A Rendezvous with Destiny

Video: Holocaust Survivor Cursed Out By Ground Zero Mosque Supporter

2010-08-25T16:54:00.003-04:00

Video: Holocaust Survivor Cursed Out By Ground Zero Mosque Supporter

By EyeBlast.tv Staff (Bio | Archive)
Wed, 08/25/2010 - 16:47 ET

In a stunning display at a protest over the Ground Zero mosque, a Holocaust survivor was berated by a mosque supporter. The mosque supporter spews vulgarities at the holocaust survivor and at one point even says he "didn't learn his lesson". Content warning, we did not bleep out the profanities.

The New Elite: Public Servants Become Public Masters

2010-08-20T09:16:00.001-04:00

The New Elite: Public Servants Become Public Masters

Why layoff policemen, firemen or teachers first? Why indeed!

In case you haven’t noticed, America is broke…..really broke. Not only do we not have anymore of our own money, but we are fast running out of China’s and Japan’s money as well. As we continue to pile more and more debt on the backs of our great grandchildren, there are those who want us to continue deeper down the rabbit hole.

We are dealing with a government, from the federal all the way down to cities/towns, committed to trickle down ruination. Like crack addicts looking for their next fix, our representatives (a term I use loosely) will not stop the spending on their own; they need to be removed from the addiction. Translation: separate them from the money (or more bluntly, vote them out!). But politicians have willing allies in this collective downfall: public servants. The politicians and the public servants share a symbiotic relationship, one that is not favorable to the people both groups are sworn to serve, the public.

The latest crisis (never let one go to waste) we have to deal with is one that we are told will affect our firemen, policemen, and teachers. President Obama is calling for another $50 billion dollars in deficit spending to ‘save’ (translation: bailout and reward poor behavior) troubled States and municipalities. If this money is not thrown at the crisis, cities and states will be forced to lay off thousands, if not millions of Obama’s union buddies. President Obama made it a point to mention this measure was to ensure that we did not layoff vital public servants such as firemen, policemen, or teachers. In his ‘never let a crisis go to waste’ mentality, President Obama made this proclamation late on a Saturday, when no one was watching. As if you can ‘sneak’ $50 billion dollars past the America people without them noticing (not in this climate).

But why the firemen, policemen, or teachers? Why not the librarian, the part-time city clerk, or the street sweeper? Because those cuts will not scare us enough to open our wallets! Politicians are so transparent you can see the ‘lack of a spine’ on almost any given issue. Worse yet are the willing participants who immediately write letters to the editor or appear before the city council/school board (often at the urging of the very groups that would rather see us go bankrupt than give up one precious taxpayer penny), in support of reckless behavior that has jeopardized the stability of our nation and our communities. In the name of compassion, we have placed a yolk of financial servitude around the necks of the very people we profess to be helping. Compassion without discipline is merely the actions of an irrational do-gooder, and sometimes the uninformed do-gooder is their own worst enemy.

We hear tired old mantras - “It’s for the kids, It’s a tough job, they deserve a million dollars, It’s only $30.00 more a year – per household, It’s for the kids (that one deserved repeating).” There is no shame and no exaggeration that won’t be exploited. In a time when most people have not only not seen raises (including cost of living), but salary and benefit reductions, many public servants feel that are entitled to keep feeding from the taxpayer trough, and even demand that more and more be added.

The problem with public servant salaries and unfunded liabilities (healthcare and retirement funds) has been at epidemic levels for decades, but the matter only seems to garner our attention during a bad economy. Additionally, past attempts to bring our financial relationship with public employees into proper prospective has been met with a full-frontal attack by the unions that represent them. One only needs to look at every major city in America, or the chaos in Greece, to know that public employees are only concerned about their own self-interest.

The relationship between unions/public servants and the tax payer reminds me of the old fable ‘The Scorpion and the Frog.’ In the story the scorpion convinces a frog to take him across the river. At first the frog refuses, fearing he would be stung. But reluctantly the frog agrees, only after the scorpion promises not to sting the frog, proclaiming that the sting would doom them both. You know the rest. Half-way across the river the scorpion stings the frog. When ask why, the scorpion replied – “I’m a scorpion; it’s my nature.” Both sink beneath the water. Like the fable ‘The Scorpion (unions/public servant) and the Frog (the tax payer),’ the unions seem all too willing to sting the tax payer, knowing full well that it will spell doom for the both of them. And when asked why, unions reply “We are a union; it’s in our nature.”

In his 2009 book Plunder, Steven Greenhut, did an outstanding job at detailing how the mutually beneficial relationship between our elected officials and our public servants is not beneficial to the taxpayers who have to pick up the tab. Mr. Greenhut illustrates how public servants are the new elite, and how their compensation packages are unsustainable. Public servants are no longer the servants. We have made them the masters.

When these deals were first negotiated, they seemed balanced. Public employees would earn lower salaries than those working in the private sector, but the trade off were that public employees would receive a somewhat better retirement and more days off. Now, public employees get higher average pay than those in the private sector, much better benefits, and many more days off. The selfishness of many public servants (and the unions that represent them) is perverted, and shows a willful lack of understanding as to the collective crisis we all share. We are stealing from future generations and we don’t care. The questions is not how much longer will it take before we are like Greece, but how much like Greece are we already.

Live Free or Die

Reference articles:

Public employees living larger than ever as economy struggles

Public Pension Cuts, Once Unthinkable, Now On The Table

Even in Europe: Millions in the public sector to pay more for pension

For feds, more get 6-figure salaries

Why the fireman?

Budget Crisis, States Take Aim at Pension Costs

Government employees now take higher salaries than private workers

Dismantling America

2010-08-17T14:39:00.001-04:00

Thomas Sowell

Dismantling America

"We the people" are the familiar opening words of the Constitution of the United States-- the framework for a self-governing people, free from the arbitrary edicts of rulers. It was the blueprint for America, and the success of America made that blueprint something that other nations sought to follow.

At the time when it was written, however, the Constitution was a radical departure from the autocratic governments of the 18th century. Since it was something so new and different, the reasons for the Constitution's provisions were spelled out in "The Federalist," a book written by three of the writers of the Constitution, as a sort of instruction guide to a new product.

The Constitution was not only a challenge to the despotic governments of its time, it has been a continuing challenge-- to this day-- to all those who think that ordinary people should be ruled by their betters, whether an elite of blood, or of books or of whatever else gives people a puffed-up sense of importance.

While the kings of old have faded into the mists of history, the principle of the divine rights of kings to impose whatever they wish on the masses lives on today in the rampaging presumptions of those who consider themselves anointed to impose their notions on others.

The Constitution of the United States is the biggest single obstacle to the carrying out of such rampaging presumptions, so it is not surprising that those with such presumptions have led the way in denigrating, undermining and evading the Constitution.

While various political leaders have, over the centuries, done things that violated either the spirit or the letter of the Constitution, few dared to openly say that the Constitution was wrong and that what they wanted was right.

It was the Progressives of a hundred years ago who began saying that the Constitution needed to be subordinated to whatever they chose to call "the needs of the times." Nor were they content to say that the Constitution needed more Amendments, for that would have meant that the much disdained masses would have something to say about whether, or what kind, of Amendments were needed.

The agenda then, as now, has been for our betters to decide among themselves which Constitutional safeguards against arbitrary government power should be disregarded, in the name of meeting "the needs of the times"-- as they choose to define those needs.

The first open attack on the Constitution by a President of the United States was made by our only president with a Ph.D., Woodrow Wilson. Virtually all the arguments as to why judges should not take the Constitution as meaning what its words plainly say, but "interpret" it to mean whatever it ought to mean, in order to meet "the needs of the times," were made by Woodrow Wilson.

It is no coincidence that those who imagine themselves so much wiser and nobler than the rest of us should be in the forefront of those who seek to erode Constitutional restrictions on the arbitrary powers of government. How can our betters impose their superior wisdom and virtue on us, when the Constitution gets in the way at every turn, with all its provisions to safeguard a system based on a self-governing people?

To get their way, the elites must erode or dismantle the Constitution, bit by bit, in one way or another. What that means is that they must dismantle America. This has been going on piecemeal over the years but now we have an administration in Washington that circumvents the Constitution wholesale, with its laws passed so fast that the public cannot know what is in them, its appointment of "czars" wielding greater power than Cabinet members, without having to be exposed to pubic scrutiny by going through the confirmation process prescribed by the Constitution for Cabinet members.

Now there is leaked news of plans to change the immigration laws by administrative fiat, rather than Congressional legislation, presumably because Congress might be unduly influenced by those pesky voters-- with their Constitutional rights-- who have shown clearly that they do not want amnesty and open borders, despite however much our betters do. If the Obama administration gets away with this, and can add a few million illegals to the voting rolls in time for the 2012 elections, that can mean reelection, and with it a continuing and accelerating dismantling of America.

Thomas Sowell's Biography

Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institute and author of The Housing Boom and Bust.

TOWNHALL DAILY: Sign up today and receive Thomas Sowell and Townhall.com's daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.

©Creators Syndicate

Newsbusted: In Over His Head

2010-08-17T14:26:00.001-04:00

Obama’s Divine Comedy

2010-08-17T14:24:00.001-04:00

Midway upon the journey of our life I found myself within a forest dark, for the straightforward pathway had been lost. – The Divine Comedy by Dante Alighieri

America is living its own ‘Divine Comedy,’ and as with Dante’s original story, there is nothing to laugh about. The right path has been lost to us because we lack direction. We are half-way through our collective journey with President Obama, and our country has strayed from the righteous path; we have wandered into a darkness of mystification that Obama cannot see through because he lacks the vision of a principled leader .

Leaders do not employ ‘hope’ as a methodology to enact ‘change’ at a time of crisis. Leaders put priorities into play and translate words into deeds. Leaders do not always see the exact crisis, but experience tells them what works and what does not work. Leaders know that sometimes their public perception should reflect the importance of the crisis. And for those of us who have been blessed to witness great leadership first hand know that one person’s calm is merely another person’s cluelessness. What America is witnessing with Obama is a community organizer, who is armed only with a naïve temperament, who has suddenly been thrust into a world consumed with peril.

For far too many, the gift of leadership is a greatly under-appreciated asset. The presidential election of 2008 is a perfect example of how artificial leadership skills can be greatly exaggerated to win over voters who lack insight of the true character of leadership, and recent events make it crystal clear that real, proven leadership is needed for the Office of the President of the United States. An unproven academic theory applied by untested underachievers does not make for great leadership; it only makes for dismal failure.

Leading up to the general election in 2008, time after time people pointed out that candidate Obama had never led anything, and time after time Obama supporters proclaimed that he is running a great campaign. It should be of no surprise too many that President Obama is failing at almost every crisis. Leading a campaign and leading a country are two uniquely different beast. Just because you own a cat doesn’t make you a lion tamer, and just because you convince enough people to vote for you does not mean you are ready to lead. Candidate Obama ran a seemly good campaign; President Obama is in way over his head. What would it matter if President Obama ‘showed some emotion (as some have suggested)’ when all it would be is misdirected irritation, and in no way an indication of leadership.

Watching President Obama these past few months trying to deal with the BP oil spill, North Korea’s overt acts of war, Iran’s continued defiance, the international community’s ‘ganging up’ on Israel, misspeaking (or butting in where it does not belong – Cambridge Police, Arizona immigration law), and an economy in chaos, one almost feels sorry for President Obama…almost. President Obama own narcissism and arrogance, fueled by willing enablers (from birth to oath), is how we find ourselves off the pathway of righteousness.

There are many people like President Obama. The halls of academia and the streets of despair are crowded with those who look at the world through the prism of underachievement, and believe that success can be achieved if only the bar was really as low as they thought it was. Ask the ‘you’ of 21 and the ‘you’ of 40 what it means to be a leader, and the answers would astound you. Is it any wonder that Obama’s resume of mediocrity was seen by fellow underachievers as the resume of a proven leader.

Every generation or so, America mistakenly tries to redefine what virtues make a great leader; and every time we realize that virtues such as integrity, commonsense, self- reliance, real world experience, confidence – balanced with humility, and a commitment to a cause higher than oneself are the intrinsic worth that makes a great leader.

America deserves a great leader every time they elect someone as President. But what Americans have failed to realize for far too long is that the President is nothing more than the extension of the country, and that it is the citizens that are the true leaders. In the end we must remember the straightforward path is our way out of the darkness of the forest, and as we have demonstrated in the past, leadership grows and gathers it strength from the people. It is time once again for the people to lead.

Live Free or Die

A Great Speech, Thank-you Congressman Boehner!

2010-03-22T10:54:00.003-04:00

A Great Speech, Thank-you Congressman Boehner!

The Myth That This Healthcare Bill Will Help Reduce Cost

2010-03-17T10:47:00.002-04:00

Let us be very clear, this healthcare bill WILL NOT reduce cost. President Obama and the Democrats are play fast and loose with the facts, and are merely playing a shell game. The United States Government (or for that matter, any government) is ill-equipped to provide services and goods, period. In fact, every time the government meddles in the free-market, chaos follows (remember “price control” under President Carter….how did that work out?)

A Cost-Control Mirage: Obama is telling people what they want to hear about health care, not what they need to know.

Also, there are things crammed into this bill that have NOTHING to do with healthcare:

Green Energy Schools: Funding for (high performance) green energy schools? Forget the fact we should be funding schools that perform high academically, but what does this have to do with healthcare?

Student-Loan Funding: This bill includes the complete takeover (and full funding responsibility) for all federal funding of college student loans. One, the government already screwed this program up, and once again, WHAT DOES THIS HAVE TO DO WITH HEALTHCARE!!!!????!!!!

We must keep push our legistaors to vote against this bill, and start over.

Speech Text: You Call Healthcare Reform, I Call It Tyranny

2010-03-17T08:49:00.002-04:00

The following is the script I used while speaking at the Americans for Prosperity event in Rochester, NH on March 16, 2010.

What a year it has been. Most of you in this room have spent the better part of this last year engaged in your government like never before.

We have had to fight so many issues, to the point of exhaustion, and no matter how hard we fight, they just keep coming. Some say it is unfortunate, that we have come to a point in our country when our representatives seem so willing to ignore, not only the Declaration of Independence and the united States Constitution, but the righteous will of “We the People……..”

I on the other hand have never been more proud of all of you, my fellow New Hampshirites, and do not look at this situation as unfortunate. Because I am going to share a little secret with you that too many in Washington seem to have forgotten, but yet each in this room knows all too well. The Constitution of the united States belongs to the people, and if those serving in our State and National capitols want to ignore that fact, then we Granite Staters are prepared to remind them.

This past year reminds me of one of the greatest clashes in our history. During the conflict at Gettysburg, standing on top of Little Roundtop, the furthest left flank of the Union Army, stood a regiment from Maine, commanded by Civil War hero Joshua Chamberlain.
The boys from Maine were the last line of defense, if the Confederates broke through there, they would overrun the rest of the Union positions.

Against overwhelming odds, Colonial Chamberlains troops pushed back wave after wave of the Confederate Army. Exhausted and out of ammo, the situation looked desperate.
In many ways that is how most of us feel today, but surrender is not an option, failure cannot not be the end result. If Congresswoman Porter and her colleagues break through on healthcare, the cause of freedom will be weaken. Because this bill is not only unconstitutional, it is un-American.

Make no mistake about it, we are in a new civil war, one without bullets, but the cause is the same………….liberty. Liberty is our unique American experience, which must include our ability to self govern and enjoy the benefits of a fair, but free market.

Thomas Jefferson said it best when he stated – “A wise and frugal government, which shall leave men free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned - this is the sum of good government.”

We live in a disciplined democracy, wrapped in the blanket of a virtue known as a Republican form of government. Today Congresswoman Porter and her colleagues are tugging on that blanket, and we must resist with every fiber of our existence, or risk exposing future generations to the oppressive elements of totalitarianism.

Whether it is an excessive tax burden against the most productive in our society, or the central mandate that dictates the purchasing of healthcare, or face a penalty that includes prison, you and I (and millions of our fellow Americans) are fighting against the soft tyranny of a 2000 page bill that puts a far off centralized government in-between you and your doctor. I call it soft-tyranny because we are not being oppressed by the bullet but by the pen, but it is tyranny none the less.

And aiding in this attack on our individual liberty, one of New Hampshire’s own, Congresswoman Carol Porter. Never in my life did I ever believe that an assault on our Constitution would be lead by a representative hailing from the “Live Free of Die” State.

But who is this Congresswoman who would so willingly ignore her employers, you and I, for a piece of legislation that would dismantle the best healthcare system in the world and replace it with Castro-care?

Congresswoman Porter has made it her legislative mission, along with Speaker Pelosi, Senate Leader Reid, and President Obama to help reshape a “new” America; an America in their own image. An image where those in Washington believe they know what is best for you, even if you don’t.

And where does Congresswoman Porter stand on these issues, when she makes it a point, along with her colleagues, that those of us who seek real healthcare cost reform are nothing more than a group who can only say “NO.” But when you look at the record, who really has been the person of “NO?

Did Congresswoman Porter reach out to John Stephen, someone who has been instrumental in helping States, including NH, deal with their healthcare issues? “NO!”

Did Congresswoman Porter reach out to sitting NH Senator, and former-NH Congressman Jeb Bradley, an individual who has worked on healthcare issues both at the State and the national level, and seek his valuable council. “NO!”

