Adolph Hitler:
"The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to permit the conquered Eastern peoples to have arms. History teaches that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by doing so." April 11, 1942,

Disarmed nations are easier to oppress....
There is a difference between disarming for peaceful reasons and disarming for military gain.

[natcat86]

Hey Molly,

What is the NewWorldOrder? Is it to do with the end times?

x

[Molly]

British Tea Party Movement to launch on Saturday
Daniel Hannan

February 25th, 2010

The inaugural British Tea Party will take place on Saturday in my home town of Brighton, and I'll be speaking. Do try to come: here are the details.

Labour has raised more than a trillion pounds in additional taxation since 1997. Yet, unbelievably, Gordon Brown has still managed to run up a deficit of 12.6 per cent of GDP (Greece's is 12.7 per cent). A far lower level of taxation brought Americans out in spontaneous protest last year.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danielhannan/100027366/british-tea-party-movement-to-launch-on-Saturday/

[WhiteWings]

Hey Molly,

What is the NewWorldOrder? Is it to do with the end times?

x

Natcat,
The NWO is group of extremely wealth that (want to) rule the world. They for example (want to) control all money and food. They also want one currency.
There are most certainly parallels with the end times. The question of course is:
a] Real?
b] Coincidence?
c] Are the following some relious guidelines. They are said to be free mansons. And free mansons were the temple builders.

[Molly]

Hey Molly,

What is the NewWorldOrder? Is it to do with the end times?

x

Hi Nat--

End times?  There are no end times.  Just a gradual but ever increasing revealing of the kingdom of God.



44And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever.

--Daniel 2

[Beloved Servant]

Wow, I like that, Molly.
Written so nicely with so few words.

[Molly]

Sunday, Feb 28, 2010 @03:05pm CST

(Washington, DC) -- One of the most well-known and controversial pieces of legislation passed during the administration of former President George W. Bush has been renewed.

President Obama has signed a bill extending the Patriot Act for a year.

The legislation was first passed after the 9-11 terrorist attacks of 2001, giving the government broad authority in terrorist surveillance. Without the extension, several provisions of the law would have expired on Saturday.

Congressional Democrats had tried to add more civil liberty protections into the law, but were unable. Republicans successfully argued changing the law would undermine efforts to track suspected terrorists.



http://ozarksfirst.com/content/fulltext/?cid=239782

[Molly]

"The Love Police"   Two witnesses?  LOL

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rX7lOk2H8eo

[WhiteWings]

http://collegerama.tudelft.nl/mediasite/Viewer/?peid=f773a6e9ecca43bbb3ac92687d476568

[Molly]

A Detention Bill You Ought to Read More Carefully
Mar 5 2010, 3:40 PM ET

Why is the national security community treating the "Enemy Belligerent, Interrogation, Detention, and Prosecution Act of 2010," introduced by Sens. John McCain and Joseph Lieberman on Thursday as a standard proposal, as a simple response to the administration's choices in the aftermath of the Christmas Day bombing attempt? A close reading of the bill suggests it would allow the U.S. military to detain U.S. citizens without trial indefinitely in the U.S. based on suspected activity. Read the bill here, and then read the summarized points after the jump.

According to the summary, the bill sets out a comprehensive policy for the detention, interrogation and trial of suspected enemy belligerents who are believed to have engaged in hostilities against the United States by requiring these individuals to be held in military custody, interrogated for their intelligence value and not provided with a Miranda warning.

(There is no distinction between U.S. persons--visa holders or citizens--and non-U.S. persons.)

It would require these "belligerents" to be coded as "high-value detainee" to be held in military custody and interrogated for their intelligence value by a High-Value Detainee Interrogation Team established by the president. (The H.I.G., of course, was established to bring a sophisticated interrogation capacity to the federal justice system.)


Any suspected unprivileged enemy belligerents considered a "high-value detainee" shall not be provided with a Miranda warning.

The bill asks the President to determine criteria for designating an individual as a "high-value detainee" if he/she: (1) poses a threat of an attack on civilians or civilian facilities within the U.S. or U.S. facilities abroad; (2) poses a threat to U.S. military personnel or U.S. military facilities; (3) potential intelligence value; (4) is a member of al Qaeda or a terrorist group affiliated with al Qaeda or (5) such other matters as the President considers appropriate. The President must submit the regulations and guidance to the appropriate committees of Congress no later than 60 days after enactment.

