We The People

And the Band Played On

2011-04-19T06:48:00.002-05:00

[Editorial Notes: What you're about to read is scary. It's meant to be. It's not a movie, its real life. This is happening and some of the outcomes are inevitable. If you're scared at the end of this piece, good. Do something about it. Get involved and tell your representatives to start building lifeboats.]

On Monday, the financial world (cue the eye-rolling "not again" reactions) was stunned by the announcement from ratings giant Standard and Poor's that it has downgraded the financial outlook of the United States.

Most people on the street metaphorically shrugged their shoulders and said, "So?" I'm going to answer that question by continuing an allegory that I'm using with the people I meet.

Last November, I likened the U.S. economy to the Titanic. I spoke about the QE2, "Quantitative Easing", as being akin to applying full power to the economic ship while headed straight for the iceberg. Extending that metaphor, yesterday's announcement was that we've not only hit the iceberg, but, as Titanic's builder Thomas Andrews told Captain Smith, "We have about two hours," -- the ship of the United States is sinking and the outcome is a foregone conclusion.

You see, what this means is the Wall Street -- Thomas Andrews -- is finally acknowledging what analysts -- Frederick Fleet, the lookout -- have been warning of for years: there's an iceberg looming and we're going to hit it. In fact, we have hit it. And now we're "down by the bow."

For years, Captain Smith (successive administrations) and J. Bruce Ismay (Congress) have been blithely ignoring the ice warnings issued by numerous other ships (Greece, Spain, Portugal and the E.U.) have issued and have instead confidently sailed directly into ice fields with "full steam ahead." And yet, as I noted above, they are "stunned" when the ship hits an iceberg.

In the case of the Titanic, Captain Smith was, by many reports, so distraught and unbelieving that he was almost, at times, catatonic and paralyzed into inaction. And our leaders, and Wall Street, are now having the exact same reaction.

On the Titanic, Captain Smith told his officers not to "panic the passengers" by telling them to muster on the boat decks. In the United States, the Obama administration and a compliant media is focusing on so-called "recovery stories" and partisan wrangling.

But they're not the only ones. In our own state of Wisconsin, which like the Federal Government, is bankrupt (yes, that's right, both have no money - literally, not figuratively), the Unions and state workers are scrambling over each other to scream about their "rights". As the ships of state sink out from under their feet, they're only concern is, like those first class ladies on the doomed Titanic, that they are "properly dressed for the occasion."

In hindsight, its easy to see the series of miscalculations, mistakes and accidents that lead to the sinking of the grand ship. Its easy for us to shake our heads and make the judgement, "Couldn't they see they didn't have enough lifeboats? How stupid!" And yet our governments have done the exact same thing.

The British Board of Trade regulations in 1912 required only that one have lifeboats according to the tonnage of the ship, regardless of the number of actual passengers. It was an outdated and outmoded way of thinking with disasterous consequences.

Likewise, our governments have been following the Keynesian model of economics which prescribes that governments spend money to stimulate the economy. It is an outdated and outmoded way of thinking with disasterous consequences.

Even China, often touted as the superpower of this century that will eclipse the United States, has subscribed to this discredited economic theory and is soon to face its own massive financial crisis.

On the evening of April 12, 1912, there were no ships (save the Californian, whose radio was off) close enough to Titanic to affect a rescue. Likewise, given the current state of affairs in Europe and the impending Chinese meltdown, there is no one to save the United States. Its up to the passengers, each and every citizen, to make the officers, our legislators, take immediate action to save as many as possible.

Ladies and gentlemen, we have hit the iceberg. We are sinking. The builder Mr. Andrews has admitted that we are going down. The question now isn't "how do we save the ship", the question is, will we have enough lifeboats for everyone. And given that our government plans as well as J. Bruce Ismay, the answer isn't encouraging. It is up to each of us, regardless if First Class or Steerage, white collar or Unions, to take our fiscal lives and those of our fellow passengers in our own hands. We are all in the same sinking boat.

I am sending this column to my legislators at both the state and Federal level. I am going to hound them about priorities and building life rafts. And I'm making sure my own life jacket (my financial "house") is secure. What are YOU doing?

Reminder: If you're getting this via RSS or Email, check the Blog at http://wethepeoplegovern.blogspot.com for embedded links that may be omitted.

The Tax System - Explained With Beer

2011-04-14T08:21:00.002-05:00

Special thanks to Mike N. for sending me this column:

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100.

If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.

So, that's what they decided to do.

The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20."

Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men -- the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his "fair share?"

They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.

And so:

The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings) .
The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings) .
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 ( 25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 ( 22% savings).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.

"I only got a dollar out of the $20," declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man, "but he got $10!"

"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than me!"

"That's true!!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!"

"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison. "We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!"

The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!

And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up any more. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

Reminder: If you're getting this via RSS or Email, check the Blog at http://wethepeoplegovern.blogspot.com for embedded links that may be omitted.