And what about Sean Mahoney, who not only wrote one of the best articles regarding healthcare reform this past year, but talks to NH business people every single day about their struggles. Did Congresswoman Porter reach out to Sean Mahoney for insight? “NO!”

And what about the small business owner, who will be greatly affected (negatively) if the current understanding of this healthcare bill passes? Did Congresswoman Porter talk with Fenton Groen, owner of one of the regions leading construction companies, who not only lives in her district, but in her hometown? Did she ask Fenton for advice. “NO!”

And what about her continents? Has Congresswoman Porter been open to your suggestions and input on this matter. “NO!”

And how responsive has Congresswoman Porter been at looking at, and embracing, free-market solutions that would have a greater impact at addressing the true concerns regarding healthcare….availability and cost:

Does Congresswoman Porter support healthcare portability; (meaning the ability for you and I being able to not have our insurance tied down to our jobs)? “NO!”

Does Congresswoman Porter support real tax-credits to individuals to help cover the cost of Healthcare insurance? “NO!”

Does Congresswoman Porter support health insurance vouchers for those that can’t purchases insurance, providing them with the ability to freely choose their own health insurance? “NO!”

Does Congresswoman Porter supported the ability for the individual to purchase any plan they want, across State lines, to help ensure maximum competitiveness (which has always helped reduce the cost). “NO!”

Does Congresswoman Porter support the ability of individuals, small business, or non-profits to combine, allowing them to negotiate as a collective (buying in quantity always reduces the cost) to buy healthcare insurance? “NO!”

Does Congresswoman Porter support the ability for individuals, interested in purchasing through a health insurance collective, to contribute additional funds, tax-free, to help those in need of health coverage? “NO!”

Does Congresswoman Porter support the ability of the individual to contribute greater sums to THEIR flex plans, tax-free, and allow those flex-plans to roll over from year to year (tax-free). “NO!”

Does Congresswoman Porter defend your individual liberty, and allow you to determine your own healthcare fate? “NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!”

But let’s be fair, Congresswoman Porter doesn’t always say no. For example:

Does Congresswoman support a 2000+ page healthcare bill that she initially did not read, and to date many of her colleagues still have not read? “YES!”

Does Congresswoman Porter support a bill that Nancy Pelosi recently supported by saying – “You have to wait until the bill passes to know what is in it?” “YES!”

Does Congresswoman Porter support a healthcare bill that directly or indirectly uses taxpayer dollars to fund abortion? “YES!”

Does Congresswoman Porter support a bill that will force healthcare rationing on all Americans? “YES!”

Does Congresswoman Porter support a bill that will cut $500 billion dollars from Medicare? “YES!”

Does Congresswoman Porter support a bill that would provide healthcare coverage to at least 8 million illegal aliens? “YES!”

Does Congresswoman Porter support a bill that the CBO says will raise income taxes to 43% (from 35%) on many Americans? “YES!”

Does Congresswoman Porter support a bill that will see the Capitals Gains taxes increase from 15% to 22.5%, in an already troubled economy? “YES!”

Does Congresswoman Porter support a bill that will force a $2,000.00 dollar increase in the average health insurance premium (according to Heritage Foundation based on the CBO analysis)? “YES!”

Does Congresswoman Porter support a bill that will FORCE people to buy insurance they don’t need or want that would cost over $8,500.00 dollars? “YES!”

Does Congresswoman Porter support a bill that would allow the IRS further intrusion into your life, by making them the enforcement arm to ensure that the mandatory healthcare insurance is being met by individuals? “YES!”

Does Congresswoman Porter support a bill that fines those who do not purchase health insurance 2.5% of their income? “YES!”

Does Congresswoman Porter support a healthcare bill that also mandates prison sentences should an individual not purchase healthcare and fail to pay the penalty fine? “YES!”
But guess what, she will make sure you have complete healthcare coverage when you are in prison!

Does Congresswoman Porter support a healthcare bill that taxes medical devices, such as pace makers, hearing aids, wheel-chairs, and artificial limbs? “YES!”

Does Congresswoman Porter support a healthcare bill that completes a government takeover and funding of all federal student-loan programs (what the hell does that have to do with healthcare?)? “YES!”

Does Congresswoman Porter support a bill that will be passed without actually being voted on? “YES!”

Does Congresswoman Porter support a bill that the overwhelming majority of her continents do not support? “YES!”

If this healthcare bill passes, with the help of Congresswoman Porter, the United States Congress will seize control of not only the best healthcare system in the world, but a free market entity that represents 1/6 of our economy.

If this bill passes, which when combined with the masses takeovers of other industries, such as the financial institutes and auto manufactures, Congresswoman Porter will be on record as to permitting the United States Government seizing close to 50% of our economy.

When a government talks about controlling the economy and business, make no mistake about it, what they are really talking about is controlling people. This is a concept our country, and most of our neighbors, are ill-prepared to handle, let alone support. And it is contrariety to the founding principles that made America the most prosperous nation on the planet.
“All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent.” – Thomas Jefferson

We cannot remain silent, and we cannot be part of a generation that allowed this to happen!
A vote on healthcare will most likely come this week. Waiting until November will not help us now. November will give us a chance to restore sensibility in DC; but today, and tomorrow, and all of the days until the next election require our vigilance.

We need to make sure that the likes of Congresswoman Porter, Speaker Pelosi, and Majority Leader Reid, feel us breathing down their necks, see us taking to the streets in opposition to bad ideas, and they need to hear us not only in resistance, but in support of intellectual solutions that serve us and not enslave us!

And how do we stay engaged:
You support groups such as the AFP, help give them the muscle to resist.

Calls are nice but telegrams, letters, and visits to our Representative offices are better! (do not go in there as a group, but go in there one at a time.

Be an advocate. Get your friends and family engaged.

Help candidates who not only oppose those representatives that support such measures as this healthcare bill, but candidates that are prepared to offer real solutions and reforms that will help New Hampshire families, and not hurt them

Support such endeavors as Frank Guinta’s healthcare petition, and Congressman Steve King’s Declaration for Healthcare Independence.

Right letters to the editor or call talk radio. Don’t insult, simply state facts.

Stay informed and be ready to engage on principles and fact. Visit sites such as Heritage Foundation and the Hudson Institute. Arm yourself with the truth, because our liberal friends know so much that just isn’t so.

In closing I want to bring you back to the beginning of my remarks. I want to bring you back to Gettysburg and Littleround Top. When we last left Joshua Chamberlain and his men they were outnumbered, exhausted, and out of ammo. The situation looked hopeless, in many ways where you and I found ourselves now.

Chamberlain knew what we know today, surrender is not an option; failure cannot not be the end result. Against all odds, Colonial Chamberlain rallied his troops and gave them the only order he could…….fix bayonets!

Chamberlain and his men did something their enemy did not expect……… they charged down that hill yelling and screaming as one united force. I can only imagine what the enemy must have thought.

When the cause of liberty needed a victory, a small band of brothers from Maine gave us one. But it was their destiny to win that battle, as it is our destiny to win this one, because they had something their enemies did not possess………. They had the high ground and they were fighting for a principle greater than themselves.

Ladies and gentleman, the opposition has underestimated your determination and your resolve. We have the high ground, and our principles are worthy of our defense. So I say to tonight…..fix bayonets ……………charge!

Don’t Like Tea Parties, Try Coffee!

2010-03-02T13:22:00.002-05:00

Leave it to liberals to create a counter movement in which their symbol is a beverage topped with frothy milk, and whose motto is “espresso yourself.”

Lacking even one original bone in their vegan induced, emaciated bodies, this group of beret wearing neoprogressives have decided that they need to stand up “against” the tea party movement by writing a coffee manifesto!

The founder of the “movement,” Annabel Park, a documentary film maker (big surprise, the perfect vocation for the founder of such a group) even offered a motivating rallying cry:

"let's start a coffee party ... smoothie party. red bull party. anything but tea. geez. ooh how about cappuccino party? that would really p!ss 'em off bec it sounds elitist ..."

Gee you think, elitist? Where do I sign up?

Bruce Maiman wrote an interesting blog piece, in which he suggested some items that should be part of the coffee party planks:

* No sleeping until after the midterm elections
* YOU TYPE EVERYTHING IN CAPITAL LETTERS
* Ability to pass people on the highway without driving in your car
* Rename your kids "Cappuccino," "Americano" and "Mocha Latte"
* Tendency to lick window panes at Starbucks
* All videos watched in fast-forward
* Can only stand still during an earthquake
* Pulse can only be measured using the National Debt Clock
* You do 20 miles on the treadmill before you realize it's not plugged in
* You're shaking like Jim Bunning at an unemployment office
* You don't sweat, you percolate

Can’t wait for the first meeting when they breakout the bongo drums and unveil the new group flag, which just happens to feature a picture of Juan Valdez and his burro.

NH’s Own Punxsutawney Phil: Governor Lynch

2010-02-28T14:15:00.000-05:00

Like the famous weather predicting rodent from the Keystone State, New Hampshire has its own version of Punxsutawney Phil, and his name is Governor Lynch. But now the only time Governor Lynch seems to emerge from his lair is when most of his constituents are without those pesky modern conveniences, like heat, water or communication with the outside world.

N’er to be seen or heard from during our recent budget woes, Governor Lynch can always be counted on to pop out of his den when it is time to declare a State of Emergency. Putting on his best Timberland Duck Boots and canvas “I am in charge” jacket, Governor Lynch has perfected the illusion of leadership when New Hampshire is in need of being declared a disaster zone.

Bravo, Hopkinton John. While members of your Party are running around imposing excessive taxes and fees, while at the same time declaring war on small business with the recent ill-advised LLC tax, New Hampshire can sleep well knowing you can be found scurrying about the fallen trees and the out-of state line crews, as a fumbling media trips over themselves (and the downed branches) in a effort to get just the “right” action photo of you.

NH: Does Congressman Paul Ryan Deserve Our Fawning

2010-02-27T15:17:00.005-05:00

With Congressman Paul Ryan’s recent visit to NH, I could not help but notice how easily some have forgotten how the Republican Party found themselves out as the majority. Everyone wants to get their picture taken with him, and no one wants to ask him the tough questions.

Maybe's its the euphoria of "certain victory" that many believe will come the Republican Party's way this Fall. Or maybe it because Congressman Ryan is young, providing the illusion of a Party newness. And although Ryan in the past, more times than not, has voted as a conservative (which I greatly appreciate), he also has a history of voting for political gain:

Voted YES on $192B additional anti-recession stimulus spending. (Jul 2009)
Voted YES on $15B bailout for GM and Chrysler. (Dec 2008)
Voted YES on granting Washington DC an Electoral vote & vote in Congress. (Apr 2007)
Voted against the original stimulus package, but than wrote that he supported the Energy Center of Wisconsin’s grant application, which “intends to place 1,000 workers in green jobs.” The funds for this center would come directly from stimulus funding he VOTED AGAINST.

Congressman Ryan was first elected to the House when he was 28 years old, and he is now 40 (that is 12 years……….the longest job he has ever held is in government!). Prior to joining the Congress he worked as an aide to Senator Kasten (1992), then served as Legislative Director for Senator Brownback, and next as a speechwriter for William Bennett and Jack Kemp. Where is the private sector experience? If he were a Democrat, many would be saying he is nothing more than the ultimately political insider! But because many see him as "one of us," they believe it is alright to ignore the fact that Ryan has called DC his home for most of his adult life.

He has little to no private sector experience. But he is young, and he is saying what we need him to say now; so NH welcomes him with open arms, wooed by his youth, and tough talk at the Healthcare Summit. But we have a greater responsibility as NH voters, it is called accountability. NH owes it to the rest of the nation to be tough on not only Democrats, but Republicans. He voted for some of the very things many of us stood against, and frankly has been in Washington far too long not to be tainted.

Some in NH care more about a photo op than holding our elected representatives accountable. I have nothing against Congressman Ryan, and feel in many ways he is far better than most in Congress. But I have gotten to the point that I need to acknowledge that part of the problem in DC is career politicians. Congressman Paul Ryan is a career politician.

The Mount Vernon Statement

2010-02-23T19:46:00.002-05:00

The Mount Vernon Statement

Constitutional Conservatism: A Statement for the 21st Century

We recommit ourselves to the ideas of the American Founding.Through the Constitution, the Founders created an enduring framework of limited government based on the rule of law. They sought to secure national independence, provide for economic opportunity, establish true religious liberty and maintain a flourishing society of republican self-government.

These principles define us as a country and inspire us as a people. They are responsible for a prosperous, just nation unlike any other in the world. They are our highest achievements, serving not only as powerful beacons to all who strive for freedom and seek self-government, but as warnings to tyrants and despots everywhere.

Each one of these founding ideas is presently under sustained attack. In recent decades, America’s principles have been undermined and redefined in our culture, our universities and our politics. The selfevident truths of 1776 have been supplanted by the notion that no such truths exist. The federal government today ignores the limits of the Constitution, which is increasingly dismissed as obsolete and irrelevant.

Some insist that America must change, cast off the old and put on the new. But where would this lead — forward or backward, up or down? Isn’t this idea of change an empty promise or even a dangerous deception?

The change we urgently need, a change consistent with the American ideal, is not movement away from but toward our founding principles. At this important time, we need a restatement of Constitutional conservatism grounded in the priceless principle of ordered liberty articulated in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.

The conservatism of the Declaration asserts self-evident truths based on the laws of nature and nature’s God. It defends life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. It traces authority to the consent of the governed. It recognizes man’s self-interest but also his capacity for virtue.

The conservatism of the Constitution limits government’s powers but ensures that government performs its proper job effectively. It refines popular will through the filter of representation. It provides checks and balances through the several branches of government and a federal republic.

A Constitutional conservatism unites all conservatives through the natural fusion provided by American principles. It reminds economic conservatives that morality is essential to limited government, social conservatives that unlimited government is a threat to moral self-government, and national security conservatives that energetic but responsible government is the key to America’s safety and leadership role in the world.

A Constitutional conservatism based on first principles provides the framework for a consistent and meaningful policy agenda.

* It applies the principle of limited government based on the rule of law to every proposal.
* It honors the central place of individual liberty in American politics and life.
* It encourages free enterprise, the individual entrepreneur, and economic reforms grounded in market solutions.
* It supports America’s national interest in advancing freedom and opposing tyranny in the world and prudently considers what we can and should do to that end.
* It informs conservatism’s firm defense of family, neighborhood, community, and faith.

If we are to succeed in the critical political and policy battles ahead, we must be certain of our purpose.

We must begin by retaking and resolutely defending the high ground of America’s founding principles.

February 17, 2010

It is not the Party’s Fault; It’s the “Isms”

2010-02-23T11:42:00.005-05:00

This is in response to a Letter to the Editor blaming Republicans for all America’s economic woes throughout our history:

I could not help but response to David B. Munsey revisionist history of the role Republicans played in the economy. But in order to fairly represent the true nature of the discussion, the dialogue should really focus on the difference between the “ism” that controlled the debate at the time of the economic up or down. Was it progressivism or conservatism that was the overall guiding principles? By worrying less about the party affiliation, and focusing more on the reining “ism,” you start see an obvious trend.

First, Mr. Munsey ignores the Great Depression of 1920. That’s right 1920, not 1931. The WORSE economic crash to occur in modern record keeping was the crash under progressive Woodrow Wilson (D). Wilson applied a high tax rate (upwards of 70%) and massive deficit spending (spending outpaced tax revenues X 3). The fastest recovery out of a major economic downturn occurred under the great “forgotten” President, conservative Calvin Coolidge (R). President Coolidge reduced the tax rate to 25% and cut spending by a whopping 50%! It is the combination of a fair tax percentage and STRICT spending controls that resulted in higher tax revenues and unprecedented employment (98.1 % employment). Under Coolidge’s conservative leadership we saw the largest increase of the middle class in history.

The next economic downturn, 1929, which contrary to misconception, was not the start of the “Great Depression.” However, the downturn of 1929 was the result of the progressive policies of President Herbert Hoover (the “forgotten progressive”) (R). Hoover ignored the lessons of the Wilson administration and abandoned the conservative principals established by Coolidge. Hoover initially maintained the lower tax rate, but increased spending to record deficit levels (much like we saw under Bush 43). Also under Hoover, we started to see the heavy hand of government being applied to business. Lo and behold, the economic collapsed, eventually leading to the depression of 1929.

I noticed that Mr. Munsey ignored the next two great dips in our economy, 1931 (the Great Depression) and 1938, probable for good reason; they would not play very well into his argument of Democrat (good) versus Republican (bad). The Great Depression was the direct result of heavy taxation, deficit spending, confusing government control, and lastly, Hoover and the Congress trying to “spend” their way into prosperity (sound familiar?). Policies that would be continued under FDR.

1938, America saw another major economic downturn with high unemployment (19% ), out of control spending , a punishing tax code (67%), the heavy hand of government entanglements within the market, and continued attempts by the US government to spend their way into prosperity. In fact FDR’s attempt to “control” the economic resulted in the comment made by FDR’s Secretary of Treasury, "We've tried spending money. We are spending more money than we have ever spent before, and it does not work."

I could go on, but why bother. When our government is guided by progressive policies, economic downturn will follow. Whenever the government is guided by conservative principals, true economic prosperity follows. Mr. Munsey is simply reciting from the playbook of the “new progressives,” which currently exist in both major Parties.

40% of all Americans identify themselves as Conservatives, and for good reason. They understand that both deficit spending and a punishing tax code are immoral. They also understand that government should function the same way a responsible household does; with a balance check book and by not stealing from your neighbors to make up for a lack of fiscal responsibility. It is progressive policies that have failed us, and both the Democrats and Republicans are guilty.