To the extent possible, the High-Value Detainee Interrogation Team must make a preliminary determination whether the detainee is an unprivileged enemy belligerent within 48 hours of taking detainee into custody.



The High-Value Detainee Interrogation Team must submit its determination to the Secretary of Defense and the Attorney General after consultation with the Director of National Intelligence, the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency.  The Secretary of Defense and the Attorney General make a final determination and report the determination to the President and the appropriate committees of Congress.  In the case of any disagreement between the Secretary of Defense and the Attorney General, the President will make the determination.  


Note that the president himself doesn't get to make the call.




http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2010/03/a-detention-bill-you-ought-to-read-more-carefully/37116

[WhiteWings]

(http://z.about.com/d/politicalhumor/1/0/0/B/3/We-The-Corporations.jpg)

[Molly]

March 12th, 2010 6:16 am
The Slaughter Solution and Other Acts of Desperation

Is it "end-game" time in the debate over what to do with American health care? The other day, some industrious blogger — it might have been the Drudge Report — posted an amusing list of headlines from the past year or so, each announcing that, at long last, we'd reached the "end game" in the debate over health.  Just yesterday, President Obama said again that "the time to talk" was over: the time to vote had come.

He didn't really mean that, of course, because were a vote taken now, his plan to have the government usurp a sixth of the U.S. economy and institute top-down socialized medicine in the Unite States would fail.

As a result, Team Obama has been exerting the old cerebellum to discover some way of passing the Democrats' health care bill without, you know, precisely passing it. Even if you question their ethics, you have to admire their ingenuity. Last month it was "reconciliation": that administrative tool was all the rage. A technique used to patch over budgetary anomalies was going to be hauled in to revolutionize a major social program that had no bipartisan support whatsoever.

That wasn't going down with the public too well. So although reconciliation is still on the table (or, rather, up the Reid-Pelosi sleeve)  the latest wheeze is "The Slaughter Solution," named for  Rep. Louise Slaughter (NY, "D,"  of course). Would you like to enact some legislation without the inconvenience (to say noting of the accountability) of actually voting for it?  The Washington Examiner explains how you can do it:

In the Slaughter Solution, the rule would declare that the House "deems" the Senate version of Obamacare to have been passed by the House. House members would still have to vote on whether to accept the rule, but they would then be able to say they only voted for a rule, not for the bill itself.

George Orwell, wouldst that you were here to witness this!


http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerkimball/2010/03/12/the-slaughter-solution-and-other-acts-of-desperation/

[Molly]

Bronson Staker, Miracle baby --courtesy of the best health care system in the world, praise God..



By Mike Celizic
TODAYshow.com contributor
updated 10:31 a.m. ET, Fri., March. 12, 2010
Bronson Staker is a typical 18-month-old — which is to say, he wasn't interested in what Mom and Dad were talking about with a stranger. Bronson was far more interested in fussing and squirming and grabbing his father's cell phone and pretending to talk into it and doing all the delightful things that toddlers do.

None of this would be remarkable except for one fact: Six weeks ago, Bronson was dead.

That is not an overstatement. Bronson is not a a child who briefly lost consciousness after choking on a piece of candy. There's no other way to describe his condition other than that one uncompromising word: dead

Fatal distraction
Bronson's mother, Sara Staker, had been bathing him and his 2-year-old brother in late January in the family's Salt Lake City home. Momentarily distracted by one of her other two children, Sara briefly left the bathroom. When she came back, Bronson was facedown in the water, showing no signs of life.

"It was horrible. It was the most helpless feeling I've ever had in my life," Sara told TODAY's Lester Holt Friday in New York. "There was no question in my mind that he was gone. He was white, his lips were blue. His eyes were rolled back."

Sara called 911 and started CPR on the lifeless little body. Bronson did not respond. First responders arrived and continued revival efforts. They, too, failed to restore a heartbeat.

When the ambulance arrived at the hospital, Bronson was pronounced DOA — dead on arrival.

Still, he was taken to the ER, where doctors took over resuscitation efforts. After 40 minutes, they finally restored a heartbeat while a ventilator pumped oxygen into Bronson's lungs.