It's Gotta Work Sometime

2011-04-07T12:18:00.003-05:00

You have to wonder, sometimes, about how sly some of these despots really are. President Obama received a letter from Qaddaffi begging him to stop bombing Libya. Ok, nothing new there... but just read the letter (new window) (here's the beginning):

Our son, Excellency,

President Obama

U.S.A

We have been hurt more morally that physically because of what had happened against us in both deeds and words by you. Despite all this you will always remain our son whatever happened. We still pray that you continue to be president of the U.S.A. We Endeavour and hope that you will gain victory in the new election campaigne.

I gotta say, it reminded me of this (new window):

From: Pastor Kothapalli Prabhakara Rao
Subject: fellowship
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 11:14:57 +0000 (GMT)

Dear in Christ,
I greet you in the precious name of Jesus. I praise God that He has
privileged me to send this email to you for your kind co-operation to
spread the Gospel and save the perishing soul.
You do not know me, but it has happened for me to find your e-mail
address on the internet. Please for give me for my intrusion like this. I
am Pastor. K.Prabhakara Rao.

Now give Qaddafi some credit. Obama's giving everyone else money, why not him??

Reminder: If you're getting this via RSS or Email, check the Blog at http://wethepeoplegovern.blogspot.com for embedded links that may be omitted.

My Job is Your Job is Our Job

2011-04-04T16:44:00.003-05:00

The local, state and even national media spent quite a bit of time this winter on the budget battle in the state of Wisconsin. In a very short time, the 60's wanna-be's drummed up sit-ins, walk-outs, websites, chain letters and all of the other hallmarks of "activism". Hours of airtime and reams of pages were devoted to the small but vocal groups of protesters and their antics. They shouted their vitriolic rhetoric from every possible venue. They even went so far as to attempt to blackmail businesses into supporting them. And yet the majority remained silent (although, thankfully, in some instances effective).

What conservatives need to do is to take some lessons from the "symbolism over substance" left and heed the warnings. We can and must learn if we're to save the progress that was made this last November:

Cult of Personality
The left is all about "feelings", not logic. They are about "rights", not responsibilities. They peg their hopes and dreams on an anointed saviour who can do no wrong and then defend that person regardless of their glaring mistakes. Look at Marion Barry, Gordon Hintz, Bill Clinton and now President Obama.

Last fall, Conservatives stunned the liberal demagogues at the polls. People like Scott Walker were swept into office with a mandate from the people to cut spending. Scott Walker is not the messiah. He does not walk on water. And he can't do this by himself. The liberals are pulling out all the stops, using the state's courts to legislate from the bench. Like the liberals, the conservatives must "stand by their man". But unlike the liberals, conservatives cannot assume that now that "their man" is in, its all up to "him".

Government of the People
The liberals like to claim that they are for "the people". They claim to represent the downtrodden masses and the "little guy". They believe that they are right, no matter what the majority might say and that its their duty to make sure that their views are pushed through. When their views are challenged, they resort to tactics like legislation from the bench.

Conservatives believe in a government of the people, by the people and for the people. They believe in democracy and the will of the people. Conservatives showed the will of the people last November. But its not a single, one-time, isolated instance. The will of the people must be proven time and time again in each election and for each issue. That's the essence of a government of, by and for the people. Every election is a referendum on that principle. Like the liberals, conservatives must muster for every election and continue to show the will of the people.

Representative Government
Liberals believe that the masses are sheep who need to be lead. They elect leaders to make decisions for them. They believe in being governed, not in being represented.

Conservatives believe in self-government. Self-government means exactly that - you govern yourself. You elect people to represent your views, your will. Like the liberals, conservatives need leaders. But those leaders need continuing support and feedback. Without that, they are no longer representatives of the people.

To paraphase Ronald Reagan, from his "A Time for Choosing" speech:
"We will keep in mind and remember that Scott Walker has faith in us. He has faith that you and I have the ability and the dignity and the right to make our own decisions and determine our own destiny."

April 5th is another state election in Wisconsin. According to poll watchers, turnout is likely to be very low. People look at these spring elections as "why bother?" In the past, many patriots would have responded with words like "civic duty", but this time, there's a deeper reason. It's about grass-roots activism and continuing what's been started. Conservatives can do this, but, let's face it, liberals have a much longer track record with it. That's why the Tea Party movement has so confounded the left. The right just doesn't have the record of continuing grass-roots activism.

April 5th's election is more than just another judicial seat-filling exercise. It is a referendum on Conservatism. It is a rebuttal to the voiciferous left. It is a repudiation of legislation from the bench. It is a support for the continuation of the principles that were expounded last November. If you remain silent on the 5th, Conservatives, don't wake up on the 6th and wonder "what the hell happened?"

Government isn't just Scott Walker's job. It's the people's job. Every day. Every election. Every issue. Unlike the Runaway Fourteen, on the 5th I'll be doing my job. What will YOU be doing?

Reminder: If you're getting this via RSS or Email, check the Blog at http://wethepeoplegovern.blogspot.com for embedded links that may be omitted.

Unbiased Media? That Un-possible!