Progressivism is Dead – What Next?

2010-02-18T07:02:00.001-05:00

Where has the time gone? We are more than a year into the Obama Era, and contrary to what some in media are saying, there is no ambiguity; President Barrack Obama’s first year in office will go down in history as the worse first year of any presidency. Period. This distinction does not rest solely with the President; he has had plenty of help from an inept, Democratically controlled Congress. But also complacent in this great American mistake, was the push into office by an electorate more concerned about “making history,” instead of embracing our historical responsibly.

In late 2008, I wrote extensively about then candidate Barrack Obama (A Rendezvous with Destiny - Obama 2008 Archives), and over this past year I have continued to write about the Obama Administration (A Rendezvous with Destiny - Obama - 2009/2010 Archives). I spent much of the time on my two radio shows (New Hampshire Perspective and Right Here, Right Now ) detailing the disaster that has been the first year of the Obama world. Nothing I wrote or said made any difference. So I have decided to say something I usually avoid when I know I am right….”I told you so…….!” The problem with this “I told you so,” is that it comes at great expense to our country.

Standing before us is tattered country, moving in so many directions, lacking focus and leadership. Go down the list of concerns that many people expressed prior to the election of 2008, and is it any wonder we find ourselves in this collective mess: lack of experience, no real-world accomplishments, governing by theory versus reality, rhetoric over substance, shady associations, sounding moderate - but living/legislating leftist, and demonstrating overwhelming derision beliefs regarding America.

And for those who bought into the hype, and wanted to be part of history……how is that working out for you? When you vote like a “left-winger (caught up in the emotion, ignoring commonsense and a higher intellectual understanding, voting to “make history” instead of voting with an understanding of history, dismissing serious concerns as mere campaigning rhetoric),” than you shouldn’t be surprised when you wake up surrounded by a nightmare of leadership that is currently smothering us.

Have you ever notice that many left-wingers want to talk about “failed” policies, based on their special eyesight, but only if they were Republican initiatives, and based on their inimitable pass/fail system. But left-wingers want to ignore an American landscape littered with their failed policies. And so it goes with our current state of affairs. There is very little truth in media, very little faith in government, and no hope that the two parties can work together. This is the Obama legacy, a failed leader born of failed policies.

Proving once again of their inability to embrace reality, their inherent aptitude for ignoring (and at times, perpetuating outright falsehoods) of our unique American history, and their dogmatic support of anything that ignores our Constitutional foundation, left-wingers have led us to a dark place. Left-wingers have closed their eyes to policies and principals that have been shown to work, choosing to lead by failed theories, and not allowing themselves to be guided by practical realities. Is it any wonder that left-wingers have had to rename their movement several times throughout history (Progressive > Communist > Socialist > Liberals > New Progressives). The left-wingers have managed to destroy another perfectly good word (progressive)…….. again! I have a suggestion to all the left-wingers seeking to rename their delusional movement. Just call it what it is…….Regressivism! I guarantee you that Regressivism rings more true to left-wing propaganda, and will last a lot longer as a moniker for their abortive movement.

Frankly, I do not care what we call those on the left, but I am more concerned with what the left stands for; bigger government and more and more repressive policies. Over time, as government grows bigger and takes on more control over our daily lives, America will undergo a major transformation away from our unique American persona of self-reliance towards a radical change to a self-imposed serfdom. Americans almost seem to be embracing these policies of bondage, where in the past an overwhelming majority would resist the heavy hand of government in our lives with every fiber of their existence. Only time will tell whether Americans wake up from this self induced servitude, or if we fall deeper under the spell of oppressive, leftist policies.

There is one distinction that will be forever part of the Obama legacy. He will be forever known as the most successful underachiever in world history. Ill-prepared for the job he sought, capitulated into that role by a people who forget the consequence that is theirs alone when choosing the leader of the free world.

Heathcare: What Would Dr. King Do?

2010-02-16T08:03:00.004-05:00

Over the past few weeks, some in the media, along with many left-leaning groups (such as Progressive Democrats for America, Democrats.com, After Downing Street), aided by easily manipulated, everyday citizens (through a letter writing campaign), have inaccurately been trying to invoke the civil rights movement of the past by declaring that Martin Luther King would have supported the current attempts at health care reform. I strongly disagree with these false assertions. Dr. Martin Luther King is one of my personal heroes; imperfect like all of us, but truly committed to a cause greater than him.

Let me say without hesitation that I believe that health care reform is needed (as it relates to cost and individual control over our plans), but the immorality we have witnessed throughout this current legislative process would not be one that Dr. King would support. One only need to read King’s “Letter from Birmingham” to know where Dr. King’s heart and mind were on the matters of injustice and individual liberty, and his deep understanding of our Judeo-Christian values, which were the guiding principles that led to the creation of our Declaration of Independence and US Constitution, and the birth of our nation.

But more importantly, Dr. King would never support any reform that would not only permit, but fund, a system that would advance the genocide that is abortion. Nor would Dr. King support a law that places a choker and chains of overwhelming debt around the neck of future generations - “The Negro cannot win if he is willing to sacrifice the futures of his children for immediate personal comfort and safety. Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.”

What we have witnessed this past year with bribes, behind the doors dealings, class envy, and demonization of individuals is everything Dr. King stood against! Dr. King would clearly see that there are no “White Only” signs in the windows of our current health care system, but would see an economic injustice that does not allow the free market to provide a fair and equal service to all; instead a necessary service is being subjected to regulations that are more about control and power, and have nothing to do with providing for those that seek that service. Dr. King would see the heavy hand of government (something he knew was easily corrupted), either immorally subjugating the will of the people, or worse yet, binding them to the chains of a new slavery; governmental dependency that does nothing to lift people up, but only serves to place all of us into a collective misery. Equal maybe, just no.

Portability in health plans, flex plans that roll over, tax breaks for the purchase of the plans, and yes when necessary, “locally-controlled” plans that provide for those who lack coverage. Picture the ability of individual groups: church groups, nonprofits, fraternal organizations, small businesses, and even groups such as bowling league and softball teams, being able to pool their resources and negotiate freely for health insurance coverage. And imagine a system that allows each of us to freely donate, within a community cooperative, to provide for those in need of health insurance. People helping people, without the waste of a defectively constructed, and most assuredly a poorly managed, government plan.

Dr. King would want us to do something to help those in need; but he would more likely to support a systems that promotes self-reliance, over a system that only serves to further support an existence of continued servitude.

Happy Birthday James Madison

2010-02-16T07:48:00.000-05:00

Today we mark the anniversary of the birth of our countries 4th President, James Madison. As a kid the only thing I knew about President Madison was his wife’s name was Dolly, and she made great cup cakes.

James Madison was a member of that eternal fraternity we would later call “The Founding Fathers.” At the ripe old age of 36, Madison was the primary author of the united States Constitution; a distinction that would earn him the larger than life nickname of “Father of the Constitution.” James Madison was also the author of many of the Federalist Papers, which many feel was Madison’s efforts to strengthen the true meaning of the Constitution, due in part to early attempts to usurp the Constitutions original intent.

James Madison was an enigma to many because of his political swings back and forth throughout his life. As he wrote the Constitution (based on his participation in the creation of the Virginia Constitution), he originally resisted the need for the Bill of Rights, insisting they were not necessary. He would shift from a strict State’s rights proponent, to a reluctant advocate for a stronger central government, back to his original belief that stronger State’s rights and limited central government should be the order of the day.

Madison opinion of another Founding Father, Alexander Hamilton, would also shift with time. Madison originally looked upon Alexander Hamilton has a threat to America’s new liberty, but would then enter into a restless relationship with Hamilton during the time of Federalist Paper and Madison’s Presidency.

Madison also had an unusually relationship with Thomas Jefferson. At first Madison and Jefferson did not get along very well. But later they would become very good friends, writing numerous, lengthy conversations back and forth to each other. During Jefferson presidency, Jefferson would come to rely on Madison’s advice, especially on matters of the Constitution.

In Madison we find a fair, intelligent, open-mind, yet cautious man. Madison possessed that rare combination of common-sense and intellect, who was not reluctant to listen to others, and when a convincing argument was made, change his mind. Not bad qualities then, or now.
Happy Birthday President Madison

The Super Bowl and Abortion, and Why Scott Brown is Wrong

2010-02-02T11:51:00.003-05:00

The past few weeks have lent themselves to the topic of abortion. The anniversary of Roe vs. Wade, the Tebow family Super Bowl commercial, Susan Estrich’s recent opinion piece, or the recent comments made by America’s new “man of the people” Scott Brown, have let us blow off a little philosophical steam, without really accomplishing anything. And after the Super Bowl, the topic will be placed back in that dark closet America stores its deficiencies; and that is a shame.

What we do at the moment of a life revealed will determine not only that baby’s fate, but the fate of all humanity. Our sense of not only our compassion towards our fellow man, our kindness to those in need, and our charity to mankind rest with the very first time many of us held the fate of a pure life in our hand, only to realize that it is not our choice to make. It is God’s will, or nature’s vocation, or the stork; whatever method you subscribe to, all of it enviably leads to one concrete fact. Standing before us, safe in the womb, is a living being. Commonsense demands you surrender to fact and reason; it is then your choice to ignore it or embrace it.

When we feel that we have the power over life and death, than we should not be surprised when people choose to use that power; whenever, wherever. The very essence of our communal respect for all existence starts at life’s beginning. Our humanity starts in the womb, the vessel that nature or God deemed to the safest place for our undefined destiny. Each of you reading this was offered the opportunity to make a difference, because you were given the gift of life; ultimately because someone recognized your humanity, and did not succumb to a “truth is relative” concept used to define life.

What some people have lost in this debate is the essential question of fact. Is the baby in the womb a human life? Not, “does the baby have a soul.” Not, “is the baby perfect.” Not, “can I afford this child.” Not, “is this the right time.” Not, “should I bring a baby into this painful world.” Not, “but it is a woman’s body.” Not, “but I wanted a boy.” Nor is the question of how the baby was conceived relevant to the most basic truth. The only thing that matters is whether the baby in the womb is life?

The question of life is beyond reproach; it is mans own selfness and insecurities that opens the door to “debate,” and closes the window to the known genuineness of our being. It is mankind’s own hubris that allows all us to be devalued.

There is no greater hope for humanity than the innocents and purity of a child. Each time we exercise power over another human being in a way that extinguishes innocent life, than we chip away at not only our individual humanity, but our shared empathy.

If you choose to ignore your own humanity, be honest about. Society has deemed, for now, that the practice of taking of an innocent human life (for whatever reason) to be the province of a free-society; not a just society, not a compassion society, not a moral society, but a free society. If you support abortion, then don’t bother with the facade that reduction should be a goal, all while supporting the endeavor that will end the life. If you support abortion as “public policy,” but not as a personal decision you would choose, please recognize that people are keenly aware of your own inconstancies.

And if you support life, put into action a course of kindness and charity that makes people want to choose life. Let all know that they are never alone, and that you value all other life above your own.

Brown, Estrich, and even Tebow are all wrong, but so are all of us. All of us have failed to live up to the promise declared over two-hundred years ago – “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.” Our past failure to live up to the absolute truth that is our Declaration of Independence has been corrected, but our future injustices await our resolve. But make no mistake about it, the issue of abortion is “not settled,” and as with the question of slavery, we only need to recognize that, as a country, we are sanctioning a transparent injustice.

The Reagan Renaissance

2010-02-02T10:47:00.003-05:00

As I look around America, I find myself back in 1979. Our economy is falling apart. Government is running up massive deficits. Our place in the world is diminishing. But now is not the time to succumb to the failed idea that government is the answer. No, now is the time for all of us to recommit ourselves to the principals that once saved this country, and can do it again. A commitment to Conservative Principals.

America has lost its way, but the American spirit has not vanished. At the time of our last great despair a leader came forth. Some called him nothing more than a former B-actor; they underestimated his love for our country, and the keen insight he possessed, and his ability to delivery, that would help make America into that “bright, shining city on a hill.”

This Saturday will mark what would have been Ronald Regan’s 99th birthday. The best gift we can give him is to remember how great we were as a nation when he was our President; and how we can move forward by returning to those key principals. Let’s us declare February 6, 2010, a new beginning, a “Reagan Renaissance.”

I encourage everyone to:

Read Ronald Regan’s 1977 CPAC speech ( Ronald Reagan's 1977 CPAC Speech)
View his greatest speech – A Time for Choosing (A Time for Choosing)
View his farewell address to America (Ronald Reagan's Farewell Address )

It Has Always Been "The People's Seat"

2010-01-18T11:34:00.006-05:00

What does the battle between Scott Brown and Martha Coakley really mean? Why has this race captured the attention of an entire nation? Why is the media fascinated with this race? The answer is simple….hope and change.

It is more than just Republican against Democrat, Liberal against Conservative; it is the understanding of the principle that we are a representative republic and not an elected aristocracy. It is the appreciation of knowing that it is the “people’s seat,” and not the throne of a self-professed nobility, who believe that it is their seat to hand down from one lord to the next. It is the hope that every generation remembers that it is the elected who answers to the people, and that change can never come at the expense of our founding principles…….. "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness…”

Believe or not this campaign is not even about Scott Brown (who is an incredible person first and valid candidate second). This is about the simple belief that it is the consent of the governed that have been preordained to control their own destiny, and will not be “subjects,” ruled by a few bigheaded elitist. Elitist whose fingers burn whenever they touch the Constitution, whose ears bleed when the Declaration of Independence is read aloud, and who have grown blind and deaf to the will of the people. Elitist who expel any original thought once they are elected, and whose asses grow accustom to a chair that is on loan to them.

There are events that happen to every generation that reaffirms the founding principles that are at the very core of this “great experiment” known as America. Every once in awhile “We the People….” is more than just a catchphrase used by politicians to harvest votes. "We the People…” becomes the rallying cry not just against something, but in support of an idea or cause worth fighting for. Revolutions aren’t just won with bullets, especially in America. Every so often a course of action becomes so apparent that the American people “take to march” and fight for a cause greater than the individual.

The Brown vs. Coakley is the manifestation of everything our Founding Fathers expected from us. Massachusetts’ own Sam Adams knew that every generation would need to be “eternally vigilant” as to the cause of our own liberty when he said – “The natural liberty of man is to be free from any superior power on Earth, and not to be under the will or legislative authority of man, but only to have the law of nature for his rule.” Today, the new “Sons (and Daughters) of Liberty” are preparing to fire the second shot heard around the world. This is not about the “41st vote,” or “derailing” President Obama’s agenda, but a stand against tyranny and arrogant authority. This about reminding those in Washington that the only thing that is inevitable is that if they chose to govern in a manner that is contrary to our Republican principals, than their days are numbered.

Benjamin Franklin, was standing outside Independence Hall when the Constitutional Convention ended, when he was approached by a Mrs. Powel of Philadelphia, who asked Benjamin Franklin, “Well, Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?" With no hesitation whatsoever, Franklin responded, “A republic, if you can keep it."

Regardless of whether Scott Brown wins or not, the message will be clear. Every race, every campaign, and every candidate will have to prove that they understand that it is the people’s seat they seek, and that they are just temporary occupants. In the end, it is important for all Americans to remember that it is our “Republic,” ............if we “can keep it.”

Let Me Rise - Voices for School Choice

2010-01-14T12:03:00.000-05:00

The Character of Conservatism Part Five: Against Anti-Republican Tendencies

2010-01-07T19:53:00.002-05:00

Against Anti-Republican Tendencies

When Thomas Jefferson entered the White House as our third President he was well aware that the nation was divided after an intense election process and the final result. Vice-President Jefferson defeated President Adams in an election that had both candidates being declared an enemy of the Constitution, an exaggeration born from campaign enthusiasm, but had the eyes of a young nation peering cautiously at their new President.

Even today some question Jefferson’s interpretation of the Constitution and maybe that is justified (the Louisiana Purchase is often cited as a break from Constitutional intent). But it is important to remember that not only did President Jefferson not participate in the Constitutional Convention, he was separated from the process by an entire ocean (Jefferson was serving in France as the Constitution was being written), so we should not look to him for any in-depth elucidation. One must look to the Federalist Papers written by James Madison (The Father of the Constitution) for a truthful explanation of the Constitution’s intent. Fortunately Jefferson (and a young America) benefitted from a close friendship with Madison, and Jefferson often sought the counsel of Madison during his presidency on matters regarding Constitutional interpretation.

But at the time of his first inauguration, Jefferson understood that there were forces already in play trying to move America away from the first principals of our republic, the belief that liberty and rights are central values, and that the people were, as a whole, sovereign. Jefferson first inaugural speech rejected the concept of inherited political power, and declared with confidence, an expectation that every citizen to be independent in their performance of civic duties.

The character of conservatism can be found in two of President Jefferson’s writing; the Declaration of Independence (a foundational document of Conservatism) and his first Presidential Inaugural speech.