Experimental procedure
Now comes the miracle part of the story — the reason Bronson and his parents, Sara and Matt Staker, were sitting on a couch in TODAY's New York studios, telling their story to Holt.

The doctors told Matt and Sara that there was a high likelihood that Bronson had suffered serious brain damage during the long period that he was clinically dead and his brain was deprived of oxygen. They said there was an experimental treatment called therapeutic hypothermia that might improve his chances of recovery. It would involve lowering Bronson's body temperature to 91 degrees, almost eight degrees below normal, and putting him in a coma to reduce brain swelling. He would be maintained in that state for almost two weeks, and when he was warmed up and revived, he probably would not be the same boy they knew.

"We asked them, 'If this was your own child, would you do it?' They said, 'Absolutely, yes,' " Matt told Holt.

The Stakers told the doctors to go ahead. Bronson was hooked up to more tubes and wires than his parents could count, covered with a blanket filled with chilling fluid, and put in intensive care. All his parents could do was look at him lying in his coma day after day, the tubes and machines breathing for him.

"It was excruciating, because every fiber of your being as a mother wants to hold your child, especially when they're hurting," Sara said. "You want to hold him and hug him and wrap him in a blanket and keep him warm."

She said he was cold to the touch and puffy from all the fluids being pumped into him. "It was just excruciating," she repeated.

As the day grew nearer when Bronson would be revived, doctors and therapists and rehabilitation experts advised the Stakers on what they could expect.

"We had been told we would probably take home a 16-month-old newborn," Sara said. "We had been told probably it would be months of rehab, maybe even years."

They were advised to get physical and occupational therapy equipment for their home and be prepared for a six-month regimen. "We were in it for the long haul," Sara said.

Awake and alert
Thirteen days after Bronson died and was brought back to a cold and comatose existence, the doctors warmed his body and allowed him to regain consciousness. Sara entered the room and looked at him. He looked back and recognized his mother.

"I walked in the room and the lights were on. Immediately I could see that he was tracking and connecting and looking from one nurse to the other. When I walked in, he lifted his chin and I could see that he knew who I was," Sara said.

This was beyond where anyone thought Bronson would be. And although he was weak, it was evident immediately that the tot was defying the odds. By the end of the day, he was standing up on his own. A day later he was walking. Two days later, he walked out of the hospital.



"Everything was there," Matt said. "He was weak because he was lying down for [13] days, but all his cognitive [functions], how his brain works, it was still there."

The doctors had given the Stakers a list of milestones that Bronson should reach in the first six months of his recovery. He hit them all in two days. A month later, he shows no signs of any damage. If anything, he's learning vocabulary faster than he was before the accident, his parents report.

Sara, who has kept a blog of Bronson's recovery, said it has taught her and Matt to believe that miracles are real. It's also taught her something about life.

"The lessons we learned are innumerable," she said. "Life is just so fragile. As parents, we're so busy and we try to multitask things. It's really easy to get distracted by the things that aren't the most important things, and the things that are the most important suffer.

"I hope that we've learned those lessons."



Read more: http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/35820985/#ixzz0i5TVNzEZ

[Molly]

Jane Burgermeister on the swine flu, NWO,  and the rise of European fascism [Lisbon Treaty]


http://projectavalon.net/jane_burgermeister.html

[Molly]

Bart Stupak [democrat] threatened.



Friday, March 12, 2010
Stupak: Dems say Abortions save Money: Stupak Threatened by Ethics Inquiry

Rep. Bark Stupak interviewed with National Review Online's "the corner" and said one of the Democrat arguments in favor of abortion is the money saved if the children are not born. He also said some of his colleagues are threatening to make complaints to the Ethics Committee about him. He didn't say what the complaints are, and probably doesn't know. There is an all-out assault to bring people around to vote for the Senate health care bill. His fellow Dems are letting him know he will be sacrificed if they can find a way to do so.



Stupak is a pro-life Democrat who introduced his own amendment to guarantee abortions will not be federally-funded in health care legislation. Stupak and 11 other Democrats have agreed that they will not vote for health care if guarantees against federally-funded abortions are not in the bill. In this interview, Stupak says he has lost two of the the 11, the pressure was just too great for them.