2011-03-12T18:39:00.003-06:00

A big "thanks" to one of my loyal readers for forwarding this very insightful list that highlights the bias of the media. Where's the outrage comparable to Bush and Reagan?

If any other of our presidents had doubled the National debt, which had taken more than two centuries to accumulate, in one year, would You have approved? (compare to the outrage over Bush adding $4T to the debt)
If any other of our presidents had then proposed to double the debt again within 10 years, would you have approved?
If any other of our presidents had criticized a state law that he admitted he never even read, would you think that he is just an ignorant hot head?
If any other of our presidents joined the country of Mexico and sued a state in the United States to force that state to continue to allow illegal Immigration, would you question his patriotism and wonder who's side he was on?
If any other of our presidents had pronounced the Marine Corps like Marine Corpse, would you think him an idiot? (compare to the chortling over Bush's mispronounciation of nuclear or Dan Quayle's gaffe with potato)
If any other of our presidents had put 87,000 workers out of work by arbitrarily placing a moratorium on offshore oil drilling on companies that have one of the best safety records of any industry because one foreign company had an accident, would you have agreed?
If any other of our presidents had used a forged document as the basis of the moratorium that would render 87000 American workers unemployed would you support him? (compare to the indignation over Reagan firing the PATCO strikers)
If any other of our Presidents had been the first President to need a teleprompter installed to be able to get through a press conference, would you have laughed and said this is more proof of how inept he is on his own and is really controlled by smarter men behind the scenes? (compare to the "furor" over Reagan allegedly having Alzheimer's in office)
If any other of our presidents had spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to take his First Lady to a play in NYC, would you have approved?
If any other of our presidents had reduced your retirement plan holdings of GM stock by 90% and given the unions a majority stake in GM, would you have approved?
If any other of our presidents had made a joke at the expense of the Special Olympics, would you have approved?
If any other of our presidents had given Gordon Brown a set of inexpensive and incorrectly formatted DVDs, when Gordon Brown had given him a thoughtful and historically significant gift, would you have approved?
If any other of our presidents had given the Queen of England an IPod containing videos of his speeches, would you have thought it a proud moment for America ?
If any other of our presidents had bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia, would you have approved? (compare to Regan's Bittberg visit)
If any other of our presidents had visited Austria and made reference to the non-existent "Austrian language," would you have brushed It off as a minor slip?
If any other of our presidents had filled his cabinet and circle of advisers with people who cannot seem to keep current in their income taxes, would you have approved?
If any other of our presidents had stated that there were 57 states In the United States, wouldn't you have had second thoughts about his capabilities?
If any other of our presidents would have flown all the way to Denmark to make a five minute speech about how the Olympics would benefit him walking out his front door in his home town, would you not have thought he was a self important, conceited, egotistical jerk.
If any other of our presidents had been so Spanish illiterate as to refer to "Cinco de Quattro" in front of the Mexican ambassador when it was the 5th of May (Cinco de Mayo), and continued to flub it when he tried again, wouldn't you have winced in embarrassment?
If any other of our presidents had burned 9,000 gallons of jet fuel to go plant a single tree on Earth Day, would you have concluded he's a hypocrite?
If any other of our presidents' administrations had okayed Air Force One flying low over millions of people followed by a jet fighter in downtown Manhattan causing widespread panic, would you have wondered whether they actually get what happened on 9-11?
If any other of our presidents had failed to send relief aid to flood victims throughout the Midwest with more people killed or made homeless than in New Orleans, would you want it made into a major ongoing political issue with claims of racism and incompetence? (compare to Bush's handling of Katrina)
If any other of our presidents had created the position of 32 Czars who report directly to him, bypassing the House and Senate on much of what Is happening in America , would you have ever approved.
If any other of our presidents had ordered the firing of the CEO of a major corporation, even though he had no constitutional authority to do so, would you have approved?

So, tell me again, what is it about Obama that makes him so brilliant and impressive?

Can't think of anything? Don't worry. He's done all this in his first 24 months -- so you have that much time to come up with an answer.

Every statement and action in this email is factual and directly attributable to Barrack Hussein Obama. Every bumble is a matter of record and completely verifiable. For those of you reading this via RSS or email, check the blog... I have researched and put in links, including to the "comparative outrages".

Reminder: If you're getting this via RSS or Email, check the Blog at http://wethepeoplegovern.blogspot.com for embedded links that may be omitted.

The Wrong End of the Stick

2011-03-04T19:50:00.002-06:00

No politician is perfect. No person is perfect. I can disagree with someone while supporting them. Thus, upon hearing the news, today, that Speaker Boehner is actively seeking to block the proposal that the body of last WWI Veteran Frank Buckles lay in state in the Capitol, I went to his website and wrote the following. I urge everyone to do so, as well.

Speaker Boehner,

I am a Reagan Conservative who was very glad to see the turnaround in power during the last election. I am, like President Reagan "strong" on national defense.

I am also the son of a highly decorated WWII veteran and a member of the National Order of Battlefield Commissioned Officers "Ponies" organization.

