Friend, you should have figured out by now that any time this admin, passes a measure which includes the word “fairness” in the title, the measure is meant for anything but fairness. The title is meant to lure and excite uninformed citizens to get emotionally excited: “Yea, I’ll get mine now, and be able to get back at that dirty ______________________.” (fill in the blank) But class warfare doesn’t help ANYONE. Pitting one class of the electorate against another, rich vs poor, white vs black, male vs female, worker vs business owner, whatever, is the most widely used, and most successful way an unjust govt. has stirred emotional angst within the voters as a way of justifying larger govt, expanded policies and taking away our liberty. We have got to look past the sound bites and emotional reactions to see the purpose of the legislation. Our country has been fundamentally altered forever by this current administration, and not for the better.

The country you and I grew up in, where opportunity was available for all who wanted to work hard and pursue their dreams, is GONE. The country as a protected home for liberty and freedom as our founding fathers envisioned is GONE. The Govt now owns 96% of the mortgage business, now controls the banking industry, the health industry, and will control the energy sector also if anything remotely resembling the current “Cap and Trade” legislation passes.

Don’t know about you, but I can’t find ANY country that has prospered under a large, centralized socialist govt. They are currently going broke all over the globe (England, Greece, Venezuela, France) Remember the Soviet Union, they failed under centralized communist govt. and their citizens are still suffering 3 decades later.

Which comes back to the issue of fairness. The world is not fair. We can’t make it fair. Men have different talents and we are able to work, produce and accomplish different things to differing levels of success.Some want to, and can earn a lot. some want to, and can’t create wealth. Then there are those that have talents and don’t want to use them. These are all internal issues, dealing with talent, motivation, and faithful stewardship. which essentially are moral and spiritual issues. The unequal outcomes are a function of internal gifts, personal motivation and faithfulness much more than any external govt regulation.

To tell the people that the govt will step in and equalize the outcome, passing the wealth from the producers to the non producers, is to fight against natures moral order. It is immoral to take from those that are faithful stewards and give to those who are unfaithful. It is simply theft. Now, I’m not talking about taking care of the poor, and righting injustice. The former is the responsibility of God fearing people, and the latter a just task of the govt.

The long and the short of this letter is to say that the Govt is using emotional fervor to justify taking power for itself. This approach to governing people was first described by Karl Marx, a devoted atheist, a man allowed 4 of his own children to die of starvation while he pursued “social enlightenment”, and who advocated violent bloody revolution as a just means of “taking what belongs to the people and returning it to the people.” These policies are the process of becoming enslaved to a bloated, socialist govt which is concerned about amassing and maintaining its own power, not it’s governing its people.

It seems we are on a course correction in this country.

We’ve let the far left have a chance; we are good about taking turns in this country, but alas, finally, we’ve found it to be the wrong course. I could have told you as much.

Whether the far left likes it or not, we are traditionally a “center right” country. Here is the Gallup from October 26th of this year:

Gallup Poll

We like limited government, and maximum freedoms. We like to run our lives according to the dictates of our own conscience, and we like others to do the same. We like to give a hand up, not a hand out.
We believe in freedom of choice, but once you’ve made that choice, you should live with it, and make the best of it.
We believe we are the best ones to decide how our money should be spent, and who should receive it.
We believe we have the right to own a firearm, to discharge it in the protection of our homes and families; to guard against tyranny of all sorts.

We gave the Democrats a chance, they stuck us with a far left ideologue, and the tides are turning. The most recent Gallup poll from yesterday, shows that 48% to 44% of people, largely independents, are planning to vote Republican.

Well wahoo. The only thing that’s good about this will be watching the left go batty. It’s not a good thing if we hire a democrat lite for our next elected official, whoever he may be. We need a SOLID conservative; the truth is, we need MANY of them.

Did you see the fiasco in New York 23 by any chance? The Republican candidate, had taken money from Acorn, was pro abortion, and endorsed the DEMOCRAT when she dropped out of the race. This is NOT the kind of Republican we need.
We need solid CONSERVATIVES to come to the fore, and lead this nation back to peace and prosperity; back to limited government and Constitutional principles.