"We'll probably have to wait until the Republicans take back the majority to fix this."


http://maggiesnotebook.blogspot.com/2010/03/stupak-dems-say-abortions-save-money.html

[Molly]

Nearly One-Third of Doctors Could Leave Medicine if Health-Care Reform Bill Passes, According to Survey Reported in New England Journal of Medicine

Tuesday, March 16, 2010
By Christopher Neefus

(CNSNews.com) - Nearly one-third of all practicing physicians may leave the medical profession if President Obama signs current versions of health-care reform legislation into law, according to a survey published in the latest issue of the New England Journal of Medicine.

The survey, which was conducted by the Medicus Firm, a leading physician search and consulting firm based in Atlanta and Dallas, found that a majority of physicians said health-care reform would cause the quality of American medical care to "deteriorate" and it could be the "final straw" that sends a sizeable number of doctors out of medicine.

More than 29 percent (29.2) percent of the nearly 1,200 doctors who responded to the survey said they would quit the profession or retire early if health reform legislation becomes law. If a public option were included in the legislation, as several liberal Senators have indicated they would like, the number would jump to 45.7 percent.

The medical journal published the results in its March and April edition, saying: "While a sudden loss of half of the nations physicians seems unlikely, a very dramatic decrease in the physician workforce could become a reality as an unexpected side effect of health reform."

Kevin Perpetua, managing partner for the Medicus Firm, reported that a reform bill could be "the final straw" in an already financially precarious industry.

"Many physicians feel that they cannot continue to practice if patient loads increase while pay decreases," Perpetua said in the study. "The overwhelming prediction from physicians is that health reform, if implemented inappropriately, could create a detrimental combination of circumstances, and result in an environment in which it is not possible for most physicians to continue practicing medicine."

"With an average debt of $140,000, and many graduates approaching a quarter of a million dollars in school loans, being a doctor is becoming less and less feasible," Perpetua said. "Health-care reform and increasing government control of medicine may be the final straw that causes the physician workforce to break down."

The survey shows that many doctors already find their situations difficult:

-- 36 percent said that they would not recommend medicine as a profession to others, regardless of whether health-care reform passes;
-- another 27 percent would still recommend medicine as a career, but not if the current reform proposal passes.

In total, 63 percent of doctors would not recommend the profession after health-care reform passes. Just 12 percent do not recommend becoming a physician now but think they would if current reform proposals pass.

Primary-care physicians, those who work in the critical fields of family and internal medicine, not only feel that they would want to quit but that they might be cast out of medicine. 46.3 percent of those physicians said that they would either want to leave medicine or that they would be "forced out" by the changes to the system.

Despite all the opposition to the bill as it stands, only a little more than 3 percent of respondents said the status quo was best, with the vast majority (62.7 percent) saying they believe changes are needed.

The same 62.7 percent said they wanted reforms made, but that they "should be implemented in a more targeted, gradual way, as opposed to the sweeping overhaul that is in (the) legislation."

Andrea Santiago, a spokeswoman for the Medicus Firm, said those numbers were the most striking.

"Please allow me to emphasize that 96 percent of the physicians surveyed in our report are in favor of health reform, in some form or fashion," she told CNSNews.com in an e-mail. "To me, the fact that so many physicians surveyed want health reform, but relatively few are in favor of the current legislation, was one of the most significant, telling results."

Congressional Democratic leaders, meanwhile, have said that doctors favor the bill and are part of an "unprecedented coalition" of doctors rooting for its passage. The claim is based on the American Medical Association's endorsement of the legislation in Congress.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, in 2008 there were 661,400 physicians and surgeons within the United States. Of that number, 250,000 are members of the American Medical Association (AMA) -- and nearly 100,000 of those are medical students.

Santiago explained the AMA could not claim to represent all doctors, nor perhaps could any other group, and said the potentially massive shortage of physicians has stayed largely out of the debate because public figures have been trying to speak for doctors instead of speaking to them.

"I think the reason it hasn't become a big issue in the political debate is maybe because no one else has really thought about the effects of health reform on the physician workforce. Or, maybe people didn't want to think about it, but as recruiters we can't help but think about it and take notice," she said.

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/62812

[SQ]

What are they thinking?
This will be the death of our country if I am understanding correctly.
If God's will I pray he nips this, I just don't understand what the problem is with our private health care.
The President and his men are on a mission, nothing else matters at the moment. :thumbdown:

[Molly]

Wait until the American people find out who their new best friend is going to be. [ Hint: it's not the doctor]...