I was, to use the words of a colleague, "stunned and amazed" at the news, today, that you are actively opposing the proposal to have the body of America's last WWI veteran, Frank Buckles, lay in state in the Capitol.

I do not understand at all your objections to this honour.

If anyone outside of a former President deserves this honour, it is Mr. Buckles. Take away the fact that he was our last living link with the conflict that marked not only the shift from colonialism to the birth of superpowers, the conflict that set the stage for the Century of America. Take away the fact that he not only enlisted under-age but went on to serve with distinction. Take away the fact that he was captured and survived a notorious Japanese prison camp in World War II. Take all that away and you still are left with the fact that this man absolutely typified, in his life, his outlook, his patriotism the very soul of what made the United States the world's only surviving superpower.

This honour has indeed been bestowed upon non-legislative and non-executive citizens in the past. Most notably, the Unknown Soldiers of World War I, World War II and Vietnam. Those men were laid in state not only to honour their sacrifice and service, but to service as a reminder of those to the entirety of the United States and to honour as well those who continue to put place themselves in harm's way for their countrymen.

It is, therefore, completely fitting that Mr. Buckles be so honoured and is inconceivable and indefensible to deny, either actively or passively, such a proposal.

I urge you, sir, to reconsider your position which is, I may say, more expected out of the anti-military elements of some of your brethren across the aisle. It is not in keeping with the tenets and philosophies of the Republican Party nor, indeed, any patriotic American to so wholly disrespect those to whom our freedom is daily owed.

If nothing else, I would hope that you would explain yourself in some logical, rational way. But moreover, I would hope and expect that you would comport yourself as an American legislator and see fit to instead wholeheartedly support this proposal.

In the words of Charles Michael Province, "It is the Soldier, not the politician / Who has given us the right to vote."

Respect those who have given us the power to put you in power.

Jeffery L. Vogt
Son of Lt. Col Roland H. Vogt, US Army
NOBC

Reminder: If you're getting this via RSS or Email, check the Blog at http://wethepeoplegovern.blogspot.com for embedded links that may be omitted.

What I Don't Get Is...

2011-02-25T13:38:00.003-06:00

The debates in Wisconsin are, of course, the topic du jour. During this, WTMJ talk host Charlie Sykes has, several times, had a popular segment entitled "What I Don't Get Is..." I'm constantly amazed at the callers who express surprise (not necessarily outrage, but surprise nonetheless) at the protests, the reaction of the Unions, the 14 AWOL Senators, and the rest of the circus in Madison and across the state. Since I don't get a chance to call in and since Charlie's program is so popular that I can't get through, I'll answer that question here.

What I don't get is why they don't get it.

The plain truth is that the reactions of the protestors, the Unions and the far left did not have spring up overnight. They have evolved over the last decade or more. It is the manifestation of the mantra of "symbolism over substance". In a word, it is hypocrisy.

Now let's be fair - there are hypocrits of every stripe. But the modern Democratic Party has made this a core principle. I say "modern" to distinguish this from the party of Kennedy (who, fiscally and on defense, was more Republican than Regan) and Roosevelt (who said what he was going to do, then did it -- like Scott Walker). And this has been evolving for more than a decade.

Take the Political Correctness movement of the 90's beyond. In specific, "free speech" versus "hate speech". Recently, that maven of the media Oprah called for "respect" for President Obama, saying, “even if you’re not in support of his policies, there needs to be a certain level of respect.” And yet, it was perfectly acceptable for Oprah, The View, Jon Stewart and others to not criticize, but engage in ad hominem attacks on President Bush. Remember when it was "patriotic to speak out against your government"? Ah, but not when its our guy.

And staying with public figures, let's talk about our Flee-Baggers. During the Doyle administration, with a Democratic-controlled state House and Senate, the Republicans drew repeated fire for their use of the filibuster. Last night, the House Democrats acted outraged when a procedural motion was used to end over 80 hours of a Democratic filibuster (far longer than any that has ever been staged before). Let me not hesitate to point out that a filibuster requires that the politicians in question actually are on the job, not hiding out like fugitives in a sympathetic neighboring state.

And then there are the protestors themselves. The Union Line is that of Helen Lovejoy, screaming, "Won't someone think of the children!?!?" They try to tie the modest increase (5.6% for pension and 12.8% for healthcare) to a collapse of the educational system when, in point of fact, those increases are less than private sector workers pay for those benefits. When this is pointed out, they cite the "anti-Union" portions, stating that its taking away workers "rights and freedoms". And yet, that conveniently ignores the fact that this bill gives back freedoms -- the freedom to choose if one wants to pay $1000 per year in Union dues and be forced to accept whatever health care plan the Union wants (one that is, ironically enough, owned by the Union). So, drawing the line from point A to point B, this isn't about the finances of their members and it isn't about the freedoms and rights of their members, its about Union dues, Union-administered and owned health funds and Union power.