It’s going to take some research, some footwork and some letter writing campaigns, but I believe firmly there ARE genuine conservatives out there; those willing to fight for right, because make no mistake, it IS about right vs. wrong, not right vs. left.

Pay attention to your elected officials. If you feel that a candidate is a true conservative, then open a dialogue with them. Go to the Town Halls and other forums where they are speaking. Go to their offices, make appointments with them. Get to know them. Find those conservatives who hold the same values as you. You don’t have to agree with them on everything, but if you agree on 75-85 percent of the issues, then that’s a pretty darn good indication that they will be someone you can feel confident in voting for.

We can maintain this course correction, but it will take all of us, and it will take time and effort, but it can be done, and I believe firmly, God will be on our side.

“Remember the Alamo!” “Mr Gorbachev, tear down this wall.” “Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country;” These rallying cries instantly bring together mind, will and emotion, break the inertia of complacency, and move people into collective action. Even though public sentiment often tilts against marketing and packaging, we are all moved by resonant rallying cries.

President Obama generated collectivist action around marketing pitches that resonated with average citizens who feel out of touch and out of control when it comes to governmental behavior. “Yes We Can” and “Change we can believe in” drew the best of the American spirit into focus like the sun’s rays through a magnifying glass. Thus his concentrated public approval has been hard to dissipate.

In the current health care debate, missing on the the conservative side is a marketing plan, a rallying cry. We need a simple call to action which the public can identify with, and like “Remember the Alamo” use to emotionally activate the wider American public. This cannot be a slick bait and switch approach which is too often the methodology of in Washington. Conservatives cannot afford and should not employ disingenuous tactics. We want truthfulness and integrity from our leaders. Honor and truth will in the end win the hearts and minds of the people.

So what can we shout from the street corners and write in the blogosphere that will unite conservative Americans in this debate? In recent weeks, a few messages have surfaced with limited success. To the administration’s claim “cheaper universal care which maintains private choice” we have responded but not well. It is impossible to explain how “expanding government control over private lives will ultimately limit choices, cause costs to escalate and lead to government intrusion into every area of our lives” in a sound bite.

Sarah Palin’s comment regarding government health care “death panels” is gaining traction. I applaud the ex-governor for taking such a bold and informed stand against Obama’s juggernaut. Yet can we get the American people to activate and engage the political system on the idea of “stopping govt. death panels?” The argument gets lost in translation via sound bite media, and gives the left too much fodder for their marketing teams.

“We don’t want socialism, and do not want to become a socialist country” is accurate. But let’s be honest – many citizens don’t know what socialism is, or why it is undesirable. When these weak slogans break down, many conservatives are left with “Well just stop this plan. Stop Obama and stop congress.”

What may surprise some of my readers is that I would like our country’s president to succeed. I would like an intelligent, black American to leave a powerful legacy on the pages of American history. America could close a chapter of racial strife, and start a new one which points in the direction of genuine healing between races. Our nation celebrates the achievements of underdogs. For a man or woman to climb from humble beginnings into the White House is an incredible accomplishment which should be celebrated. However, a man who does so via thuggish “coalitions of power” assembled to “fundamentally restructure American society” while listening to the advice of ex-terrorists, felons, hate-mongers and communists . . . well . . . now I have a problem.

Which leads full circle to the fundamental issue. Conservatives can’t rally public sentiment on “stopping this person” or “voting against a policy.” We need a rallying cry which resounds deep in the hearts of free people who want change that will genuinely create improved quality of life. Toward that end, I offer this sound bite friendly clarion call.