Friends and Fellow-Citizens:

CALLED upon to undertake the duties of the first executive office of our country, I avail myself of the presence of that portion of my fellow-citizens which is here assembled to express my grateful thanks for the favor with which they have been pleased to look toward me, to declare a sincere consciousness that the task is above my talents, and that I approach it with those anxious and awful presentiments which the greatness of the charge and the weakness of my powers so justly inspire. A rising nation, spread over a wide and fruitful land, traversing all the seas with the rich productions of their industry, engaged in commerce with nations who feel power and forget right, advancing rapidly to destinies beyond the reach of mortal eye—when I contemplate these transcendent objects, and see the honor, the happiness, and the hopes of this beloved country committed to the issue, and the auspices of this day, I shrink from the contemplation, and humble myself before the magnitude of the undertaking. Utterly, indeed, should I despair did not the presence of many whom I here see remind me that in the other high authorities provided by our Constitution I shall find resources of wisdom, of virtue, and of zeal on which to rely under all difficulties. To you, then, gentlemen, who are charged with the sovereign functions of legislation, and to those associated with you, I look with encouragement for that guidance and support which may enable us to steer with safety the vessel in which we are all embarked amidst the conflicting elements of a troubled world. During the contest of opinion through which we have passed the animation of discussions and of exertions has sometimes worn an aspect which might impose on strangers unused to think freely and to speak and to write what they think; but this being now decided by the voice of the nation, announced according to the rules of the Constitution, all will, of course, arrange themselves under the will of the law, and unite in common efforts for the common good. All, too, will bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will to be rightful must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal law must protect, and to violate would be oppression.

Let us, then, fellow-citizens, unite with one heart and one mind. Let us restore to social intercourse that harmony and affection without which liberty and even life itself are but dreary things. And let us reflect that, having banished from our land that religious intolerance under which mankind so long bled and suffered, we have yet gained little if we countenance a political intolerance as despotic, as wicked, and capable of as bitter and bloody persecutions. During the throes and convulsions of the ancient world, during the agonizing spasms of infuriated man, seeking through blood and slaughter his long-lost liberty, it was not wonderful that the agitation of the billows should reach even this distant and peaceful shore; that this should be more felt and feared by some and less by others, and should divide opinions as to measures of safety. But every difference of opinion is not a difference of principle. We have called by different names brethren of the same principle. We are all Republicans, we are all Federalists. If there be any among us who would wish to dissolve this Union or to change its republican form, let them stand undisturbed as monuments of the safety with which error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it. I know, indeed, that some honest men fear that a republican government can not be strong, that this Government is not strong enough; but would the honest patriot, in the full tide of successful experiment, abandon a government which has so far kept us free and firm on the theoretic and visionary fear that this Government, the world's best hope, may by possibility want energy to preserve itself? I trust not. I believe this, on the contrary, the strongest Government on earth. I believe it the only one where every man, at the call of the law, would fly to the standard of the law, and would meet invasions of the public order as his own personal concern. Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question.

Let us, then, with courage and confidence pursue our own Federal and Republican principles, our attachment to union and representative government. Kindly separated by nature and a wide ocean from the exterminating havoc of one quarter of the globe; too high-minded to endure the degradations of the others; possessing a chosen country, with room enough for our descendants to the thousandth and thousandth generation; entertaining a due sense of our equal right to the use of our own faculties, to the acquisitions of our own industry, to honor and confidence from our fellow-citizens, resulting not from birth, but from our actions and their sense of them; enlightened by a benign religion, professed, indeed, and practiced in various forms, yet all of them inculcating honesty, truth, temperance, gratitude, and the love of man; acknowledging and adoring an overruling Providence, which by all its dispensations proves that it delights in the happiness of man here and his greater happiness hereafter—with all these blessings, what more is necessary to make us a happy and a prosperous people? Still one thing more, fellow-citizens—a wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government, and this is necessary to close the circle of our felicities.

About to enter, fellow-citizens, on the exercise of duties which comprehend everything dear and valuable to you, it is proper you should understand what I deem the essential principles of our Government, and consequently those which ought to shape its Administration. I will compress them within the narrowest compass they will bear, stating the general principle, but not all its limitations. Equal and exact justice to all men, of whatever state or persuasion, religious or political; peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none; the support of the State governments in all their rights, as the most competent administrations for our domestic concerns and the surest bulwarks against antirepublican tendencies; the preservation of the General Government in its whole constitutional vigor, as the sheet anchor of our peace at home and safety abroad; a jealous care of the right of election by the people—a mild and safe corrective of abuses which are lopped by the sword of revolution where peaceable remedies are unprovided; absolute acquiescence in the decisions of the majority, the vital principle of republics, from which is no appeal but to force, the vital principle and immediate parent of despotism; a well disciplined militia, our best reliance in peace and for the first moments of war, till regulars may relieve them; the supremacy of the civil over the military authority; economy in the public expense, that labor may be lightly burthened; the honest payment of our debts and sacred preservation of the public faith; encouragement of agriculture, and of commerce as its handmaid; the diffusion of information and arraignment of all abuses at the bar of the public reason; freedom of religion; freedom of the press, and freedom of person under the protection of the habeas corpus, and trial by juries impartially selected. These principles form the bright constellation which has gone before us and guided our steps through an age of revolution and reformation. The wisdom of our sages and blood of our heroes have been devoted to their attainment. They should be the creed of our political faith, the text of civic instruction, the touchstone by which to try the services of those we trust; and should we wander from them in moments of error or of alarm, let us hasten to retrace our steps and to regain the road which alone leads to peace, liberty, and safety.

I repair, then, fellow-citizens, to the post you have assigned me. With experience enough in subordinate offices to have seen the difficulties of this the greatest of all, I have learnt to expect that it will rarely fall to the lot of imperfect man to retire from this station with the reputation and the favor which bring him into it. Without pretensions to that high confidence you reposed in our first and greatest revolutionary character, whose preeminent services had entitled him to the first place in his country's love and destined for him the fairest page in the volume of faithful history, I ask so much confidence only as may give firmness and effect to the legal administration of your affairs. I shall often go wrong through defect of judgment. When right, I shall often be thought wrong by those whose positions will not command a view of the whole ground. I ask your indulgence for my own errors, which will never be intentional, and your support against the errors of others, who may condemn what they would not if seen in all its parts. The approbation implied by your suffrage is a great consolation to me for the past, and my future solicitude will be to retain the good opinion of those who have bestowed it in advance, to conciliate that of others by doing them all the good in my power, and to be instrumental to the happiness and freedom of all.
Relying, then, on the patronage of your good will, I advance with obedience to the work, ready to retire from it whenever you become sensible how much better choice it is in your power to make. And may that Infinite Power which rules the destinies of the universe lead our councils to what is best, and give them a favorable issue for your peace and prosperity.

Jefferson’s first inaugural address was an example of the perfect political speech, and I do not mean that in the negative. What I mean by that is that it was crafted by its author to address its immediate audience, the Legislative and Judicial branches of the government, to remind them that they not only served at the will of the people, and “deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed …..,” but it was the intent of Jefferson “to unite a proper energy in the Executive, and a proper stability in the Legislative departments, with the essential characters of Republican Government,” a belief that was expressed by Madison to Jefferson in September of 1787 (in a letter from Madison in Philadelphia to Jefferson in France).

Jefferson’s speech was meant to set the tone to address issues facing our young nation as a united Republic, the most important, to work together to remain true to originally intent of the Constitution. But more than this, Jefferson’s had an opportunity to reaffirm what he originally wanted to say in the Declaration of Independence. Most know the line …”Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness…” But few know that Jefferson originally wrote…”Life , Liberty and the Pursuit of Property…” Jefferson understood that governments true role was first and foremost “provide for the common defence,” and conduct itself in a manner that creates the smallest footprint upon individual liberty:

“Still one thing more, fellow-citizens—a wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government, and this is necessary to close the circle of our felicities.”

Jefferson’s first inaugural speech is the essence of a liberty based Republic, a sentiment later reaffirmed by Ronald Reagan:

“Now it doesn't require expropriation or confiscation of private property or business to impose socialism on a people. What does it mean whether you hold the deed to the—or the title to your business or property if the government holds the power of life and death over that business or property? And such machinery already exists. The government can find some charge to bring against any concern it chooses to prosecute. Every businessman has his own tale of harassment. Somewhere a perversion has taken place. Our natural, unalienable rights are now considered to be a dispensation of government, and freedom has never been so fragile, so close to slipping from our grasp as it is at this moment……….
“…… defines liberalism as meeting the material needs of the masses through the full power of centralized government…….the full power of centralized government"—this was the very thing the Founding Fathers sought to minimize. They knew that governments don't control things. A government can't control the economy without controlling people. And they know when a government sets out to do that, it must use force and coercion to achieve its purpose. They also knew, those Founding Fathers, that outside of its legitimate functions, government does nothing as well or as economically as the private sector of the economy.”

One of the fundamental natures of conservatism is the understanding that our republic can not withstand the weight of its own oppression when it chooses to interfere with the liberty of others by confiscating from those willing to work and give it to those who are not.
The strength in Jefferson’s first inaugural address is its dedication to the genuineness of Republicanism, the governmental foundation that America is built upon. Jefferson spoke to unity without compromise to one’s own principal, a tone that would later be captured so brilliantly by Ronald Reagan.

Jefferson’s Declaration of Independence would come to serve as the foundation, his first inaugural speech the frame, and his presidency the crown that would all later be known as Jeffersonian principal, and by progression, an evolutional component of the character of conservatism.

Battle of the Bulge: Pregnant Soldiers in Combat

2010-01-03T22:00:00.002-05:00

Recently much has been made about female soldiers becoming pregnant while serving in a combat zone. Maj. General Anthony Cucolo III, determined to maintain combat readiness, has made clear that there would be repercussions (for both male and female soldiers) should they chose to engage in behavior that removes them from their duty:

"Anyone who leaves this fight early because they made a personal choice that changed their medical status or contributed to making someone no longer deployable is not in keeping with a key element of the Army's warrior ethos – 'I will always place the mission first,'" Cucolo said. "I believe there should be professional consequences for making a choice like that."

US general in Iraq defends tough pregnancy rules

It is important to note that the soldiers are not being punished for being pregnant; they are being reprimanded for violating their oath, and committing to actions that made the solider unable to perform their assigned duties. I understand, primal urges are hard desires to resist; but that is what we ask of our soldiers every day, to be at the optimum of their mental and physical best.

There is nothing new with the military, and by extension combat commanders, taking steps to ensure full combat effectiveness. Pregnancy is just another in a long list of physical and/or mental changes that are known to deter fighting readiness, and can result in punitive actions against the solider:

Being overweigh, excessive drug or alcohol use, self-injury, reckless behavior, even getting a sunburn (if it affects the soldier’s ability to perform their duties to their fullest) can result in an official warning.

Unfortunately, the debate has taken a wrong turn. Pro-abortion groups, liberal feminist organizations (such as NOW, which called the policy "ridiculous.” “How dare any government say we're going to impose any kind of punishment on women for getting pregnant," NOW President Terry O'Neill said. "This is not the 1800s."), anti-war groups want to somehow make this an issue about choice in favor of pregnancy (a hard sell considering their fanatically support for abortion at all cost). Each of these groups has ulterior motives, none of which have anything to do with the combat readiness of the US Military.

But the most operant intervention is when politicians decide to intervene for self-seeking motives, and not in the best interest of the combat status of a unit serving in a hot zone. Four US Senators, Sens. Barbara Boxer (D-California), Barbara Mikulski (D-Maryland), Jeanne Shaheen (D-New Hampshire), and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-New York) prematurely sent a letter in opposition to General Cucolo’s orders:

"We can think of no greater deterrent to women contemplating a military career than the image of a pregnant woman being severely punished simply for conceiving a child," the senators wrote to General Cucolo. "This defies comprehension. As such, we urge you to immediately rescind this policy."

The heavy tone of the letter is not only indicative of the Senator’s misunderstanding of the true role of the US Military, but the factual crisis General Cucolo was trying to address…….the selfish actions of a few soldiers under his command that were jeopardizing not only the mission, but the lives of fellow soldiers. It is the actions of these soldiers, some more than likely getting pregnant to avoid a long deployment, which “defies comprehension.”

Additional links:

Senators Demand General Rescind Order on Pregnant Soldiers

Knocked up and deployed: A Combat Commanders Point of View

UK Military Concerned About Pregnant Female Soldiers

A Complete Guide to ObamaCare

2009-12-28T11:53:00.002-05:00

The Wall Street Journal has complied all of their stories and editorials regarding the healthcare debate. Great resource

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704471504574441193211542788.html

Detroit Terror Plot Makes 28 Plots Foiled Since 9/11

2009-12-28T11:47:00.002-05:00

Jena Baker McNeill, Homeland Security Expert over at the Heritage Foundation, offered an excellent insight into Detroit - Northwast Airlines - Terror Plot

http://www.heritage.org/Research/HomelandSecurity/wm2741.cfm

The Debt Limit Made Simple

2009-12-28T10:49:00.000-05:00

A Christmas Prayer

2009-12-24T09:01:00.003-05:00

I sometimes envy past generations because they had the ability to simply enjoy Christmas for what it is….the birth of Our Savior, Jesus.

The exchanging of gifts was to represent a birthday celebration. Yet somehow the greatest gift is lost in the commercialism that Christmas has become. God’s gift to man….his only Son.

As you sit down for your Christmas dinner this year, take inventory of God’s blessings in your life. We live in an imperfect world, and at times we can feel consumed by all the hate and sorrow we witness. We ask ourselves “what can I do to help?”

You can let God’s grace stay strong in your heart and share his message. Buy one less gift for each person, and give that money to charity. Because this season as many of us agonizes over trying to find a Zhu Zhu, there are children in this world who will not see their next birthday. As each of us worries about “putting on a few extra pounds,” there are parents struggling to feed their families. And as we gather with family and friends, there sits a person alone…thinking that they are not loved. But if each of us holds ourselves to the standard set by Jesus Christ, and do what ever we can to help our neighbors, we can keep the true meaning of Christmas alive.

So this Christmas, may God’s grace bless your home and shine into heart. May you find your meaning in life through God’s Peace.

"Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men."

A Christmas Prayer by Robert Louis Stevenson

Loving Father, Help us remember the birth of Jesus, that we may share in the song of the angels, the gladness of the shepherds, and worship of the wise men.
Close the door of hate and open the door of love all over the world. Let kindness come with every gift and good desires with every greeting. Deliver us from evil by the blessing which Christ brings, and teach us to be merry with clear hearts.
May the Christmas morning make us happy to be thy children, and Christmas evening bring us to our beds with grateful thoughts, forgiving and forgiven, for Jesus' sake. Amen.

A Christmas Canon: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4cP26ndrmtg

Lyrics to a Christmas Canon:

This night
We pray
Our lives
Will show

This dream
He had
Each child
Still knows

We are waiting
We have not forgotten

On this night
On this night
On this very
Christmas night

The Christmas Story

2009-12-24T08:56:00.001-05:00

On Christmas Eve millions of families will gather together for the reading of “Twas The Night Before Christmas.” At the end of the story our children will place cookies out for Santa, sprinkle food on the lawn for his reindeer, and scamper off to bed for an anxious night of sleep.

When they wake up early in the morning, they will be overcome with the joy of finding gifts mystically left under the Christmas tree. But wouldn’t be nice if, after they open their presents, they were read another story which brings the true meaning of Christmas into your home.

Luke 2: Versus 1-20, tells the Nativity Story with simplicity, yet manages to convey the great joy that was delivered to man with the birth of Jesus.

The Story of Christmas

And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus, that all the world should be taxed. (And this taxing was first made when Cyrenius was governor of Syria.) And all went to be taxed, everyone into his own city. And Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth, into Judaea, unto the city of David, which is called Bethlehem; (because he was of the house and lineage of David) To be taxed with Mary his espoused wife, being great with child. And so it was, that, while they were there, the days were accomplished that she should be delivered. And she brought forth her firstborn son, and wrapped him in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger; because there was no room for them in the inn.

And there were in the same country shepherds abiding in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night. And, lo, the angel of the Lord came upon them, and the glory of the Lord shone round about them: and they were sore afraid. And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people. For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Savior, which is Christ the Lord. And this shall be a sign unto you; Ye shall find the babe wrapped in swaddling clothes, lying in a manger. And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God, and saying, "Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men."

And it came to pass, as the angels were gone away from them into heaven, the shepherds said one to another, Let us now go even unto Bethlehem, and see this thing which is come to pass, which the Lord hath made known unto us. And they came with haste, and found Mary, and Joseph, and the babe lying in a manger. And when they had seen it, they made known abroad the saying which was told them concerning this child. And all they that heard it wondered at those things which were told them by the shepherds. But Mary kept all these things, and pondered them in her heart. And the shepherds returned, glorifying and praising God for all the things that they had heard and seen, as it was told unto them.

Merry Christmas and Peace on Earth.

Silent Night, Holy Night

2009-12-24T08:00:00.000-05:00

There truly is a Spirit of Christmas that transcends the worldly events that somehow occupy mans being on Earth. One such event is war. There is no more brutal expression of man’s ignorance then the conflicts that have littered our history. Yet, even in war, “love’s pure light” will shine.

On December 24th, 1914, heavenly peace did descend upon the trenches of World War One, when the soldiers of the Germany, French, and English Armies castaway their hate, and for a brief moment in time found “Peace on Earth, Goodwill towards Men.”

On that cold Christmas Eve night, Germany soldiers began decorating their trenches by placing candles on trees while singing Christmas Carols. One such carol was “Stille nacht, heilige nacht.” The British soldiers responded by singing the English version…….. “Silent Night, Holy Night.”