16,500 more IRS agents needed to enforce Obamacare

By: J.P. Freire
Associate Commentary Editor
03/18/10 4:32 PM EDT

New tax mandates and penalties included in Obamacare will cause the greatest expansion of the Internal Revenue Service since World War II, according to a release from Rep. Kevin Brady, R-Texas.

A new analysis by the Joint Economic Committee and the House Ways & Means Committee minority staff estimates up to 16,500 new IRS personnel will be needed to collect, examine and audit new tax information mandated on families and small businesses in the 'reconciliation' bill being taken up by the U.S. House of Representatives this weekend. ...

Scores of new federal mandates and fifteen different tax increases totaling $400 billion are imposed under the Democratic House bill.  In addition to more complicated tax returns, families and small businesses will be forced to reveal further tax information to the IRS, provide proof of 'government approved' health care and submit detailed sales information to comply with new excise taxes.

Americans for Tax Reform has a good breakdown of the bill by the numbers.

Isn't it reassuring that at a time of recession, government will do what's necessary to ensure its growth?



Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/16500-more-IRS-agents-needed-to-enforce-Obamacare-88458137.html#ixzz0ibmPh48H

[Molly]

Cuccinelli's office confirms Virginia will sue over health care

A spokesman for Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli II (R) said this afternoon that Virginia will file suit against the federal government if the Democratic health care reform bill is approved by the U.S. Congress.

Cuccinelli has long said he was examining the legal issues and suggested he would likely file suit. Brian Gottstein, a spokesman for the office, said this afternoon that a lawsuit is now a definite. Gottstein would provide no details of the legal rationale for such a suit, indicating the process is "still being worked out."

Virginia last week became the first state in the country to pass a state bill declaring it illegal for the government to require individuals to purchase health insurance, a key part of bills under consideration on Capitol Hill.

We are also expecting to receive a letter shortly that Cuccinelli is sending to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) warning her that using the so-called "deem and pass" procedure to pass the Senate health reform bill in the House would open the measure to additional constitutional challenges from the states.

UPDATE: We've received a copy of Cuccinelli's letter to Pelosi. In it, he writes: "Should you employ the deem and pass tactic, you expose any act which may pass to yet another constitutional challenge."

The full letter is included after the jump.


March 17, 2010 The Honorable Nancy Pelosi Speaker of the United States House of Representatives Office of the Speaker H-232, U.S. Capitol Washington, D.C. Dear Speaker Pelosi: I am writing to urge you not to proceed with the Senate Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act under a so-called "deem and pass" rule because such a course of action would raise grave constitutional questions. Based upon media interviews and statements which I have seen, you are considering this approach because it might somehow shield members of Congress from taking a recorded vote on an overwhelmingly unpopular Senate bill. This is an improper purpose under the bicameralism requirements of Article I, Section 7 of the U.S. Constitution, one of the purposes of which is to make our representatives fully accountable for their votes. Furthermore, to be validly enacted, the Senate bill would have to be accepted by the House in a form that is word-for-word identical (Clinton v. City of New York, 524 U.S. 417 (1998)). Should you employ the deem and pass tactic, you expose any act which may pass to yet another constitutional challenge. A bill of this magnitude should not be passed using this maneuver. As the President noted last week, the American people are entitled to an up or down vote. Sincerely, Kenneth T. Cuccinelli, II Attorney General of Virginia.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/virginiapolitics/2010/03/cuccinellis_office_confirms_vi.html


ID Governor Signs Bill to Sue if Health Care Reform Passes

Nevada Governor Says He'll Sue Federal Government Over 'Illegal' Health Care Bill

SC, Fla. ready to sue over health care deal


38 states poised to sue gov't over health care

[CHB]

Molly, I see you are more than likely a Republican, if you were a Democrat the story would be different. It all depends on which side you talk to as to how this whole thing will play out.

Isn't that the way it is with religion also?

CHB

[Molly]

No I'm not a Republican.  You obviously didn't know me when the Republicans were in power.

But, I do love my country and the blessing we were favored with from God in the form of the Constitution of the United States.

I consider that document a gift from God, since you ask.

Nor do I wish, like Esau, to sell my birthright for a bowl of pottage.