1. Lower prices mean more coverage, more choices and more freedom for more people
2. Less government means lower prices.

Policies can be built which achieve less government involvement. (Thank you President Reagan.) But explaining them to the public which believes “Yes We Can” create “Change We Can Believe In” is a tough sell. It is equally tough to sell “reintroduce market forces” or the benefits of “health care savings accounts” to a digital, sound bite culture. Conservatives need a plan to support, and an idea around which to rally that creates positive, proactive excitement. Failing to create positive momentum on our side can stop this current generation of socialist advance only to be vulnerable for the next evolution of the same message. We need a voice. We need a message. We need change we can believe in. We need to fix a flawed health care system, without replacing it with a failed socialist one. We need to get popular support for a positive solution which will make our lives better.

• We want lower health care prices.
• Lower prices mean expanded coverage.
• Lower prices mean more people can be covered.
• Lower prices maintain my freedom and choice.
• Less government involvement means lower prices.
• It works, it always does. It works every time it’s tried.

So Congressman, Senator, Mr. President, craft a bill which lowers the price of health care, and you will then fulfill the promises you have made to the American people. This is what we hired you to do.

Obamunism - it’s a thought provoking title. Yet do the majority of America’s citizens assent to this characaturization of our new president?  After all, he was elected on a groundswell of American populism (and maybe Acorn voter fraud, but who’s really keeping track).  Until recently, His poll numbers continue to reinforce his self-assumed deification, and the liberal media unquestioningly toes the party line.   With support like this, who wants to challenge the Chicago thuggery politics which have come to the White House with him?

If only we could get an outside point of view – someone who could comment on recent political evolutions in America who doesn’t have Democrat or Republican prejudice.

In april of this year, Pravda, the state run media outlet in Russia printed the following.

“It must be said, that like the breaking of a great dam, the American decent into Marxism is happening with breath taking speed, against the back drop of a passive, hapless sheeple, excuse me dear reader, I meant people.”

Read the full story here: http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/107459-american_capitalism-0#

This commentary comes from the Russian state run political news machine. I would suggest that this group knows communisism and marxism when they see it.

Stand up Americans.

Light the Fires

Tim

Remember back when B.O. said he wanted to have a “Civilian National Security Force”? Something that was “just as strong”, “just as well funded” as our military? Well he’s implemented the first phase of that force. This is from the White House website; the context is the “disinformation” surrounding Socialized Health Care:

“There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there, spanning from control of personal finances to end of life care. These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through casual conversation. Since we can’t keep track of all of them here at the White House, we’re asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov.”

Now what’s FISHY is asking people to turn in their neighbor for DISAGREEING with a government program or policy!! Your casual conversations–CASUAL conversations are now subject to federal involvement! Dear God what is happening to our beloved country?

Can’t those of you supporting this man see how Fascist he is? Do we REALLY want to recreate Nazi Germany?? Hasn’t ANYONE seen the movie “Night Crossing” about the desperation of trying to escape Nazi Germany; the fear of your neighbors being suspicious of your every move??

For the Love of all that is Good, America, WAKE UP! It’s happening under our noses, and no one is making noise. Why aren’t we calling our newspapers and demanding real news? Why aren’t we bombarding our news and radio stations demanding to hear the whole story?

If they begin to infringe on our right to Free Speech in “Casual Conversation”, it’s only a matter of time before the “telescreen” becomes reality.

The arguments for why we should or should not have “free” health care are being thrown back and forth in a rather cavalier way. I put “free” in quotes because nothing is ever free. There is always some economy involved in getting what you want, even if it’s not a cash economy. In the case of “free” health care, there just so happens to be a huge cash economy associated with it, but there are also the economies of time and quality. In other words you will have to sacrifice a lot of cash, time, and quality to get “free” health care. As a general rule, people will never understand that. These are the same type of people that get duped by the “free orange Macbook” offers that pop up all over the Internet.

This post is not about “free” health care though, at least not directly. I want to try to put into words what I understand about the Bill of Rights and how it applies to the issues we face today. A lot of people mistake the Bill of Rights for an enumeration of our rights as citizens of this country. These people are fools. I apologize if I just called you a fool, and maybe that’s a strong word, but this aspect of our Constitution has traditionally been taught completely inaccurately in public schools, leaving most people none the wiser. One of the cavalier arguments against “free” health care is that there is no right to health care in the Bill of Rights. Therefore, no one has that right, right? Wrong. This is a horribly inaccurate argument, and I facepalm whenever I hear people and pundits use this to defend their stance against health care reform of any kind.