Eventually both sides would walk across “No Man’s Land” and exchange greetings and small gifts. Little did Father Josef Mohr, the composer of “Silent Night,” know that one day the words he penned would, even if only for a short time, help stop the madness of war and bring enemies together in peace:

Silent night, holy night
All is calm, all is bright
Round yon Virgin Mother and Child
Holy Infant so tender and mild
Sleep in heavenly peace
Sleep in heavenly peace

Silent night, holy night!
Shepherds quake at the sight
Glories stream from heaven afar
Heavenly hosts sing Alleluia!
Christ, the Saviour is born
Christ, the Saviour is born

Silent night, holy night
Son of God, love's pure light
Radiant beams from Thy holy face
With the dawn of redeeming grace
Jesus, Lord, at Thy birth
Jesus, Lord, at Thy birth "

How Is Jail Time A Building Block Of Healthcare Reform?

2009-12-22T08:00:00.003-05:00

Three women are sitting in a jail cell wearing orange prison jumpsuits, waiting to appear before a judge. The women eventually enter into cell house banter which ultimately leads to a discussion as to the infraction that led to their incarnation.

The first woman tells a tale of shoplifting. The next woman shamefully confesses to driving drunk. The final woman reluctantly confesses to her crime. Is it murder? Nope. Perhaps embezzlement? Not quite. I know,……. espionage. No, the monstrous crime she committed ……not purchasing healthcare. The other two women say nothing at first, but then begin to laugh. Not buying insurance a crime….surely you jest!

I wish I was only joking, but aside from the many anti-liberty provisions and false assumptions made throughout both Senate and House bill, there are previsions (or better put, perversions) that punish those that would “opt-out,” choosing not to voluntarily participating in their own oppression:

If you chose not to purchase one of the “State approved” healthcare plans, you will be required to pay a fine equal to 2% of your income.

Willful failure to pay the fine is punishable by up to a $25,000.00 fine, and up to one-year in jail.

Willful evasion to obtain healthcare or avoid paying the fine is punishable by up to $250,000.00, and up to five-year s in jail.

Where is the choice the Democrats pledged would be part of any healthcare reform? If a person takes steps to provide for their own healthcare needs, which happens to fall outside of the government controlled system, they will be labeled as criminals, and subject to the full weight of the federal government. With this bill, the federal government is outlawing self-reliance, herding us into a “death march” that would eventually make all of us wards of “the State.” Reform yes, but slavery, no.

Make no mistake about it. This healthcare reform “debate” is about control, and the very essence of this bill will affect our liberty, as well as the freedom of all future generations. The fact that this debate has been side-tracked by abortion funding is just a side-show to avoid a discussion regarding the real tyranny of this legislation. The issue we are facing once again from these agents of subjugation is “Whether we believe in our capacity for self-government or whether we abandon the American revolution and confess that a little intellectual elite in a far-distant capitol can plan our lives for us better than we can plan them ourselves. “

If you are hungry, I will lend you a hand. If you need shelter, let‘s work together to help you. If you need aid and comfort, I will help. But do not ask me to steal from another man in the form of counterfeit compassion, whether that theft is in the form of money or the chipping away of individual liberty. I will not do that, and I will resist with every fiber of my being.

In an effort to fix a leaky faucet, the Democratic Party would have us tear down the entire house. Let us remember that “progressive” in itself is not an indication of morality, compassion, or intellect. Progress merely means that an individual or group strives to advance their cause, and contrary to those who think progress can only be defined as improvement, I suggest they stand on a mountain as an avalanche comes crashing down and bear witness to the destructive nature of progress without thought or reason. Like an avalanche, this attempt at healthcare reform is nothing more than an attempt by progressives to do something, no matter how destructive the end result that “something” is.

I cannot tell you how many times I have heard Democrats yell - "It is a crime that people do not have healthcare." With the pending passage of the Democratic healthcare reform, the Democrats will make it official.

Should Tea Party Groups Endorse Candidates?

2009-12-12T15:18:00.005-05:00

Recently I talked about the need for the liberty groups (9/12, Tea Party, etc.) to think about publicly supporting like minded candidates; which would merely be the natural extension of their influence. I strongly suggested that the liberty groups require that any candidate seeking their support openly affirm their commitment to the liberty group’s principles/philosophies. Needless to say, I received several interesting e-mails.

Some felt that it would be a “betrayal” of the cause if they simple started to act like the “political machines” they detest. By no means was I suggesting that. It makes no difference to me, nor should it to the liberty groups, whether the candidates are attached to a political party or stand alone (although I tend to avoid Democratic candidates, in large part because the party platform does not come close to any of my core conservative principles, and by extension a candidate for that party would be ineffective). We have to be very careful not to dismiss an individual merely because of an established, political partnership.

I also was not suggesting that the liberty groups support “just one candidate.” If several candidates come forth that meet the principles of the group, than it is fine to support more than one candidate. This happens already, often because we find that groups create a rating system to assign to candidates. It is important to note that the group is not merely supporting a candidate, but willing to publicly stand with an individual who has pledged to support the group’s mission.

There are several methods a group can use to indicate which candidates best match the groups principles. The methods that can be used to grade a candidate can range from a simple report card style assessment, a “yes/no” survey, or a pledge or oath of adherence.

If the group has a list of principles, the group would merely assign a point system to each principle. The group may assign a higher point value to some of the principles, or even designate “deal breaker” principles (mandatory principles that must be agreed to in order to get the liberty groups approval). A list of principles provides both the group and the candidates the opportunity for flexibility, but still allow for clarity. A good example of this can be found in a recent undertaking from within the Republican Party:

Proposed RNC Resolution on Reagan’s Unity Principle for Support of Candidates

WHEREAS, President Ronald Reagan believed that the Republican Party should support and espouse conservative principles and public policies; and

WHEREAS, President Ronald Reagan also believed the Republican Party should welcome those with diverse views; and

WHEREAS, President Ronald Reagan believed, as a result, that someone who agreed with him 8 out of 10 times was his friend, not his opponent; and

WHEREAS, Republican faithfulness to its conservative principles and public policies and Republican solidarity in opposition to Obama’s socialist agenda is necessary to preserve the security of our country, our economic and political freedoms, and our way of life; and

WHEREAS, Republican faithfulness to its conservative principles and public policies is necessary to restore the trust of the American people in the Republican Party and to lead to Republican electoral victories; and

WHEREAS, the Republican National Committee shares President Ronald Reagan’s belief that the Republican Party should espouse conservative principles and public policies and welcome persons of diverse views; and

WHEREAS, the Republican National Committee desires to implement President Reagan’s Unity Principle for Support of Candidates; and

WHEREAS, in addition to supporting candidates, the Republican National Committee provides financial support for Republican state and local parties for party building and federal election activities, which benefit all candidates and is not affected by this resolution; and

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Republican National Committee identifies ten (10) key public policy positions for the 2010 election cycle, which the Republican National Committee expects its public officials and candidates to support:

(1) We support smaller government, smaller national debt, lower deficits and lower taxes by opposing bills like Obama’s “stimulus” bill;

(2) We support market-based health care reform and oppose Obama-style government run healthcare;

(3) We support market-based energy reforms by opposing cap and trade legislation;

(4) We support workers’ right to secret ballot by opposing card check;

(5) We support legal immigration and assimilation into American society by opposing amnesty for illegal immigrants;

(6) We support victory in Iraq and Afghanistan by supporting military-recommended troop surges;

(7) We support containment of Iran and North Korea, particularly effective action to eliminate their nuclear weapons threat;

(8) We support retention of the Defense of Marriage Act;

(9) We support protecting the lives of vulnerable persons by opposing health care rationing and denial of health care and government funding of abortion; and

(10) We support the right to keep and bear arms by opposing government restrictions on gun ownership; and be further

RESOLVED, that a candidate who disagrees with three or more of the above stated public policy position of the Republican National Committee, as identified by the voting record, public statements and/or signed questionnaire of the candidate, shall not be eligible for financial support and endorsement by the Republican National Committee; and be further

RESOLVED, that upon the approval of this resolution the Republican National Committee shall deliver a copy of this resolution to each of Republican members of Congress, all Republican candidates for Congress, as they become known, and to each Republican state and territorial party office.

Another good example of a liberty-minded pledge is the one currently being featured at Laura Ingraham’s web site, which she calls “10 for 10:”

1) Taxpayers' Bill of Rights (TABOR). Limit federal spending growth to the percentage in population growth plus the rate of inflation; provide taxpayers the option of filing a post-card sized return using a low, flat tax rate of 15%

2) End Tax-funded abortions. Stop federal payments to Planned Parenthood and prohibit any taxpayer-subsidized health insurance plan from covering abortion

3) Defend American Borders. Complete America's border-protection initiatives using remaining funds from the so-called stimulus bill

4) King Dollar. Preserve a strong dollar so that Americans' savings aren't wiped out by inflation and the U.S. dollar remains the world's reserve currency

5) Empower American Business. Immediately slash corporate tax rates to 15% and scrap the capital-gains tax altogether

6) Defend America. Strengthen America to defend our homeland and fully fund an operational, layered missile-defense system

7) Statism Exit Plan. De-fund czars; immediately cease bailout payments to failed companies; ban future bailouts

8) End Generational Theft. As few believe America's entitlement programs will be able to pay benefits to future generations, provide younger workers the choice of diverting payroll/Social Security taxes into personal retirement accounts

9) Restore America's System of Justice. Introduce penalties for frivolous lawsuits, where those who launch unsuccessful lawsuits are liable for the defendants' legal bills

10) American Energy Independence. All-of-the-Above strategy that embraces alternatives, expands and accelerates exploration and production of oil and natural gas, and jumpstarts dramatic increases in nuclear power

Some groups choose to require the candidates to commit to a pledge. The difficultly with a pledge is that they often do not allow much flexibility; and maybe that is the desired goal of the liberty group. But we must remember that 100% agreement (even from within the liberty groups) is nearly impossible. The pledge should convey a commitment to the cause, but respect the fact that there may be a difference of opinion on how to achieve a shared goal. If the language of the pledge is too vague, no candidate will agree to it; if the pledge is too rigid, then the group should be prepared to having very few, or even no candidates taking the pledge. An example of a pledge that liberty groups should consider is a piece called the American’s Creed.

The American’s Creed was commissioned by Congress in 1917, and it is the combination of the Declaration of Independence and the Gettysburg Address, so it sets a liberty tone that has stood the test of time:

The American's Creed

by William Tyler Page

I believe in the United States of America as a government of the people, by the people, for the people; whose just powers are derived from the consent of the governed, a democracy in a republic, a sovereign Nation of many sovereign States; a perfect union, one and inseparable; established upon those principles of freedom, equality, justice, and humanity for which American patriots sacrificed their lives and fortunes.

I therefore believe it is my duty to my country to love it, to support its Constitution, to obey its laws, to respect its flag, and to defend it against all enemies.

The American’s Creed is one of the strongest dedications to the virtues that made our country great. The Creed respects the understanding that we are a unified nation bound together by core beliefs, while at the same time declaring the importance of States’ sovereignty (the fundamental idea that many believe helps to ensure that government is closest to the people). The Creed is tight enough to repel those candidates that are not liberty minded, while being flexible enough not to scare high-quality candidates away.

Regardless of the type of oath a group opts for, it is important for the group to commit to paper the core principles that best represent their values. By providing a written declaration, the liberty groups will not only provide guidance to potential candidates, but the group will also have a foundational document that will always remind them of their commitment.

And to those candidates seeking the support of liberty groups; do so only if you intend to honor the groups cause, and not just for votes. As I have stated on numerous occasions, much of the liberty groups wrath is directed at those politicians they feel have let them down. Trust me when I tell you that you do not want to be added to that list.

The Tea Parties Born 2009 - R.I.P.2010?

2009-11-26T09:22:00.006-05:00

Political truth, like revenge, is a dish best served cold; at least for some in the media. Take for example the recent article by Kenneth Vogel, that appeared on Politico, and was eventual e-mailed throughout the Democratic Party:

Will Tea Partiers turn on each other?
Kenneth P. Vogel November 19, 2009 11:41 PM EST

After emerging out of nowhere over the summer as a seemingly potent and growing political force, the tea party movement has become so rife with internal feuding over philosophy, strategy and money that some supporters fear it will disintegrate before realizing its full potential.

The grass-roots activists powering the movement have become increasingly divided on core questions such as whether to focus their efforts on shaping policy debates or elections, work on a local, regional, state or national level or closely align itself with the Republican Party, POLITICO found in interviews with tea party organizers in Washington and across the country.
Disagreements over those issues have spawned personal and institutional rivalries, at least one highly contentious lawsuit and - perhaps most significantly - resulted in the splintering of local, regional and national groups into a patchwork of hundreds of smaller groups that occasionally seem to be working at cross-purposes.

“These groups don’t play as well together as they should,” said Kevin Jackson, a St. Louis-based conservative author and activist who has spoken at dozens of tea party-type rallies and is traveling across the South with a convoy sponsored by the national Tea Party Patriots group.

“They’re fractured at the organization level, I think mainly because there are a lot of people who have not had managerial experience who all of a sudden are thrust into the limelight and become intoxicated with it. And when a potential rift comes up, instead of handling it and maybe agreeing to disagree, they splinter and go off on their own.”

The movement exploded onto the scene this year as a backlash to what participants contend are the free-spending, overreaching initiatives pushed by President Barack Obama and the Democratic Congress. It is composed of hundreds of independent local groups, many of which are incorporated as nonprofits, and have localized names referencing the tea parties, “9/12” or “We The People.”

Many of their members also belong to national conservative groups, including FreedomWorks, Americans for Prosperity and Grassfire, while the local groups often affiliate formally or informally with loose-knit umbrella organizations, including the Tea Party Patriots and Tea Party Nation.

The organizational chaos - combined with a widening apathy at the edges of the movement - has produced a growing consensus among local, state and national tea party leaders that in order for the movement to evolve from the loose conglomeration of fired-up activists who protests and marches across the country into a sustainable block with the power to shape the GOP and swing elections, it will require the emergence of a national leader, group or structure.
Ned Ryun, president of American Majority, a nonprofit that has conducted organizer-training sessions for many tea party activists, said “the next 3 to 6 months” are going to be critical in determining “what’s going to happen with the tea party movement. Are they going to be a bunch of fingers, or are they going to come together to be a fist?”

Yet, while some tout a planned National Tea Party Convention in February (at which former Alaska governor and tea party darling Sarah Palin is listed as the keynote speaker) as a potentially unifying moment and others point to online coordination efforts, there is deep disagreement about what any national organization would look like and who would lead it.
FreedomWorks, Americans for Prosperity, Grassfire, Americans for Limited Government and a host of other groups have helped organize various efforts capitalizing on the energy behind the tea parties, including providing training, online war rooms that help generate phone calls and ready-to-distribute canvassing literature.

But the groups have also jockeyed - mostly behind the scenes - to take credit for leadership of the movement, which - depending on who’s doing the telling - took its name either as an homage to the 1773 Boston tax revolt that played a major role in sparking the American Revolution or from an acronym standing for “Taxed Enough Already.”

The philosophical and strategic disagreements have been present within the tea party movement almost from the beginning. But they were hidden - or at least overshadowed - by the initial explosion of activist enthusiasm, which has dissipated somewhat, exposing and widening the rifts.

“Some of these groups may burn out, but this is part of this entrepreneurial process and the competition is good,” said Adam Brandon, vice president of communications for FreedomWorks, a nonprofit chaired by former House Majority Leader Dick Armey of Texas.

The group has facilitated some of the efforts demonstrating the potential power of the movement. Those have included the confrontations that erupted at congressional strong support from many tea party groups and leaders.

Brandon stressed that the strength of the tea party movement is in its grass-roots nature and that FreedomWorks’s goal is to help facilitate the movement, not to control it.
“One thing that’s clear is that anyone who says they own the tea party movement is going to get run over because no one owns the movement,” he said.

Brandon acknowledged the “rivalries and turf battles” now gripping parts of the movement but said “that’s normal because people have different ideas about what they want. That’s what’s happening now, and it’s sometimes a painful process.”

Those fights have been waged over issues that go to the heart of the movement’s purpose and strategy as well as more mundane rivalries and personal feuds.

In Myrtle Beach, S.C., disputes within the local tea party about how much to engage in partisan politics and whether board members were profiting from contracts to print paraphernalia emblazoned with the group’s logo prompted the treasurer to resign and join with defectors from a North Carolina “We the People” group to form a new organization.

“There’s a lot of fighting, and everyone wants to be in charge, and that’s why you have so many splinter groups,” said the ex-treasurer Janet Spencer, who charged her adversaries within the tea party with saying “derogatory things about me that were very unprofessional.”
She said her new group, called Patriotic Voices of America/Carolina Patriots, counts about 100 members and will not coordinate with the Myrtle Beach Tea Party, whose treasurer, David Ognek, said the friction is “just group dynamics.”

In Texas, a handful of thriving tea party groups severed their ties from the national Tea Party Patriots group after it ousted, then sued a founding board member who had affiliated with a rival group called the Tea Party Express.

“Our fight is in Congress and not with each other or with these other groups,” said Toby Marie Walker, who was the Texas state coordinator for the Tea Party Patriots and also co-founded the Waco, Texas, tea party.

This Waco group recently drew an estimated 4,000 people to a rally it organized with the Tea Party Express, which travels the country hosting rallies. The month before, it had pulled out of the Tea Party Patriots after the Patriots group extremist rhetoric, and raising questions about the Express’s finances.

The Patriots’ attack and lawsuit worried the Waco group’s board, Walker said, because “if you align yourself with someone who is going to be that malicious, then how do we know they won’t turn on us?”