[CHB]

Hi Molly,

I see what you are saying but I personally don't think we should be involved with worldly affairs. Paul said to "think on things above and not on things here on earth". God puts who he chooses to be in power and all things will go the way he wants it and whatever we do will not effect things one bit. That is unless he chooses us to be involved and apparently he has chosen you so more power to you.  :girlheart:

CHB

[Molly]

I hear you, chb and appreciate your point of view.  I know a lot of people feel that way.

But, 2000 years ago, Jesus said this--


36... "My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jews. But now my kingdom is from another place."

--John 18

"now"

G3568
νῦν
nun
noon
A primary particle of present time; "now" (as adverb of date, a transition or emphasis); also as noun or adjective present or immediate: - henceforth, + hereafter, of late, soon, present, this (time). See also G3569, G3570.


Jesus is talking about a time which 2000 years ago was 'now.'     But, today, 2000 years ago is 'then.'

We pray the prayer he taught us--

Thy kingdom come

Thy will be done

On earth as it is in heaven


Therefore, I pray, I witness, I wait, I work for the day that he is all in all, that his kingdom is on earth as it is in heaven.



1 Peter 4:11
If anyone speaks, he should do it as one speaking the very words of God. If anyone serves, he should do it with the strength God provides, so that in all things God may be praised through Jesus Christ. To him be the glory and the power for ever and ever. Amen.

[Molly]

Obama's health care reforms show that America has become an 'elective dictatorship'

By Toby Young World Last updated: March 22nd, 2010



Wow. Talk about close. 219-212. No wonder the anti-abortion Democrats were able to secure some last-minute concessions. If four representatives had switched sides, Obama would have lost the vote.

Has America been more politically divided over an issue since the Civil War? Civil Rights? At least that issue cut across party lines, whereas health care reform — or "socialised medicine", as its opponents call it — has divided the parties right down the middle. Not a single Republican voted for the bill. (Admittedly, 34 Democrats voted against it.) This was a bitterly fought legislative campaign that gave the lie to Obama's claim that his Presidency would be "postpartisan". He is the most partisan President in living memory.

In this respect, Obama has had to conduct himself more like a British Prime Minister than an American Head of State. When I studied A-level politics back in the Reagan era, I remember being taught that the two great American political parties, unlike ours, only existed as electoral machines. They coalesced around one candidate every four years, then fractured again, with Presidents bolting together bi-partisan coalitions to push through legislation. The President didn't depend for his survival on retaining the support of his party in the same way that our Prime Minister does and, hence, his party didn't have to stay together after he'd been elected, at least not to the same extent. This, I was taught, was one of the advantages of America's separation of powers. Because the executive branch of the government didn't need to control the legislative branch in order to remain in office, it hadn't developed anything like the same control mechanisms as the British Prime Minister. This meant the British people had more to fear from the centralisation of power than Americans. Elective dictatorship — the phrase Lord Hailsham coined to describe the dominance of Parliament by the government of the day — was a greater threat to Britain than it was to America.

The emergence of elective dictatorship in America — with the President having to use every stick at his disposal to beat his parliamentary party into submission — is surely one of the least attractive aspects of Obama's Presidency. According to today's New York Times:

Never in modern memory has a major piece of legislation passed without a single Republican vote. Even President Lyndon B. Johnson got just shy of half of Republicans in the House to vote for Medicare in 1965, a piece of legislation that was denounced with many of the same words used to oppose this one. That may be the true measure of how much has changed in Washington in the ensuing 45 years, and how Mr. Obama's own strategy is changing with the discovery that the approach to governing he had in mind simply will not work.

"Let's face it, he's failed in the effort to be the nonpolarizing president, the one who can use rationality and calm debate to bridge our traditional divides," said Peter Beinart, a liberal essayist who is publishing a history of hubris in politics.

It seems unlikely, to put it mildly, that this is the end of the affair. No doubt the Republicans in the Senate have a few delaying tricks up their sleeves and opponents of the bill, having failed to stop its passage in the legislative branch of the government, will switch their attention to the judicial branch. It will be interesting to see how far Obama can use the powers vested in him as President to railroad through these reforms. An elected dictator? I cannot see a freedom-loving people putting up with such a figure for long.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/tobyyoung/100030829/obamas-health-care-reforms-show-that-america-has-become-an-elective-dictatorship/