The Bill of Rights is actually an enumeration of the limitations of government power over our unlimited natural rights. Without getting into too much historical detail, this was a bit of a sore spot between the Federalists and Anti-Federalists during the founding of our country. Alexander Hamilton argued against any Bill of Rights because the Constitution alone gave the people all rights under the sun, and he feared listing any specific rights could be misconstrued as a limitation on other rights. Worse yet, large government might use a Bill of Rights to find more exceptions to the Constitution with which they could restrict the rights of the people even further. (Does this sound familiar?) Meanwhile, Anti-Federalists such as Thomas Jefferson feared that listing no rights would be an open invitation for large government to quickly take away all rights and perhaps turn itself into a monarchy all over again. I’ll just point out that both of these factions feared large government rule. Our Bill of Rights as we know it today is essentially a compromise between the two groups trying to prevent just that. How? Take a look at the Ninth Amendment:

“The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”

Are you familiar with that Amendment? I know it’s not the First or Second, but seriously, there were only ten total in the Bill of Rights; you should know them all.  The Ninth Amendment illustrates the founding fathers’ belief in personal rights before government and their anticipation that people would easily misconstrue the Bill of Rights as a limitation on personal rights (in the hopes that you would not do this.) This idea is further illustrated in the wording of other Amendments. The First Amendment says “Congress shall make no law…” The Fourth says, “the right of the people to be secure…shall not be violated.” The list goes on. These are strongly worded to restrict the power of government over the people. Ultimately, we ended up with a Bill of Rights, but it was the first Bill of Rights in history to be the exact opposite of what all prior bills of rights of various nations had been, which were essentially lists of rights handed down by the ruling class to its subjects.

What does this mean for us today? First of all, it means you now know the true meaning of the Bill of Rights and can use it correctly in your political arguments. (Please, spread the word. It’s so embarrassing that we the people don’t know the true origins of our country and the meanings of its founding documents.) More importantly, it means we have all of those rights you have ever said were not rights because they were not in the Bill of Rights. That being said, what we must not forget are the responsibilities that come with every right. You cannot have a right without a responsibility. Here, I propose my Bill of Rights And Responsibilities for modern reference. This is a living document that can be amended as new issues arise. It should be easy enough to do for those of us who understand what personal responsibility means.

• The Right to Own a Home: You cannot be denied the purchase of a home based on race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, age or any other discriminatory measure that violates your civil rights. Additionally, your home cannot be seized at the whim of any person or governing body.
  The Responsibility of Owning a Home: You have to pay for your home in order to own it. No other person, group, or government can be held responsible for the home you own. Educate yourself on what it means to have a home mortgage. If you are not fiscally ready to own a home, rent one instead.
  The Consequences of Failing Your Responsibilities: You will lose your home. No one will save you. Buying another home later in life may be extremely difficult. Alternatively, the government may bail you out, and everyone will hate you.

• The Right to Health Care: You cannot be denied health care based on race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, age or any other discriminatory measure that violates your civil rights. Additionally, you have the right to not have your health put in jeopardy against your will.
  The Responsibility of Health Care: Take care of yourself. Health care begins with you. Do not run to the hospital every time you need a band-aid (or a drug fix.) Get off the couch. Eat healthy. Plan ahead. Put money aside for any chronic or unexpected conditions. Be smarter with your money. This is your health we are talking about. Why buy the 60-inch flat panel HDTV when you know you could be saving that money for a rainy day? Put your health first. You are the victim of the choices you make. People have been taking care of their families for centuries. Don’t feel entitled. Don’t be spoiled. Be an adult.
  The Consequences of Failing Your Responsibilities: You overcrowd the system. You become a leech on society. The government declares a national crisis and makes you and everyone else a ward of the state. Your rights to health care are now dictated and restricted by the government. You have no options. Your right to health care as it should have been is now gone.