And the "rights" that are "stripped" (a favorite word of the pablum-fed media)? Turns out that "unions still could represent workers in wage negotiations, but they can’t seek pay increases above those pegged to the Consumer Price Index unless the hikes are approved in a public referendum". So this isn't about "rights", this is about the Union not wanting to "chance" the public turning down such a referendum. It's about Union power.

The protesters themselves are on the forefront of hypocrisy. Their leader, President Obama, recently called for "a more civil and honest public discourse" in the wake of the Arizona shootings. And yet the protesters, the vanguard of the "political correctness" movement, are making direct "hate speech" attacks on Governor Walker -- even so far as to putting "crosshairs" over his picture and calling for "reloading". Scant weeks before, these people were screaming about Sarah Palin's "crosshairs". Shame, shame if it's Palin, but huzzah if its the left!

Then there's the blogger (not journalist) Ian Murphy who scammed (not pranked, that word is too 'lighthearted' for his misrepresentation) his way onto a phone call with the Governor. In a recent interview by a real journalist, Murphy, a virulent shock-blogger, admitted that he is not a journalist. He's akin to the guy who breaks the jewelry-store window and then the passerby (the responsible journalists) who would never do it themselves, happily take the stolen goods.

Yet the same people who are holding this self-described "troublemaker" as a paragon of investigative reporting are the same ones who cry "foul" at conservative (and degreed) journalists like Fox News, Drudge and Breitbart. They constantly harp on how "biased and slanted" those legitimate news outlets are while at the same time espousing people like Murphy (who ranted "F*** THE TROOPS" in one of his virulent blogs) as the standard of virtue.

Additionally, there's the selective short-term memory of the protesters, bloggers and leftists when it comes to "responsibility". They love to blame Republican administrations for all the world's ills, but are mysteriously silent about the fact that it was a Democratic Governor, State House and Senate that used short-term budget "fixes" and Federal monies to paper over the serious fiscal situation while simultaneously passing larger and larger budget deficits to future administrations.

So now we're faced with the reality of a massive budget shortfall. And some of the people who swept Walker and others into office under the banner of "fixing the fiscal mess" are committing the largest hypocrisy of them all -- fix it, but don't take away MY perks!

As I said at the beginning, none of this is new. It's been brewing for a long time. You could see it in the lawsuits of the 2000 Presidential election versus the so-called "mandate" of the 2008 Presidential election. What is new is the blatant way in which it is shown in public. The left has taken off the mask of principle and sincerity in the last decade and now they are the ones asking "What I don't get is..." when the hard-working private sector no longer buys into their hollow rhetoric. They are left wondering why they are, despite doing all the things that people have "bought" for a decade, now being laughed at, vilified by the majority, and no longer in power.

What I don't get is... why they don't get it.

Reminder: If you're getting this via RSS or Email, check the Blog at http://wethepeoplegovern.blogspot.com for embedded links that may be omitted.

Remedial Math

2011-02-16T12:02:00.004-06:00

I was in the state capitol, Madison, yesterday, for a technology seminar. The seminar started late because a couple of the presenters couldn't make it around the Capitol Building due to the protesters. Who were these people and what were they protesting? They were WEAC and state workers protesting Governor Scott Walker's proposed state budget.

Governor Walker has to contend with a budget that does not balance. His proposal includes eliminating or cutting some (not all) benefits from some (not all) state workers. Why? In his own words, benefit cuts are better than job cuts.

Now, I realize that WEAC doesn't really care about teaching. I mean, let's face it, its a Union. If they're honest, themselves, they would admit that what they care about is their power, not the quality or content of the jobs those members perform (I'm not being flippant, here, I'm being serious -- ask yourself, "what's the mission of a Union").

So, in deference to this fact, I thought I'd take it upon myself to explain a little remedial mathematics in the form of a story problem. I'll even make it easier by making it "multiple guess".

Scotty has six friends and four apples. Each friend wants an apple. How many apples should Scotty give each friend?
A) 2/3 of an apple
B) 0, he should keep them all
C) Get rid of two friends and give each of the remaining four a whole apple

Hmmm. Well, let's show our work, for the benefit of the WEAC folks scratching their heads.

4 apples divided among 6 people = 4 / 6 = 2 / 3

So the answer is "A". But wait, that means no one gets a whole apple! Doesn't matter to WEAC and the Unions. All they care about is a whole apple. They don't care that Scotty can't get any more apples. Its immaterial that with the mathematically correct answer everyone stays a friend and everyone at least gets something. What matters to them is that no one's getting an entire apple! An apple they fought for and deserve, dammit! An apple they have a full right to!

But as they say, "follow the money". What's the meat of Governor Walker's proposal? It's actually not to take away benefits but to limit the Unions' negotiating power to salaries only. And that's what rankles the Union bosses, which brings us back to my point about the purpose of Unions. They don't care about the jobs that are performed, they care about the benefits. They don't care about the number of workers employed, they care that the workers that are employed get as much as they possibly can.

