When the Pied Piper plays his tune -- the rats are eager to dance.  And when Obama plays the tune of socialism -- it is Arlen Specter, Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins who are eager to dance the jig of compulsory moral perversion.

What is moral perversion?  It's the idea that compromising the rights of citizens in order to increase the power of the government is enlightened and imperative.  It's using a crisis to rob American's of their God-given right to liberty.

And moral perversion explains the devastating state of Arlen Specter’s character and honor.  Because they are absent from his person completely.  He is enslaved by the Democrat’s idea of usefulness and compromise.  Having no concept of the interests of free men, he is the lead rat that follows the pied piper out of the city. 

And with any luck, out of the Senate.

Why is compromise morally perverse?  Because the "enlightened" idea of "caution and compromise" advances the political and moral argument leftward, forcing the country to accept the Leftist's premise that the needs of some supersede the rights of others.

In this case, that premise comes in the form of the socialization and nationalization of our economy and our medicine.  That the government has a RIGHT to take from you, and give it to someone else, in the name of the common good.  It's the premise that you MUST work, so others don't have to.

What happened to the three Senators who chose to dance for Obama? 

Without the principles of individual rights and capitalism, the three Republican Senators accepted the premise that the bailout as written was good and necessary.  Needing their dose of importance, they chose to object, not to the sale of our country to socialism, but to the price tag.

The argument of the "Republican Three" allowed the Leftists to take the moral high ground, even though the majority of the public was, and remains, clearly against their bailout plan.  The premise that socialism is the only way out of this crisis became the "moral" and "just" position.

At that point it was only a matter of time before a "compromise" was reached.  Afterall, the Republican Senators only objected to the total cost of the bill.  So the Democrats, smelling a rat and a victory, agreed to a few menial cuts.  A few million dollars were easy to trade for absolute, unconditional surrender to the Leftist's radical changes.  But the poisonous provisions stayed intact.  Because the Republican Senators forfeited the moral imperative that each individual is responsible for himself and accountable to no governmental entity or tyrant.

And if conservatives refuse to maintain their, "stand of moral self-confidence, on clear-cut, consistent principles," as described by Ayn Rand in a speech she gave in 1963, the public will have nowhere to turn.

So, slowly, they will be forced by their government, the media lapdogs and by history books to capitulate to the idea that socialism is our only option.

Beware of where conservatism turns from here.  We must understand that it is incumbent upon us to stand and fight for individual rights.  In fact, it is our moral obligation given our understanding of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, to demand that the government and it's socialists step back from the deep collectivist abyss that we now face.

Conservatives must understand that ideas matter.  Principles are important.  And freedom is vital to our lives.

Conservatives must refuse to play to the tune of appeasing socialism.  Americans, a true majority of them, are counting on us.

The Socialist stimulus bill currently being fine-tuned by Congressional Democrats is a direct affront to your unalienable rights as an American.  When this bill becomes law, it will move America from a country based on individual rights, called democratic individualism, to an America based on majority mob rule, called democratic socialism.

What is the difference?  Obama summed it up in two words, when he was “negotiating” with Republicans about the current stimulus bill: “We Won.”

A politician elected by a majority of the public is not given total power over the government, the country and her citizens.  A President, by his elected status, does not have the power to change our way of life and create his own socialist utopia.  Our President is morally bankrupt when he decides to take unlimited power from the American people.  In this country he is only given limited power, which, no matter how many votes he receives, Constitutionally CANNOT infringe upon your individual rights.

Yet he is.

Because the “we won” mentality doesn’t recognize your individual rights.  The “we won” mentality only recognizes the rights of the majority and their interests, over yours and over your family’s interests.

Socialism/Collectivism only has one weapon that it uses to fight free people: altruism.  As Ayn Rand explained in 1963:  “Altruism claims that man has no right to exist for his own sake and that self-sacrificial service to others is the only moral justification of his existence.”

In other words, you work your entire life for the benefit of others, to make yourself feel better.  Isn’t that why you go to work?  In order to give your paycheck to your neighbor?

Look at the beneficiaries of altruism, who used Obama’s Florida townhall meeting to beg the government for a handout. 

Julio asks for more benefits.  Henrietta wants the government to give her a car, a kitchen and a bathroom.

By asking for help from the federal government these people have given up their individual rights, given up their motivation to take care of themselves and their families.  They would rather that Barack Obama determine how much they will be paid, through unemployment payments, or what kind of house they will live in, through government housing.  They have traded their humanity for the dishonorable life of a parasite.  They have traded the pursuit of their own happiness for the bonds of slavery.

But it is not their freedom or our freedom alone, that we are risking, by accepting the terms of the stimulus package.  When we take something from the government, we are putting our hands in our neighbor's pockets.  Because the government has to take from someone else, to give to us.  Not having the money available to pay for this bailout, the government will be taking from our children.

Julio, by printing more money at the Treasury, and giving it to you, the government is telling your children that they will have to pay for your handout.  You are asking the government to enslave all our children because the government will have to raise their taxes to pay for the deficits you are demanding that we generate today.

What would you call parents who willingly sell their children into slavery?  I call them mad, and evil.  And I refuse to be one of them.