Other local tea party groups, though, cast their lots with the Patriots, heeding the group’s call to disassociate with the Tea Party Express.

In Granbury, Texas, local tea party organizer Josh Sullivan says he believes the movement’s effectiveness is being compromised by extremism.“You have some interesting folks in the Tea Party movement - some of them I can support, but some of them are kind of out there and radical, and I don’t want to associate myself with them,” he said.

In Northern Colorado, meanwhile, a handful of active 9/12 groups - named for the Glenn Beck-encouraged effort to stage the Sept. 12 Washington march - are unhappy with the state 9/12 group’s aversion to fundraising and with its focus on national issues and have discussed forming their own rival statewide group.

“People are beginning to become a little bit de-energized - they’re starting to feel like they’re fighting a losing battle, because we send a lot of letters into Washington, D.C., and things like that, and people are saying they’re not listening,” said Brian Britton, who heads the Greeley, Colo., 9/12 group.

That fear is echoed by Glenn Galls, a Hot Springs, Ark., tea party organizer frustrated with the focus of Arkansas’ state-level tea party groups on national races and issues such as cap and trade and health care.

Democratic email footer:

“If the tea party movement is going to continue to thrive and to grow and to have influence,” he said, “it must start coming together and coalescing and finding its purpose in life, because if it doesn’t, the excitement will fade like it does from anything else.”

Michael Czin Regional Press Secretary Democratic National Committee Office: (202) 863-8106
BBerry: (202) 286-7654

***** End of E-mail *****

Although there is some truth in the original Politico piece, Mr. Czin should not be so eager in ordering the wreath for the wake, because in the words of Mark Twain, “the reports of my death have been greatly exaggerated,” as is the premature death knell of the liberty movement.

I would caution both the Republican and Democratic Parties from reading too much into some of the observations of this article (just as I would have advised Michael Czin from forwarding the email around the Democratic Party – it is the type of thing that can be used to unite the liberty troops). Infighting can be found with any group, from the Cub Scouts to the UN. It is human nature, why would we expect these groups to be any different?

Many of these groups came together because of their dissatisfaction with all levels of government, and that has not changed. The liberty groups see both parties as the disease (a point I disagree with – a few bad apples do not spoil the whole barrel; nor do a few RINO’s speak for the rest of the crash). Watch what happens if this healthcare monstrosity passes. These groups will put their differences aside in defense of a cause. For you see, it is the cause that serves as the surrogate leader. Every time politicians give these groups a reason to fight, such as healthcare, cap-n-trade, illegal alien amnesty, in a perverted sort of way, they are providing the very leadership these groups need to resist them……..the cause! And right now, it is the Democrats that keep providing the ammunition; ammunition that will be used to put the lame donkey out of its misery.

What we are witnessing are growing pains. But at some point a level of realistic, political maturity must be the order of the day for these groups to be considered viable entities. If not, we will continue to witness our representatives standing before us like the highwaymen of old, yelling “Stand and deliver! Your money or your life.” Individual liberty is the cause, but a communal synergy is means of resistance.

However, to the articles’ point, eventually these groups must rally with a common ally. A new group of Founding Fathers must come forth, concerned less about individual accolades, and committed to the greater good of the “united States of America.” In the words of Ronald Reagan, it is amazing what you can accomplish it you do not care who gets credit for the success.

But to the observations in the originally article, I have some advise for the liberty groups. Do not let petty squabbles divide you. United you stand, divided you will fall. The Democratic Party would like nothing more than to see the liberty groups marginalize, preferring to focus on your potential downfall so as to avoid dealing with their own civil war (Democrats.com - Let's Beat the BlueDogs ). Do not give the Democrats the pleasure by proving them right. Rise above your differences, because the reasons that brought millions of Americans together still exist; and the difference between a country committed to liberty and a country whose people are subjects to tyranny have always rested with the liberty groups throughout history.

The lack of leadership, beyond the cause, is easy to resolve. It is time for the liberty groups to start endorsing candidates. The liberty groups should seek out leaders willing and able to run for office. Leaders with integrity, leaders willing to commit to the principals of the group. Each liberty group should create a common, realistic pledge (or list of key principals they stand for), that each candidate would be required to publicly support. This is how the liberty groups will find their “level of realistic, political maturity.”

Thanksgiving Day Prayer

2009-11-26T08:21:00.000-05:00

A Thanksgiving Day Prayer
by Brian F. King

O Lord, with humble hearts we pray
Thy blessing this Thanksgiving Day
And ask that at table place,
Where grateful folk say words of grace,
That Thou will come to share the yield
Thy bounty gave to farm and field.
We pray thy love will bless, O Lord,
Each hearth, each home, each festive board;
And that Thy peace will come to stay
Where candles glow, Thanksgiving Day.

God Bless and Peace Be With You

Happy Thanksgiving 2009

2009-11-26T08:20:00.000-05:00

Proclamation of Thanksgiving

Washington, D.C.
October 3, 1863

This is the proclamation which set the precedent for America's national day of Thanksgiving. During his administration, President Lincoln issued many orders like this. For example, on November 28, 1861, he ordered government departments closed for a local day of thanksgiving.

Sarah Josepha Hale, a prominent magazine editor, wrote a letter to Lincoln on 28, 1863, urging him to have the "day of our annual Thanksgiving made a National and fixed Union Festival." She wrote, "You may have observed that, for some years past, there has been an increasing interest felt in our land to have the Thanksgiving held on the same day, in all the States; it now needs National recognition and authoritive fixation, only, to become permanently, an American custom and institution." The document below sets apart the last Thursday of November "as a day of Thanksgiving and Praise."

According to an April 1, 1864, letter from John Nicolay, one of President Lincoln's secretaries, this document was written by Secretary of State William Seward, and the original was in his handwriting. On October 3, 1863, fellow Cabinet member Gideon Welles recorded in his diary that he complimented Seward on his work. A year later the manuscript was sold to benefit Union troops.

By the President of the United States of America.

A Proclamation.

The year that is drawing towards its close, has been filled with the blessings of fruitful fields and healthful skies. To these bounties, which are so constantly enjoyed that we are prone to forget the source from which they come, others have been added, which are of so extraordinary a nature, that they cannot fail to penetrate and soften even the heart which is habitually insensible to the ever watchful providence of Almighty God. In the midst of a civil war of unequaled magnitude and severity, which has sometimes seemed to foreign States to invite and to provoke their aggression, peace has been preserved with all nations, order has been maintained, the laws have been respected and obeyed, and harmony has prevailed everywhere except in the theatre of military conflict; while that theatre has been greatly contracted by the advancing armies and navies of the Union. Needful diversions of wealth and of strength from the fields of peaceful industry to the national defence, have not arrested the plough, the shuttle or the ship; the axe has enlarged the borders of our settlements, and the mines, as well of iron and coal as of the precious metals, have yielded even more abundantly than heretofore. Population has steadily increased, notwithstanding the waste that has been made in the camp, the siege and the battle-field; and the country, rejoicing in the consiousness of augmented strength and vigor, is permitted to expect continuance of years with large increase of freedom. No human counsel hath devised nor hath any mortal hand worked out these great things. They are the gracious gifts of the Most High God, who, while dealing with us in anger for our sins, hath nevertheless remembered mercy. It has seemed to me fit and proper that they should be solemnly, reverently and gratefully acknowledged as with one heart and one voice by the whole American People. I do therefore invite my fellow citizens in every part of the United States, and also those who are at sea and those who are sojourning in foreign lands, to set apart and observe the last Thursday of November next, as a day of Thanksgiving and Praise to our beneficent Father who dwelleth in the Heavens. And I recommend to them that while offering up the ascriptions justly due to Him for such singular deliverances and blessings, they do also, with humble penitence for our national perverseness and disobedience, commend to His tender care all those who have become widows, orphans, mourners or sufferers in the lamentable civil strife in which we are unavoidably engaged, and fervently implore the interposition of the Almighty Hand to heal the wounds of the nation and to restore it as soon as may be consistent with the Divine purposes to the full enjoyment of peace, harmony, tranquility and Union.

In testimony whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Seal of the United States to be affixed.

Done at the City of Washington, this Third day of October, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-three, and of the Independence of the Unites States the Eighty-eighth.

By the President: Abraham Lincoln
William H. Seward,
Secretary of State

Concerning Doug Lambert and Ray Buckley

2009-11-17T13:37:00.002-05:00

Over the past for days a controversy has been brewing over the comments made by radio show host Doug Lambert that were directed at NH Democrat State Chairman Ray Buckley. An incredibly stupid thing was said, and Doug Lambert has apologized and asked for a chance to make up for this blunder.

It is important to note that no one should take this letter as an acceptance of the remarks made by Mr. Lambert. I found Mr. Lambert’s comments unpleasant, but completely uncharacteristic of the Doug Lambert I know. Because of the political climate we now live in, it is also important to state that I make the following comments as a private citizen, and not as a spokesperson for any of my affiliations. What Mr. Lambert said was distasteful, and has no place in the public debate. But Mr. Lambert understands what he said was wrong, and he had the strong moral character to take ownership of his mistake.

As for the relentless, mob mentality that is being directed at Mr. Lambert, I have but one question to ask. Where is the grace? Make no mistake about it, we should hold Mr. Lambert’s “feet to the fire,” and keep him to his word that this will not happen again. We have all said and done things that we later regret, this includes Mr. Buckley himself. And for the most part, over time, all of us have been absolved for our lapse of judgment.

There are those that would keep this wound open for purely political reasons, but in the end they come off looking petty and spiteful. Like rabid dogs fighting over a bone, some have decided to feast on Mr. Lambert character, and that is just sad. Some have decided that they will not stop until EVERYTHING is taken away from Doug. In opposition to the hatred they believe was uttered by Doug Lambert, they will bring forth a wrath a million times worse than anything Doug might have said. It is cruel, but sadly indicative of the current state of our culture.

I have known Doug for some time now, and I am proud to call him a friend. I know him to be a kind and thoughtful person of high moral character. I will not abandon someone I respect because I am unhappy with something they have done. We should all remember that even the best of people make mistakes, but to “err is human, to forgive is divine.” Have we become such a vicious culture as to deny a person the opportunity at redemption? We live in a country that prides itself on second chances; to allow the fallen an opportunity to make amends for their mistakes. I say to you today that if anyone is deserving of a second chance, Doug Lambert is.

And for those that might take this opportunity to attack me, so be it. It would not be the first time. I would rather stand with a person who understands he made a mistake, but will strive to regain our trust, than stand with people who would ignore their own transgressions while throwing stones at a person asking for our mercy. We are facing tough times, and this is not to say that this incident didn’t merited some attention, but in the grand scheme of things, it is time for all of us to move on.

A Time for Choosing Again

2009-11-03T09:19:00.004-05:00

The following is the text of a speech I gave during two separate appearances before Republican committee’s last week. Depending on the audience members point of view, they either enjoyed it or they were squirming in their seats:

Ladies and Gentleman...thank you for your invitation to speak before you tonight.

I have the luxury of not running for office or relying on a pay check that requires me to be polite, or diplomatic in my presentation. It is quite liberating to be able to offer observations unencumbered by who I might offend.

Today (October 28) we mark an important anniversary for conservatisms, and in turn the Republican Party. It was 45 years ago today that Ronald Reagan gave one of his greatest speeches….”A Time For Choosing.” It was in that speech that then citizen Reagan not only defended the principals of conservatism, but put socialism on notice:
“You and I have a rendezvous with destiny. We'll preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on earth, or we'll sentence them to take the last step into a thousand years of darkness.”

Most of you are gathered here today because you see your State and your Country at the edge of that darkness. And sadly I must tell you that some in the Republican Party are willing participants in our shared fate. The Republican Party lost its way, becoming nothing more than Democrat-light; interested more in vote harvesting and staying in power. It seems that our party motto became – “Any Republican is better than a Democrat.” But where has that gotten us?

Both the Republican Party and the Democratic Party now share the same predicament, the American people don’t trust either one. The Republican Party forgot the words of Jack Kemp - “You serve you party best, by serving your country first.” It is time for the Republican Party to embrace that statement once again, because God knows the Democrats won’t.

So before we can take back our State and our Country, we must first take back our Party. Because you see, there are those that call themselves Republican and have no clue what that means. Worse yet there are those that call themselves moderate Republican, conservative Republican, and my new favorite oxymoron Liberal Republican.

I actually chuckle when I hear all of these terms, but I am most amused when I hear people describe themselves as a Conservative Republican……….or delineate by stating they are a social conservative or fiscal conservative. Well, I am here to tell you today that the very essence of the Republican Party is conservative. The first Republican platform, its last platform, and all the platforms in-between are the very model of principled conservatism. Don’t believe me, you tell me if this is a moderate, liberal or a conservative statement (from the 2008 Republican Party platform):

This is a platform of enduring principle, not passing convenience — the product of the most open and transparent process in American political history. We offer it to our fellow Americans in the assurance that our Republican ideals are those that unify our country: Courage in the face of foreign foes. An optimistic patriotism, driven by a passion for freedom. Devotion to the inherent dignity and rights of every person. Faith in the virtues of self-reliance, civic commitment, and concern for one another. Distrust of government's interference in people's lives. Dedication to a rule of law that both protects and preserves liberty.

But too many people seem to have difficulty saying the word Conservative out loud. Some whisper it like a mark of shame, afraid that they will be tarred and feathered by the villagers. The only shame is that we have forgotten what we stand for, and thus the country is in far worse shape for our own ignorance.

But there is more hope for the Republican Party than the Democratic Party, and why do I say that?

40% of the people in this country identify themselves as conservative; 36% identify themselves as independent (with center to right leanings), and only 20% identify themselves as liberal. Republicans know how to be conservative, and as we found out in 2006 and 2008, we are terrible at being liberal.

Over the past few months there have been a lot of words that begin with “R - E” thrown about. Reenergize, rebuild, refocus, regroup, and rejuvenate. Folks, these are merely marketing terms that will only cause further mistrust. The Republican Party must be true to itself, which in turn will earn the trust of the people, because there is too much at stake if you and I fail.

In the speech “A Time for Choosing,” Reagan understood that America was the last best hope for the world; that if the torch of freedom was extinguished here, then the warming light of liberty dies everywhere. I say to you that if you believe that America is the last best hope for the world, then it is the Republican Party that is the last best hope for America.

Ronald Reagan did not stand in front of us and call himself a Conservative Republican; he simply called himself a Republican because he understood to be Conservative was to be Republican, and to be Republican was to be Conservative. The only way for us to return the Republican Party to a party that serves the people is to return to the grassroots of conservatism that made us great, and avoid any further watering down of our principals in an effort to come across as more appealing.

The justification for watering down the core beliefs of the Republican Party is the often heard phrase that we are a “Big Tent Party.” There is some truth to that statement…we are the Big Tent Party, and all are welcome. But that does not mean you check your principals at the door before you enter. No…..it means that you enter the tent prepared to stand for something greater than yourself….greater than the next fundraiser…..or greater than the next election!
For you see, this tent stands strong because it is being held up by poles of principals. This tent stands strong because of great Republican leaders such as Reagan, Coolidge, and Lincoln, who stood firm on the principals that made this party great. The Republican Party is strongest when it uses the Declaration of Independence and The Constitution as its firm footing, a foundation to keep us away from the dangers of that darkness President Reagan warned us about. In the words of President Lincoln:

“Be sure you put your feet in the right place, then stand firm.”

There can be no comprise or moderation when the cause is just, when the hope of an entire planet rest with us, you and I, choosing the right course. But with the Constitution as our North Star, always there to point us home, not only as a country, but as a people committed to the cause of liberty. But we must be willing to use it, because if we chose to ignore it, America will be lost at sea until it sinks from the weight of its own ignorance.

So let’s you and I dabble with the suggestion from those who feel we should be more moderate. Where should that moderation be applied? Which of the issues should you and I comprise on? That the redistribution of wealth is fair and just? That higher taxes are there to serve the people? That the chain of debt that is already weighing down future generations is not our problem? That a stronger centralized government is in the best interest of America? That the Constitution is a living, breathing document, open to generational interpretation?

Or is just simpler that the Republican Party take a more “sensible” understanding that “We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness……” , that those words do not apply to the unborn, just as some felt it did not apply to those held in bondage over 100 years ago.

Or how about the belief that morality is purely the province of the individual, and that a community has no vested interest in protecting religion, preserving the strength of the family, or promoting a robust patriotism and strong sense of civil commitment.

No I tell you…. that it is not moderation, it is appeasement to oppression. Does it matter that the tyranny comes in the form of 1000 pages bills that no one reads, or by the point of the gun? Our party, the Republican Party was founded on the very principal of Life and Liberty. The Republican Party was founded with the sole purpose to fulfill our country’s promise that all Men are created equal. There are some that have confused moderation with appeasement. This confusion has hurt our country, and our inherent laziness has moved us closer to the abyss of totalitarianism.

Sam Adams once said -

"It is not high time for the people of this country explicitly to declare, whether they will be freemen or slaves? It is an important question which ought to be decided. It concerns us more than anything in this life. The salvation of our souls is interested in this event. For wherever tyranny is established, immorality of every kind comes in like a torrent. It is in the interest of tyrants to reduce the people to ignorance and vice. For they cannot live in any country where virtue and knowledge prevail. The religion and public liberty of a people are intimately connected; their interest are interwoven, they cannot subsist separately; and therefore they rise and fall together.”