Once again, the Unions show where their sympathies lie -- with their power. They don't really care about their members and they don't care about their member's salaries. All they care about is keeping themselves in power by appearing to "fight" for things that can't be provided without bankrupting the state. Which, of course, they don't care about (despite several states already going bankrupt).

Back when I was in grade school, there was a local teacher's strike that garnered attention in the national media. The teachers said that they were striking for higher pay because "taxes are so high." Now, I was only in grade school, but I looked at my parents and asked, "But if they get higher pay, won't taxes go up again to pay for it?"

I know the math here is a bit difficult for those who grew up on "new math" and geography classes that taught how to balance a checkbook (true story), but maybe some of the students of WEAC's members can explain it to them.

Unfortunately, I doubt it.

Reminder: If you're getting this via RSS or Email, check the Blog at http://wethepeoplegovern.blogspot.com for embedded links that may be omitted.

What the Left Will Never Get

2011-02-14T09:36:00.003-06:00

An article in The Daily Beast today reads, in part, thus:

"President Obama’s 2012 budget, set for release on Monday, projects a $1.65 trillion deficit this year—the largest on record.
[snip]
Before you buy Republicans’ complaints about the deficit, however, keep this in mind: The main reason this year’s deficit is larger than expected is the deal to extend the Bush tax cuts, which the GOP pushed for."

Now, the Daily Beast is not known for being a paragon of unbiased reporting. Just last week, they crowed, in an article entitled "The Myth of Obama's Big Spending":

"Obama has slashed one tax dollar for every dollar he’s spent on government programs."

The Left, as well as the media elite, love to deride the Tea Party, calling them all sorts of names and portraying them alternatively as know-nothing rednecks or gun-toting domestic terrorists. It has been intuitively obvious that those who engage in these one-dimensional characterisations have no idea what the Tea Party movement was or is all about, nor have any idea of the reasons for the failure of so many incumbents (Democrats and Republicans) in last fall's elections. They miss the point, entirely.

The point of the Tea Party movement was and remains to hold Congress to the same standards that each one of us is held to; to hold them responsible for their spending; to hold them accountable for their actions and their promises. It is a rejection of "business as usual". It is not Left, it is not Right, it is not Liberal, it is not Conservative. It is a movement of, by and for the People to enforce their control -- their Constitutionally-guaranteed control -- of their Government.

So as budget time looms, those who lost power are, as predicted, trying every tactic to slander and change the facts. They are deliberately missing the point that lowering taxes is only one half of the equation. Without cutting spending significantly, we will continue to be in a status quo.

Think of it this way -- if you're getting paid $50,000 per year and your expenses are $60,000 per year, how much does it help to get a raise of $3,000 per year if you don't cut your spending? You're still in the hole and sinking, just not as fast! Ah, but you say, "Ok, I'll cut a dollar of spending for every dollar of my raise!" So now, you're cutting your spending to $57,000 per year and you've increased your income to $53,000 per year. Um.... you're still sinking!!!

Congress and the administration must be held accountable. We all have to learn to live within our means or we go broke. Government is the only entity that has been held exempt from that, and they're the ones who gave the exemption! They force everyone else to be solvent, but not themselves.

The People spoke, last November. They sent a message to their elected officials -- play by the rules we have to play by or be replaced, regardless of your party affiliation. We were and are sick of "business as usual" of the last two decades of Congress.

As I said when I started this blog, "There is one and only one thing that strikes fear into the heart of any politician - that is We the People." And a scared animal lashes out.

So take heart; the entrenched power elite are running scared. That sound of hoofbeats? It's We the People.

Reminder: If you're getting this via RSS or Email, check the Blog at http://wethepeoplegovern.blogspot.com for embedded links that may be omitted.

Cause and Effect

2010-12-11T14:45:00.005-06:00

In the December 11, 2010 Appleton Post-Crescent, Caroline Seidl of Appleton comments in the phone editorial:

"Congratulations go out to Plexus for adding two overseas sites while hundreds of thousands of U.S. citizens are out of work and losing their homes. Thank you, big business, for sticking it to us once again."

What a wonderful case-in-point of the "dumbing down" of America -- people like Caroline who can't see from Point A to Point B. The saddest part is that these people do not, nor ever will understand that our Universe is one where effect inevitably follows cause.

The Administration has, over the last two years, levied huge taxes and fees on the "evil corporations". People like Caroline cheered this, because they are getting "something for nothing." And yet, when those "evil corporations" decide, in the interest of staying afloat, to move operations overseas, these same people like Caroline scream about how the jobs are leaving the U.S.

By Caroline's thinking, "profit is evil" and yet when profit (and therefore the corporation) is eliminated, that's evil as well. You can't have it both ways, Caroline. Punish the corporations, add more burden, and those jobs will go away as the corporations fight for their lives.

People like Caroline are no different than those who who lined up for "Obama money" -- they don't know or care where it's coming from because they can't draw the straight line from point A, Cause, to point B, Effect. You'd hope that some basic courses in Logic would help, but that's a false hope. Because the positions of the left are predicated on "feelings", not thought.