• The Right to Higher Education: You cannot be denied higher education based on race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, age or any other discriminatory measure that violates your civil rights. Additionally, you cannot be forcibly removed from school without just cause.
  The Responsibility of Higher Education: You have to study hard, work hard, and save a lot. If you can’t save more, study more. Scholarships come to those who earn them. Universities are competitive. If you cannot compete, you will not win.
  The Consequences of Failing Your Responsibilities: You won’t get into college, or you will flunk out of college.

• The Right to Dance Naked to “Billie Jean” In Your Living Room: No one can stop you. You’re a dance machine.
  The Responsibility of Dancing Naked to “Billie Jean” In Your Living Room: Close the blinds. Don’t let the music disturb the neighbors.
  The Consequences of Failing Your Responsibilities: At best, your neighbors just label you a freak, never speak to you again, and post their video of you on YouTube. At worst, you get fined or locked up for any number of reasonably policed infractions.

You can see where I am going with this. My point is simple: every right has a responsibility, and failure to be responsible for your rights leads to consequence. There are no guarantees. There are no free rides. Granted, that last example was a little silly, but it just goes to show how silly it is to try to limit people’s natural rights. Some things are just nobody else’s business. We don’t need to outright ban those things.

Responsible people should be rewarded for their model behavior. Everyone has to live the life they have chosen for themselves. You will find people are much more willing to help you in your time of need if they are left to their own means of taking care of themselves than when you call upon the government to force them to take care of you. When you ask the government to solve your problems, you invite it to chip away at the unlimited natural rights you once had under the Constitution. My other point is that for those of you who claim to be “Constitutionalists” and continue to deny people rights because they are not in the Bill of Rights, it is time to wise up. We can solve the problems we face without government intervention, but we will never get there if we continue to argue inadequately. For those of you who outright reject the Constitution, well, I’m not sure what to say except that it is in fact our main governing document, and if you continue to pass legislation that contradicts it, we will have to hold you accountable for our nation’s spiraling demise.

It has been said recently that the Republican party is “too far right” (think Arlen Specter). I would vehemently disagree, and say that if we want the GOP to get back to actually BEING the “Grand Old Party,” we need to get back to choosing TRUE conservatives in our electoral processes. The Republican party has alienated myself and scores of others. I no longer consider myself a Republican, but a Conservative.

So what IS a Conservative? Here is my list, and it is by no means comprehensive.

A Conservative is someone who:

• Believes in upholding the Constitution; that, in fact, the Constitution is infallible and the law of the land. Period.
• Values life.
• Values morality.
• Champions small government.
• Promotes free trade.
• Believes in lower taxes.
• Believes you and I are the ones to decide what’s best for us.
• Knows that you and I should keep our money and spend it as we see fit.
• Knows that a handout is not a hand up, and not the way to solve problems.
• Knows keeping the military strong keeps us safe.
• Knows freedom of speech is necessary to a free republic.
• Understands gun ownership is expressly provided for, and critical for a free republic.
• Believes that most government programs do more harm than good.

Now there are more I could add, but the point is we haven’t had one around in awhile. They are an endangered species. I think George Washington was maybe the last one.

I firmly believe that there are two reasons we lost the election. First and foremost, John McCain was NOT a true Conservative: McCain-Feingold is a glaring example. He also said that Obama and Clinton were nice, and we would be OK if one of them won the election. Bless his heart, but I think he lost all his “fight” fighting his gaolers. He couldn’t articulate how he was better than Obama; how he was more conservative and it cost us. Second, if the differences are minor, then why not vote for the guy who could make history. I know some of you don’t believe me, but I heard with my own ears people who wanted to vote for Obama because he “looks like me”, because he was black. I heard them say it. Now I would like to believe that this was a small segment of the population, but I doubt it very much. And, honestly, I don’t fault them for that too much. If the conservative had been black, I would have been so excited to throw my vote in his corner; to make history.