We do not win elections by watering down our message; we win election by communicating our principals with pride. We do not win elections by being cowards, afraid to run for office “because” the outcome is not assured. We win elections by understanding that we may lose today, but we win tomorrow in the arena of ideas.

For you see, in the words of President Reagan, the issue for this election is….

Whether we believe in our capacity for self-government or whether we abandon the American revolution and confess that a little intellectual elite in a far-distant capitol can plan our lives for us better than we can plan them ourselves.

The Republican Party, our party, must offer the kind of leadership that grows and takes its strength from the people. Any organization is in actuality merely the lengthened shadow of its members. A political party is a mechanical structure created to further a cause. The cause, not the mechanism, brings and holds the members together.

Thank-you

New Hampshire, Gambling Is Not The Answer

2009-10-29T14:52:00.001-04:00

As New Hampshire continues to spend itself into bankruptcy, there are those that believe the answer to our financial woes rest in the false promise of gambling. Gambling is nothing more than gasoline to be thrown on the fire of irresponsible spending; and who are the willing pyromaniacs fiddling as Concord burns? Our representatives in Concord, and in particular the Democratic leadership of Norelli, Larsen, Hassen, and Governor Lynch.

It does not matter at this point whether any politician in Concord supports gambling or not. The real issues is that their lack of fiscal discipline has set New Hampshire on the road to economic ruin, which in turn has opened the door to the false salvation of another government sanctioned ponzi-scheme in the form of expanded gambling. Gambling does nothing more than encourage our commonsensical challenged representatives to add another link to the chain of debt we have placed around the necks of future generations.

The facts are simple:

Compulsive gamblers will increase by 100% to 500%, when gambling is introduced (Kindt, University of Illinois).

Casinos earn more than ½ their incomes from problem/pathologic gamblers (Grinols, University of Illinois).

The crime rate is nearly double for those communities that allow gambling (US News and World Reports analysis).

The promise of tourism dollars is greatly overstated. Most of the money made by those businesses that offer gambling comes almost entirely from in-State residents (Better Government survey in States that sponsor legalized gambling).

Gambling is nothing more than a regressive form of taxation. The poor always lose the greatest share of their income (Wisconsin Policy Research Institute report). In fact, casino gambling causes up to $289 in social costs for every $46 of economic benefit. (Grinols, University of Illinois).

Bankruptcy dramatically increase wherever gambling has been introduced: 1,000 Minnesotans annually file for bankruptcy since the introduction of riverboat gambling; gambling related bankruptcy has increase 40% in Detroit since the opening of a neighboring casino.
Each problem gambler cost society an estimated $15,000 to $60,000 per year (Goodman and Robert, Free Press). It has been calculated that for every $1 the State receives in gambling revenue, they will spend at least $3 in increased criminal-justice, social-welfare, and other related expenses (US House of Representatives on Small Business testimony).

The lure of big money is not just limited to the poor and the pathological. Corruption amongst government officials will increase as it did in Louisiana, Missouri, South Carolina, Arizona, as well as others States that legalized some form of expanded gambling. Dozens of officials were arrested and convicted in each of those States on gambling induced corruption (The National Gambling Impact and Policy Commission, US House of Representatives).

In fact the gambling lobby has become the single most powerful lobby in States that have legalized gambling (Goodman, US Gambling Study)

Study after study tells us that the social costs of gambling, such as increased crime, lost work time, bankruptcies and financial hardships faced by the families are costing the American economy as much as $54 billion annually. Is this what is in the best interest of New Hampshire? The solution to our fiscal crisis is right in front of our representative’s faces? They must do what thousands of our fellow New Hampshirites do every day…….live within our means? It’s the spending stupid, and no amount of gambling will help.

The morality of gambling is a debate we can have on another day; but the immorality of excessive spending is one we must confront today.

Jeff Chidester, is the host of the weekly radio show which can be heard every Sunday at 11:00am on 96.7 – the WAVE (www.967thewave.com)

New Hampshire Stimulus Spending Update: 22 Million Dollars, 221 Jobs Created…????

2009-10-22T09:09:00.001-04:00

Stimulus: to spur, motivate or incentivize. Based on the numbers, none of that happen in New Hampshire:

Now New Hampshire.com: Stimulus Has Created 221 Private Sector Jobs in NH

New Hampshire has received roughly 22 million dollars in Federal Stimulus Funds, and only created 221 new jobs (22 million divided by 221 jobs = political farce!). And what is the Democratic response….we need more stimulus spending!

President Obama: The Post Office Is Kaput, Let’s Do The Same To Heathcare

2009-08-12T11:44:00.003-04:00

Many things can be said about President Obama’s townhall meeting in Portsmouth, NH. It was a staged event; yes and so are Republican rallies. It was stacked with people “friendly” to the President’s cause; Yep, as all political rallies are. The questions were softballs; What’s your point?

The town hall was a staged event, as has been most of the Obama’s presidency. All politics is politics, and no one should be surprised by the way the Democrats handled the Portsmouth Townhall Meeting.

However, what can be addressed is the content of the President’s address; especially things that were said off prompter. One such statement was his poorly selected analogy regarding the US Post Office and private package delivery services. It is in this statement that the truth about why people are concerned about the Democrats plans to take over our current healthcare system; the government can never do it better than the free-market.

President Obama went off prompter when attempting to answer how a public plan might co-exist with a private healthcare system. Chuckling as he usually does when he is trying to formulate an answer; President Obama made the following observations:

“I think private insurers should be able to compete. They do it all the time. I mean, if you think about, if you think about it, um, UPS and FedEx are doing just fine. Right? The, uh, no they are. I mean, it's the post office that's always having problems. "

First point, in a free society private industry should never be in “competition” with a government program. The deck is always stacked in the government’s favor; the government writes the rules, enforces the rules, and when need be, changes the rules. No true competition can be achieved.

UPS, FedEx, Airborne Express are not in the business of daily mail delivery service. Daily mail delivery service, regardless of what some people might think, is vital to a fluid communication infrastructure, thereby permitting to some degree government involvement. However, many of the inefficacies of the post office are a glaring example of a bloated bureaucracy and a failed business model.

Point two, UPS and FedEx actually aren’t real competitors of the United States Postal Service. UPS, FedEx, Airborne Express were born out the need to provide fast delivery service, as inexpensive as possible, originally to the business community. Nevertheless, the customer understands that there will be a premium cost for a higher degree of service, and the customer is willing to incur that burden. The United States Postal Service has tried to play in the “fast delivery” service arena, and has failed (the reason for this failure could be a whole other article). The same thing will happen when you try to build a healthcare model based on this flawed premise, as President Obama eluded to at the Portsmouth Townhall.

If anything, President Obama’s analogy demonstrates what happens when a government system, also known as a public opinion, is overburden. The public program rations the service options and quality, then tries to “change the rules” when a private option is successful at exploiting the government programs failures.

And the final point comes from the last sentence of President Obama’s statement – “I mean, it's the post office that's always having problems. “ You are correct Mr. President! The government run program, weight downed with a bloated bureaucracy, continuing to function using outdated business principals, rationing services to ease their own internal pressure points (also known as customers), in the end providing sub-standard service to all, but hey, they are servicing everyone!

Maybe President Obama should work on reforming the Postal Service first before trying to tackle healthcare reform. But I have a strong suspicion that he will come to the same conclusion many have come to regarding healthcare reform. The government will never be as affected at these types of programs as the fair market solution. Period.

Word of advice to President Obama and his staff; next time use analogies that support your position, not hurt it. Just a thought.

President Obama in Portsmouth, NH: Read The Sign

2009-08-10T20:20:00.003-04:00

President Obama will be traveling to Portsmouth, NH to put on a well-orchestrated "town hall." meeting. As he travels to the Portsmouth High School, I would suggest he take the time to see the beauty that is New Hampshire, and the words of wisdom that await him.

NH Patriot Greets President Obama

New Hampshire is proud of its history, and its commitment to liberty. Jack Kimball is a modern day patriot who is merely continuing the fight for liberty, but instead of bullets, his weapon is "just words."

How Can You Tell Obama Is Lying…..His Lips Are Moving

2009-08-04T17:20:00.002-04:00

There are things that you can always count on in life, and one such thing is that Democrats will always raise your taxes, because they cannot control their need to spend your money.

Obama will raise our taxes not because of what happen under the Bush administration. No, Obama will raise our taxes because of the reckless spending his party has committed over these past few months. President Obama will go back on his pledge (for my liberal friends, that means a guarantee, oath, word of honor), vowing not to raise taxes on those making less than $250,000.00 (although that number kept creeping down as the campaign progressed).

From a speech in Dover, NH, September of 2008 (go to 1:21 – “I can make a pledge, no family making less than $250,000.00 will see ANY form of tax increase….NOT ANY OF YOUR TAXES!

………NOT ONE SINGLE DIME. Not one of New Hampshire’s proudest moments. I love the wit….cracks me up.

What the speech told us then, and tells us now, is how naïve (or stupid, your choice) Obama's economic plan is.

President Obama: I'm Not A Doctor, But I Play One On TV

2009-08-03T08:03:00.000-04:00

Flu Vaccination Priority List: Senior's On Their Own

2009-08-02T09:09:00.000-04:00

As with every collective society, eventfully it is the elderly, infirm, and those that are deemed to be "unsuitable" that are cast out. We see this not only in history, but in today's societies that have taken control over essential services, such as healthcare.

A recent example of an unfortunate oversight (which will not doubt be the reply from the Obama administration), is the omission of one our more vulnerable elements of our society...the elderly.

Senior Citizens Left Off Government’s Swine-Flu Vaccination Priority List

I venture to guest that someone in the Obama administration will eventually suggest a solution that solves two perceived problems: those stuborn old folks who just won't die and the alleged dwindling food source for the polar bear population. Advise to anyone over 60 years-old, if the governemnt offers you a "free trip" to the artic circle, don't be surpise if the tickets one-way.

Healthcare Proposal: 5 Year Plan to Move Consumers Off Their Plans

2009-08-01T08:43:00.008-04:00

Let me first start by saying I have done something most Congressmen, Senators, and liberals have failed to do......I READ THE BILL!

If you were to read this bill it would take you very little time to see that the numbers do not add up, nor is the plan sustainable without the eventual take over of the entire system. But one of the must concerning issues is the Democrats are lying , and their uninformed followers gobble up the misinformation like the dimwitted sheep in Orwell's book "The Animal Farm."

The biggest lie is the often repeated statement that you will be able to keep your plan. It is a bold face lie, and anyone who repeats this statement is either an idiot or a lair, or both.

Obama’s Health-Care Proposal Could Keep Consumers from Choosing Own Insurance Plan After Five Years, House Minority Leader Says

5 year plans have been tried before...........

Like what we are witnessing in France and Canada, we will end up with a tiered healthcare system where the rich and connected "somehow" receive the best care, while the other animals on the farm wallow in the slop of a "new" healthcare system.

Advice To The Birthers: Focus Your Energies Elsewhere

2009-07-29T10:30:00.000-04:00

I have tried to stay out of the "birth certificate" controversy because it is a non-issue. Lee Harvey Oswald killed JFK, man landed on the moon, Jimmy Hoffa was killed by the mob, the Twin Towers were knocked down by two planes, and President Barrak Obama was born in the United States:

Hawaii again declares Obama birth certificate real

All-American Kooks

This country has too many issues to deal with to be distracted by this issue any further. But just like all other "conspiracy theories," there is a small minority of people who just cannot let it ago, so they will be left behind to wallow in their own paranoia.

Newsbusted: Obamas popularity hits a new low

2009-07-29T07:57:00.000-04:00

Conyers: Read The Bill….Why!

2009-07-28T19:51:00.001-04:00

It sound like the beginning of a bad bar joke – "A Congressman and two lawyers walk into a room….." Unfortunately, the joke is on the American people.

Recently Congressman Conyers lightheartedly suggested that his peers should not attempt to read the House healthcare bill unless accompanied by two lawyers. I am not sure if that statement was an sign of the lack of intelligence of the average congressman, or the maze of confusion that is the House bill on healthcare. Either way, it does not bode well for "We the People…"

Conyers Sees No Point in Members Reading 1,000-Page Health Care Bill--Unless They Have 2 Lawyers to Interpret It for Them

Conyers proves that President Reagan was right when he said – "Government is like a baby. An alimentary canal with a loud voice at one end and no responsibility at the other."

Newsbusted: The national deficit and TOTUS falls

2009-07-23T06:45:00.000-04:00

Our Healthcare Future: You'll Need a GPS To Find Care

2009-07-16T08:32:00.006-04:00

The Democrats are hoping that the American people are feeling so overwhelmed and exhausted, that they will not have the energy to beat back the onslaught of tyrannical legislative initiatives currently being pushed by the party of the jackass.

However, what the Democrats do not seem to realize is that their effort at remaking of American, by attempting to exploit a chaos of their own creation, is only serving to unite the American people against them.

Rasmussen Reports: Americans Trust Republicans More Than Democrats On 8 of 10 Key Issues

What do the Democrats think is going to happen when the American people look at the mess that will become our healthcare system if any one of the Democratic healthcare plans passes?

Time To Fit President Obama With A Crown?

2009-07-08T17:30:00.000-04:00

It is a waste of time to point out the hypocrisy of the Democrats now that “their man” Barrack is in charge. Nor will we find any solace within the Fourth Estate. The real issue is that many of the false allegations leveled at President Bush would be insignificant compared to what is actually emanating from the Obama Administration:

King Barack?

David Limbaugh

Oh, how quickly times have changed. Just a few short years ago, Democrats were up in arms over King George III's (President George W. Bush's) "unconstitutional" executive power grabs. Where are these people now?

I'll tell you where they are: right in the thick of it, enabling President Barack Obama to consolidate and exercise unprecedented power.

Remember when Democratic Sen. Patrick Leahy complained that the constitutional "checks and balances that have served to constrain abuses of power for more than two centuries in this country" were at risk because Republicans controlled the executive and legislative branches? How about Sen. Russ Feingold, who was looking at impeachment as a remedy to keep the president in check and prevent him from acquiring power "like King George III"?

Today these same senators are not just passively mute about Obama's power grabs; they are co-conspirators.

You might think the repeated conservative complaint about Obama's egregious lack of transparency is, by now, a tired talking point. But we're not just referring to minor procedural matters that are substantively inconsequential.

He hasn't just breached his promise to make his legislation available for public preview. He and his congressional cohorts are burying very important matters in legislation.

The Waxman-Markey cap and tax debacle that just slipped through the House was bad enough, with its mandated broad-based assaults on America's taxpayers, energy and economy in exchange for no appreciable expected environmental benefits. But look at its stealth provision, reported by the Washington Examiner, creating a three-year package of unemployment benefits, a $1,500 job relocation allowance and a health insurance premium subsidy for workers unemployed as a result of this "jobs creation" bill. Unbelievable! How can any congressman who voted for this monstrosity possibly get re-elected?

This was nothing new, though, as you'll recall that Obama's non-stimulative stimulus bill increased unemployment benefits for those not magically benefited by that job creations bill.

Indeed, there are so many Obama abuses I can only chronicle a fraction of them in a short column. But just consider a few others, and ask yourself how long even rank-and-file Democrats can justify supporting such tyrannical madness by this arrogant chief executive, who truly is -- as distinguished from Bush -- engaged in a daily quest to "dictate" fundamental, structural changes to this nation:

--ABC News reported that a senior White House official said the urgency of extending the expiring U.S.-Russia nuclear arms treaty "might mean temporarily bypassing the Senate's constitutional role in ratifying treaties." Did you hear that, Sens. Leahy and Feingold?

--President Obama is appointing so many "czars" to help him run the government without the usual accountability of Cabinet-level positions that even Sen. Robert Byrd said this practice "can threaten the constitutional system of checks and balances." Byrd's worried, but what do Leahy and Feingold think of Obama's pay czar, who'll have broad discretion over executive pay?

--Obama has so insulated himself from ordinary press scrutiny that even liberal journalists Chip Reid and Helen Thomas grilled White House press secretary Robert Gibbs for Obama's "tightly controlled" town hall meeting on health care. During that forum, Obama "coincidentally" called on three people (out of 200) who work with groups trying to pass his health care proposal.

--Obama is so intent on bullying our ally Israel that he is breaching a previous Bush administration-negotiated agreement between Israel and the United States to allow some Israeli construction in West Bank settlements to allow for natural growth.

--The Obama-Holder Justice Department dismissed a strong case against New Black Panther Party members for billy club-style voter intimidation because the members were intimidating for Obama's election.

--Obama and Holder are going to vacate an order of prior Attorney General Michael Mukasey's stating that immigrants facing deportation do not have an automatic right to an effective lawyer.

--Obama and Holder are now mirandizing terrorists on the battlefield.

--Some have questioned whether Obama-Holder ordered the FBI to "back off" anti-terror investigations of radicalized Muslim converts, such as the one who police say shot two military recruiters in Little Rock, Ark.

--Obama's auto task force used "intimidation tactics" against Chrysler's senior bondholders and called their Democratic lawyer, Tom Lauria, a "terrorist" for refusing to accept its offer outright. Where, by the way, were Leahy and Feingold -- and all the liberal media -- when Obama's deal involved an executive-forced transfer of ownership from shareholders and creditors to Obama's favored unions? Were they also unbothered by claims of Chrysler dealers that they were threatened and lied to?

--Obama's thugs fired AmeriCorps inspector general Gerald Walpin and slandered him as virtually demented because he blew the whistle on the corrupt practices of Obama's buddies.