To paraphrase the old saw, "Liberalism wasn't reasoned in, so it can't be reasoned out."

Reminder: If you're getting this via RSS or Email, check the Blog at http://wethepeoplegovern.blogspot.com for embedded links that may be omitted.

No Special Day

2010-11-10T19:58:00.007-06:00

The 11th hour of the 11th day of the 11th month. No special day at all. "What the hell do you mean," I hear you scream?! Just that. But before the lynch mob approaches with tar, feathers and rope, allow me to explain.

Today is Veteran's Day. The airwaves, ether and mass media are saturated with people exhorting you to "thank a vet." I find that sentiment, on this particular day, rings hollow. Why? Because every day we live in freedom, the freedoms guaranteed by our Constitution, including the right to be selfish and irresponsible, is due to one and only one person - the Veteran.

Our founding fathers understood this. They understood that the further one got from the realities of what it takes not only to secure but to maintain those freedoms, one would grow less understanding and appreciative of them. John Adams summed up this evolution in his famous quote: "I must study politics and war that my sons may have liberty to study mathematics and philosophy. My sons ought to study mathematics and philosophy, geography, natural history, naval architecture, navigation, commerce, and agriculture, in order to give their children a right to study painting, poetry, music, architecture, statuary, tapestry, and porcelain."

We, as a country and as a world have lived in relative peace for the last three-quarters of a century. That's three generations. As in Adam's quotation, the third generation is so distanced from this last period of world war that they believe that any war is "unnecessary". They believe, instead, that it is the government -- politicians, special interest groups, intellectuals -- who "provide" the freedoms they enjoy.

My father, a veteran of World War II, of the first wave on Omaha Beach, a recipient of the Silver Star, twice the Bronze Star, a Battlefield Commission (instead of the offered Medal of Honor), knew what it was to secure those freedoms. Like Lance Corporal Edwin Kraft, he believed that "For those that will fight for it, freedom has a flavor the protected shall never know."

I had occasion to ask him what he thought of the anti-war protesters in the 70's, 80's and 90's. He told me, "I'm glad they're free to protest."

I'm not disregarding the efforts of the artists, politicians, students, teachers, businessmen, farmers, and the rest of us who make up this nation. I am, however, stating that it is due to the men and women "on that wall" that those people are and remain free to pursue their lives.

Charles Michael Province, US Army Veteran, wrote the now-famous lines, summing up this daily, ongoing sacrifice:

It is the Soldier, not the minister
Who has given us freedom of religion.

It is the Soldier, not the reporter
Who has given us freedom of the press.

It is the Soldier, not the poet
Who has given us freedom of speech.

It is the Soldier, not the campus organizer
Who has given us freedom to protest.

It is the Soldier, not the lawyer
Who has given us the right to a fair trial.

It is the Soldier, not the politician
Who has given us the right to vote.

It is the Soldier who salutes the flag,
Who serves beneath the flag,
And whose coffin is draped by the flag,
Who allows the protester to burn the flag.

I was brought up understanding this, eventhough it was never put into words. Instead, my own curiousity lead me to read more and more about the history of our country and our world. And the more I learned, the more I realized that it was the soliders insured that the political philosophies of our Founding Fathers would be secured for all citizens.

After coaxing out my father's stories and those of his remaining comrades, I began to understand. And so, every time, regardless of what day of the year it is, that I see a soldier or veteran, I thank them "for their service" -- because I realize that they have served so that I don't have to.

So today, Veteran's Day, yes, thank a vet. But do so every day, every opportunity. Thank those who guarantee the freedoms you and I, in our blissful ignorance, enjoy every day. Including the freedom to call those very Veterans "baby killers". It's due to them that you can do that without going to a concentration camp.

Or, as a bumper sticker put it, "If war wasn't the answer we'd be speaking German."

Reminder: If you're getting this via RSS or Email, check the Blog at http://wethepeoplegovern.blogspot.com for embedded links that may be omitted.

The Launch of the Titanic

2010-11-09T07:24:00.002-06:00

Oh, God, not another "financial" piece... but please, bear with me.

On May 31st, 1911, the Titanic slid down the greased rails at the Harland & Wolff shipyard in Belfast. That day, it was impossible for anyone to envision the fate that awaited it, less than a year later. On November 3rd, 2010, the QE2 slid down the rails of the Federal Reserve, greased by the incompetence of Benjamin Bernake, the fiduciary misconduct of the Obama administration and the criminal complicity of Congress. This time, it's possible -- no, it's unmistakeable -- to see the iceberg "right ahead".

The QE2 in this case is the second round of so-called "Quantitative Easing". What this boils down to is that the Federal Reserve has decided to "print" more money in what they believe is a move that will "promote financial growth". In essence, the Federal Reserve Chairman, Ben Bernake, decided to print up more money on the theory that this will spread more money around and therefore stimulate the economy. Sounds good on the surface, right? "But wait," as they say, "there's more!"