It was assumed from my last post, that I was a Bush fan, and that now, it was my turn to whine. Well guess what? I did vote for Bush…Could you IMAGINE how badly things would have gone with either Gore OR Kerry at the helm? I shudder to think
But Bush let us down. I still think he’s a good man, but he blew it, and blew it big time. I’m not talking the Iraq war, Saddam Hussein was a meanace, and a harborer of terrorists; he had ignored SIXTEEN UN resolutions. Why have a UN, and Resolutions if we aren’t going to enforce them??

But I digress.

Bush gave us the Perscription Drug plan and No Child Left Behind, two examples of his enlargement of the government behemoth. These have no Constitutional basis. He was not a Conservative.

So who is? That remains to be seen, but one thing we have to make sure of, is that whoever it is has a great love of the Constitution and believes in the infallability of it. We can no longer afford to say that something is “no big deal.” We have to look at everything through the lens of the Constitution and there will either be a basis for it or not. We have to make sure that whoever is elected counts states rights as a top priority.

Moderates need not apply.

I thought I might take a moment to reflect on Presidents past, specifically George W. Bush and how he compares to Barack Obama. It’s obviously no secret that I dislike the direction Obama is taking the country, but one thing you may not know is that not all anti-Obamunists were pro-Bush. In fact, there is a vast number of us who felt just as bad over the past 8 years as we are feeling now: completely controlled by unrelenting dogmatic philosophies on how everyone should live. With Obama, we teeter on the brink of becoming a socialist nation. With Bush, the threat was a church-state. Why do we have to keep electing such polarizing idealogues? Where are the fiscally conservative, socially liberal candidates? Where are the people who can think and reason critically?

I live in an area where being white makes me the minority. It’s difficult then to let anyone know that I am an Obama detractor. Immediately, I am simply a “racist” in the eyes of his supporters. It boils my blood that someone would assume that I look past all of Obama’s policies and land on the color of his skin as his “flaw.” When Bush was president, I lived in a different area where not liking him made me either a “terrorist supporting liberal” or a “satanist.” Of course, you can see where I am going with this. I am none of these things that people assume, but the Presidents we elect seem to give the people carte blanche to make such assumptions. It’s simply not healthy for half the country to always be ready with such an angry, thoughtless attack.

Whenever I can actually have a civil conversation with someone about my politics, they are often surprised to find out that I am not an Obama supporter. After the first few incredulous exchanges, I can eventually start explaining the problems I have with socialism. When I get to the part about how to solve problems without government intervention, I start getting nods. “Oh yeah,” they say, “that’s more of how I feel about it too.” So many people do not realize that they are centrists until you get them to say it out loud. Generally, until that point, they haven’t seen far enough down the road to understand the consequences of what is taking place.

Too often our “problems” are boiled down to “rich versus poor” or “black versus white” or “religion versus non-religion” or (under Bush) “good versus evil.” I believe that generally people want to do the right thing. It’s just that no two people are ever going to agree on how to do it. Is it sad that there are poor people? Yes, absolutely. Should you legislate the “rich” (I put that term in quotes because as of late it means families with $250,000 whereas in my eyes you aren’t rich until you’re well into the millions) to pay for the poor? Absolutely not. Redistribution of wealth is not a right of the federal government. Is it unethical for “rich” people to sit on the sidelines while the poor flounder? Maybe. But do you know how many “rich” people already give large amounts of money to various charities? Do you have a tally of all the humanitarianism in which each “rich” person takes part every year? Most pragmatically, have you thought about how many jobs that “rich” person has created with his or her wealth? People don’t care about those kinds of questions because the leader tells them they don’t have to.

My point is that the pendulum is swinging too far. Extremism may seem admirable, but in practice it only alienates and divides. Bush and Obama are no different in this regard. Abstract away the details of their respective agendas, and you have the same figurehead destined to help rip the country apart. Hopefully, eventually, the pendulum will lose momentum and land somewhere in the middle, bringing us a leader that can actually unite and not just campaign.