To say this is scratching the surface is a monumental exaggeration.

Newsbusted: Sarah Palin and VP Joe Biden

2009-07-08T08:00:00.006-04:00

Will The Senate Slavery Apology Lead To Reparations?

2009-07-08T08:00:00.002-04:00

Should the United States of America apologize for slavery? The US Senate believes we should.

Recently the US Senate passed the Slavery Apology Act, which included a disclaimer that would seemly prevent the payment of reparations. But how can the Senate deny plaintiffs legal recourse if the Senate themselves validate an alleged wrong? They can’t, as numerous reparation supporters have publicly indicated:

Randall Robinson, author of "The Debt: What America Owes to Blacks," said he sees the Senate's apology as a "confession" that should lead to a next step of reparations. "Much is owed, and it is very quantifiable," he said. "It is owed as one would owe for any labor that one has not paid for, and until steps are taken in that direction we haven't accomplished anything."

On the floor of the Senate, Senator Roland Burris (D – Illinois), stated that the “disclaimer in no way would eliminate future actions that may be brought before this body that may deal with reparations.”

This act is a slap in the face of all those, of every races and religion, that fought to end slavery. To put this solely at the feet of all Americans, ignoring the truth that is the terrible history of the worldwide slave trade, is disingenuous and unjust.

Senate slavery apology

A Minority View: Walter Williams

Last month, the U.S. Senate unanimously passed Senate Resolution 26 "Apologizing for the enslavement and racial segregation of African-Americans." The resolution ends with: "Disclaimer – Nothing in this resolution (a) authorizes or supports any claim against the United States; or (b) serves as a settlement of any claim against the United States." That means Congress apologizes but is not going to pay reparations, as least for now.

Members of the Congressional Black Caucus have expressed concerns about the disclaimer, thinking that it's an attempt to stave off reparations claims from the descendants of slaves. Congressional Black Caucus Chairwoman Barbara Lee, D-Calif., said her organization is studying the language of the resolution, and Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., said "putting in a disclaimer takes away from the meaning of an apology. A number of us are prepared to vote against it in its present form. There are several members of the Progressive Caucus who feel the same way."

It goes without saying that slavery was a gross violation of human rights. Justice would demand that all the perpetrators – that includes slave owners, and African and Arab slave sellers – make compensatory reparation payments to victims. Since slaves, slave owners and slave sellers are no longer with us, such compensation is beyond our reach and a matter to be settled in the world beyond.

Absent from the reparations debate is: Who pays? Don't say the government because the government doesn't have any money that it doesn't first take from some American. So which Americans owe black people what? Reparations advocates don't want that question asked but let's you and I.

Are the millions of Europeans, Asians and Latin Americans who immigrated to the U.S. in the 20th century responsible for slavery and should they be forced to cough up reparations money? What about descendants of Northern whites who fought and died in the name of freeing slaves? Should they cough up reparations money for black Americans? What about non-slave-owning Southern whites, a majority of whites; should they be made to pay reparations? And, by the way, would President Obama, whose father is Kenyan and mother white, be eligible for a reparations payment?

On black people's side of the ledger, thorny issues also arise. Some blacks purchased other blacks as a means to free family members. But other blacks owned slaves for the same reason whites owned slaves – to work farms or plantations. Are descendants of these blacks eligible and deserving of reparations? There is no way that Europeans could have captured millions of Africans. They had African and Arab help. Should Congress haul representatives of Ghana, Ivory Coast, Nigeria and Muslim states before them and demand they compensate American blacks because of their ancestors' involvement in capturing and selling slaves?

Reparations advocates make the foolish unchallenged pronouncement that United States became rich on the backs of free black labor. That's utter nonsense. Slavery has never had a very good record of producing wealth. Think about it. Slavery was all over the South. Buying into the reparations nonsense, you'd have to conclude that the antebellum South was rich and the slave-starved North was poor. The truth of the matter is just the opposite. In fact, the poorest states and regions of our country were places where slavery flourished: Mississippi, Alabama and Georgia. The richest states and regions were those where slavery was absent: Pennsylvania, New York and Massachusetts.

The Senate apology is nothing more than political theater, but it could be a slick way to get the camel's nose into the tent for future reparations. If the senators are motivated by white guilt, I have the cure. About 15 years ago I wrote a "Proclamation of Amnesty and Pardon Granted to All Persons of European Descent."

Walter E. Williams, Ph.D., is the John M. Olin Distinguished Professor of Economics at George Mason University in Fairfax, Va.

Why The "First" Stimulus Was More Than Just A Mistake

2009-07-07T19:51:00.003-04:00

Stuttering Stimulus

By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Monday, July 06, 2009 4:20 PM PT

Stimulus: "The truth is, there was a misreading of just how bad an economy we inherited," Vice President Joe Biden told ABC News. Really? What about the "worst economy since the Great Depression"?

Those who pushed through this year's $787 billion fiscal "stimulus" seem to be counting on the American people's short memory. Wasn't it just last year that we were told, repeatedly and with stark emphasis, that this economy was the "worst" since the Great Depression?

That was the pretense for not only the stimulus, but for the federal takeover of the U.S. auto industry and the quasi-takeover of the U.S. financial industry. It's also the underlying premise for both nationalized health care and massive new taxes to cut CO2 emissions.

If the stimulus passed, the White House vowed, unemployment would peak at 8%. Today, it's 9.5% — and rising.

"The truth is, we and everyone else misread the economy," said Biden. He used that phrase — "the truth is," or something similar — at least three times in a talk with ABC's George Stephanopolous. But the "truth is" something quite different.

Many voices — including ours — were raised in opposition to the stimulus when it was debated. We didn't "misread" the economy. We knew from history that, left alone, it would get better without government meddling.

Instead, Americans were promised "shovel ready" projects would put stimulus money to work right away creating jobs. For the record, since February, the month the stimulus was passed, the U.S. has lost 2 million jobs. The stimulus is clearly a failure.

Yet, says Biden: "The truth of the matter was, no one anticipated, no one expected that the recovery package would in fact be in a position at this point of having to distribute the bulk of the money."

But that's not the "truth of the matter" at all. Many economists and conservative politicians warned explicitly about this very problem. So did IBD. And so did numerous other media outlets. The notion that no one brought it up is simply false.

Of $157.8 billion "made available" under the stimulus, only $56.3 billion has been paid out — or 7% of the total $787 billion. And according to ex-Treasury Department economist Bruce Bartlett, "just 11% of the the discretionary spending on highways, mass transit, energy efficiency and other programs involving direct government purchases will have been spent by the end of this fiscal year."

Based on this, there are only two possible conclusions: One, the stimulus has been the most inept public waste of money in history. Or two, it was a cynical attempt by the Democrats to vastly expand the scope of government during a time of crisis. Or maybe it's both.

After all, how else could a government seize major parts of a once-private economy with nary a peep? How else could it boost spending to record levels, then blame earlier administrations for their fiscal incontinence? And how else could they add $10 trillion to the nation's debt in just 10 years and still claim fiscal prudence?

Yet, faced with this, economist Paul Krugman and others on the left argue that a second stimulus is needed. Asked about it, Biden — who oversees the stimulus, by the way — refused to reject it.

This is a little like a medieval barber bleeding his patients to improve their health, then bleeding them again when they fail to improve. At some point we'll all wake up and use modern medicine. Until then, why double-down on failure?

Those who argue doing nothing wasn't an option are wrong. We would now be emerging from this recession if the government had left well enough alone. The Fed's interest-rate cuts to zero last December would have been plenty.

Instead, we're facing the worst recovery since the Depression, and the entrepreneurs who fuel job growth are hunkering down to weather planned tax hikes in the trillions of dollars.

When In The Course Of Human Events; Independence Day 2009

2009-07-04T11:31:00.006-04:00

“When in the Course of human events….” So begins the opening salvo from an oppressed people seeking self-rule. In the Summer of 1776, the only thing that was certain was that Colonial America and Britain were on a collision course with history. On July 2, 1776, the Continental Congress approved the final version of a document that would serve as the foundation for the creation of the United States of America.

To understand the Declaration of Independence is to understand what beats inside all people, the belief “that all men are created equal,” and that each of us “are endowed” with “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” The Declaration of Independence belongs to all of those seeking liberty, and for the first time in man's history government was empowered by the will of the people, and was solely accountable to the very same will. The Declaration of Independence anointed the people control of their own destiny as a “united” country.

A “simple” piece of paper placed the fate of governing with the people, the people only needed to stay true to its principals. So on this Independence Day, remind yourself what the true meaning of July 4^this by reading the Declaration of Independence, and always remember, that through our perceived faults, we are still that beacon of hope and freedom that was proclaimed on July 4th, 1776.

Peace and God Bless,

Jeff Chidester

The Declaration of Independence

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness of his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected, whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:

For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Brittish brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

New Hampshire: Josiah Bartlett, William Whipple, Matthew Thornton

Massachusetts: Samuel Adams, John Adams, John Hancock, Robert Treat Paine, Elbridge Gerry

Rhode Island: Stephen Hopkins, William Ellery

Connecticut: Roger Sherman, Samuel Huntington, William Williams, Oliver Wolcott

New York: William Floyd, Philip Livingston, Francis Lewis, Lewis Morris

New Jersey: Richard Stockton, John Witherspoon, Francis Hopkinson, John Hart, Abraham Clark

Pennsylvania: Robert Morris, Benjamin Rush, Benjamin Franklin, John Morton, George Clymer, James Smith, George Taylor, James Wilson, George Ross

Delaware: George Read, Caesar Rodney, Thomas McKean

Maryland: Samuel Chase, William Paca, Thomas Stone, Charles Carroll of Carrollton

Virginia: George Wythe, Richard Henry Lee, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Harrison, Thomas Nelson, Jr., Francis Lightfoot Lee, Carter Braxton

North Carolina: William Hooper, Joseph Hewes, John Penn

South Carolina: Edward Rutledge, Thomas Heyward, Jr., Thomas Lynch, Jr., Arthur Middleton

Georgia: Button Gwinnett, Lyman Hall, George Walton

North Korea: Happy Independence Day, America!

2009-07-04T11:21:00.002-04:00

North Korea showed its solidarity with America by launching 7 large firecrackers into the sea in celebration of the U.S. Independence Day:

N. Korea Fires 7 Missiles Off Eastern Coast

Unfortunately, President Obama was unable to see the display, in more ways than one.

Where's The Stimulus Money?

2009-07-02T11:08:00.000-04:00

Self Interest Won Out Over America's Interest: Waxman – Markey Bill

2009-06-30T08:00:00.001-04:00

Waxman – Markey, also known by its ill-suited title the "American Clean Energy and Security Act," passed by the not so reassuring vote of 219 to 212. The battle begins anew in the Senate, where its passage is far less likely (but in this political climate, who knows).

The damage to America's economy, based on a false crisis, will be devastating. The Heritage Foundation validated that by 2035 the bill would cut the GDP of the United States by $6,790 per family of four and impose $4,600 in carbon taxes per family:

House Passes Climate Bill

The Cap and Trade 8

House Narrowly Passes Bill Designed to Influence Earth's Climate by Restricting U.S. Industry and Imposing Costs on American Families

The Economic Impact of the Waxman-Markey Cap-and-Trade Bill

But the media, and other supporters of the American Clean Energy and Security Act, would prefer to ignore Heritage's findings, instead choosing to quote from the flawed Congressional Budget Office, which grossly underestimated the overall cost to the economy, as well as the individual impact:

CBO Grossly Underestimates Cost of Cap and Trade

This bill needs to be stopped before we find ourselves on a course that will damage the worldwide economy to the point of no return., just as it did in Spain and other parts of Europe.

Tilting at Green Windmills

Climate Change: Who Is Getting Rich

Pelosi will profit from Obama-Waxman-Markety cap-and-trade energy bill

Massachusetts Healthcare Program: A Model For Failure

2009-06-23T14:03:00.001-04:00

One of the bills being bandied about in Congress is to make medical insurance mandatory for every citizen, similar to what happen in Massachusetts.

However, before we adopt this model nationally, shouldn't we first understand how affective it has been in Massachusetts:

Massachusetts Health Care Reform Not as Successful as Lawmakers Claim, Free Market Analyst Says

Sounds likes a perfect federal program: heavy on bureaucracy, billions of dollars over budget, and ineffective.

Healthcare Horror Stories You Won’t Here

2009-06-19T13:45:00.002-04:00

As the polls start to show signs of Americas distain for the type of healthcare takeover being bandied about in Washington, along comes a horror story the Obama administration does not want you to hear:

The Obamacare Horror Story You Won't Hear

These are the same people that want “oversee” Americas healthcare system. Wonderful.

North Korea Missile Threat: Hawaii An Intended Target

2009-06-18T08:16:00.001-04:00

I have long given up trying to understand the leadership of North Korea. They have committed to policies that have served only to starve and isolate their people. Now we have more “saber rattling” threats from Pyongyang:

North Korea may fire a missile toward Hawaii

I guess that is one way to end the “birth certificate” controversy. Notice they didn't threaten to aim it at Alaska. After the Palin slap down of Letterman, Kim Jong II would rather take his chances with President Obama.

Only In Massachusetts: Guns Are Bad, Especially If They Are In The Possession Of The Police

2009-06-15T21:50:00.003-04:00

Leave it to the extremely left leaning newspaper the Boston Globe to somehow see an issue with a well-armed police force:

Even small localities got big guns

This was a “none story,” and did not deserve front page coverage. But this story is a classic example of how clueless the liberal media is. 19 years after the program started, after no incidents whatsoever, with no-to-minimal cost to the taxpayers, suddenly the crackerjack team at the Globe are concerned that “some departments” got more guns than the program would seem to allow. Whew, for a minute there I was worried that the Globe was concerned that the police would be better armed than the criminals.

Cops + Guns = Good. Liberal Reporter + Computer = Idiocy

Newsbusted: Newsweeks Evan Thomas calls Obama God

2009-06-09T21:08:00.001-04:00

Dismantling GM and the Constitution: Driving Over The Cliff Together

2009-06-03T11:00:00.001-04:00

To My Fellow GM Investors (formerly known as Citizens of the United States of America),

Today you and I have become willing participants in the further erosion of the Constitution and the outright violation of over 200 years of case law:

A Matter Of Law

"So the government, with roughly two times what private bondholders have on the table, gets a stake five times bigger. And the union, with about a third as much "invested," gets a 70% bigger stake. Even the Canadian government, with its $9.5 billion "invested," ends up with 12%."

No politics at play here, and frankly I am appalled at the suggestion of impropriety, shocked I tell you! It seems rather straight forward, and consistent with Obama's "spread the wealth" philosophy. You and I, as new shareholders in GM, should be thankful that someone as benevolent as President Obama, and his crack team of advisors, is looking out for our best interest. We can all sleep better tonight (as long as excessive drinking and sleeping pills are part of our nighttime regiment), knowing that the full weight of the US Government is behind GM (or in this case, on top).

As a fellow shareholder, we should also feel confident that a 31 year-old college graduate and former Obama campaign staffer, Brian Deese, has been task with overseeing the dismantling of the former grand lady of the automotive world. Forget the fact that Deese has NO EXPERIENCE at running a business, let alone has ever stepped foot in an automotive plant; although rumor has it he just got his learners permit. Familiarity and expertise are both highly overrated anyway.

Deese's selection should be an indication to us all of President Obama's keen business suave, and commitment to taking the automotive crisis seriously. Deese, who served as one of Obama's attack dogs during the presidential campaign, is "just too smart to fail (now the official motto of the Obama administration)."

But fear not my fellow automotive titans, not only do we have President Obama and wiz kid Deese taking care of our company, he have the Duke of Delaware in our corner as well:

Biden's Top Economic Adviser Says Getting Congressional Authorization for GM Bailout is 'Not a Concern' of the Administration

That's right, why worry about our representative form of government, we have a bloody car company to run! Besides, we will just have to wait until the next shareholders meeting to make any changes to the newly appointed board of directors, formerly known as the Democratic Congressional Caucasus, which is currently scheduled for November 2, 2010.

In addition, why should we be concerned that most economists believe this latest move by the Obama administration will scare away customers? How dare they question our leader and his sidekicks?

A Nationalized GM May Drive Off More Customers, Economists and Consumers Say

So until the holiday party, keep checking the mailbox for your dividend checks, and thank God every day that you live in a country where one day you are a regular schmo, and the next day the owner of your very own car company!

Newsbusted: Nancy Pelosi visits China and GM files for bankruptcy

2009-06-02T19:55:00.000-04:00

Why Is President Obama’s Visit To Dresden A Concern?

2009-06-02T15:03:00.003-04:00

As President Obama prepares for another oversees trip, some in America are concerned about one of his scheduled stops. On June 5 (a day before the 65^th anniversary of D-Day), President Obama will visit the Germany town of Dresden, and many fear that President Obama will offer an apology for a false crime:

Mythologies of Dresden Must Be Rejected

If President Obama offers any sort of apology he will not only be doing a disservice to America, but he will also be dishonoring all the brave aircrews that participated in this necessary mission. To offer an apology based on revisionist history does not serve the best interest of America, and any act of contrition will only serve to perpetuate the myth that America did something wrong.

There are many tragic stories connected to World War II, including Dresden. However, the Dresden tragedy is not of America's making, and to offer penance is nothing more than offering validation to a falsehood, and is an example of the type self-flagellation some in this country feel we should perform to purge America of its sins, real or perceived.