What Bernake and the Fed are trying to do is Keynesian economics. They are trying to spend their way out of debt. This doesn't, as I've explained before, work at all. The idea is completely discredited. It's made even worse because the value of "a dollar" does not have any intrinsic value -- it is not tied to a commodity. Instead, it represents the "good faith" of the United States.

These days, that "good faith" is sorely lacking. The economy of the U.S. is in the dumper and printing more money, as anyone with a fifth grade education (excepting, of course, those who teach at Princeton) can deduce, simply devalues every dollar even further.

There are two major problems, here: illiquidity and insolvency. I don't intend this to be an Econ 101 course (if it were, I'd invite Mr. Bernake) but I'll give a quick explanation for the layman (me!):

Illiquidity is when you don't have "cash on hand". Think of this as when you own a car (without a loan) or a washer and dryer, but you don't have cash to buy groceries.
Insolvency is bankruptcy. It's when you owe even on your car and washer/dryer. You don't own anything, anymore. Your debt is greater than your total worth.

Thanks to the policies of the Obama administration and a Congress of accomplices, the United States has a debt that has exploded. The candidates made promises in 2008 to anyone who would listen. They promised "money for nothing". They promised "the government will take care of you." All you had to do was vote for them, then sit back and collect your "Obama Money." Plenty of people, inculcated by over a half-century of burgeoning federal nannyship bought this hook, line and sinker.

While fiscal conservatives warned that there would be a day of reckoning, shouting "ICEBERG! RIGHT AHEAD!", the liberal intelligencia and administration "Goebbels" did their best impression of Captain Smith, increasing speed into the ice field and rearranging the deck chairs. They started handing out money (as my father would say, and keeping in the theme of this piece) like a pack of drunken sailors, increasing the debt from $869 billion in 2007 to $2.2 trillion! Just to put this in perspective, the QE2 ("our" QE2 in this story) is $850 billion.... that's nearly the ENTIRE debt from 2007!

So here's the issue - you can solve illiquidity (at least in the short term) by converting something to cash. The Federal Reserve does this not by pawning real goods, but by printing more money. But this "solution" supposes that you'll have the cash coming in to replace it so you can get your goods out of hock. It flat out does not work if you are insolvent nor does it fix insolvency.

If you don't own anything yourself then you can't hock it; and in the case of the United States, we are insolvent. So printing more money (pawning goods) does nothing! It simply causes us to owe even more and go further into debt.

To put it very simply in our analogy, Bernake is applying full power to the engines with the iceberg looming.

But we do have a chance, yet, to get the ship of state out of harm's way. A new Congress has been elected. It's up to us, the passengers, the voters who put them there, to hold their feet to the fire. It's not good enough to "compromise" -- "we'll just turn the wheel a little and we'll slow down a few knots" -- instead what's needed is full rudder and all astern on the engines. That's what we sent these people to Congress to do and its up to us to make sure they do it.

If we don't, then we may as well start singing "Nearer, My God, to Thee" because there aren't enough lifeboats to go around.

Reminder: If you're getting this via RSS or Email, check the Blog at http://wethepeoplegovern.blogspot.com for embedded links that may be omitted.

The Day After

2010-11-03T11:09:00.003-05:00

Reaction

Much wailing and gnashing of teeth." I see so many of my liberal relatives crying "waily, waily, waily" this morning. What they fail to see, what they, in their myopia, cannot believe is that this is a repudiation of "business as usual". Their much vaunted Saviour of the People has betrayed those very people who pu...t him in power. Don't believe me? Just look at the map with overlays -- areas that went big for Obama in '08 swung back the other way.

This is an acknowledgement of three things:

That when people feel that their mandate has been misused, that the promises made to them have been ignored, they will fight back;
That people are sick to death of career politicians;
That despite what the intelligencia would believe and, through their media try to portray, the great silent majority will not remain silent and "take" what is "good for them" in other's eyes.

A Prediction

In the coming days, the liberal intelligencia will be giving their spin on last night's election. They will be saying that this was a triumph of the uneducated. They will be wringing their hands and saying that the "rednecks", "hayseeds" and "ignorant masses" were the victors.

What they will be missing, utterly, in their myopic elitism is that this is a message. We live in a Representative Democracy. We do not elect our representatives to govern us, but to represent us. If those officials do not represent us, they can and will be removed.

The John Stewarts and Stephen Colberts will pander this skewed vision. They will ridicule the victors and their supporters as idiots and morons (of course, all in humour). They will, as one of my relatives did yesterday, take refuge in the last act of those unable to mount a substantive argument -- the ad hominem attack.

They will utterly fail to see that the selfsame people who wanted a change in 2008 decided that the promises made, despite predictions of this very fact, could not be kept. And that those people want another change.

Their leadership, beginning with the White House Press Conference today, will claim that they were not given enough time. They will completely ignore the fact that they, themselves, claimed that a single administration is capable of effecting change - for better or worse. And then they will fall back to the only recourse left to them - Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt.

They will claim that this sea change endangers "everything they worked for" these last two years while simultaneous unable to see that this is exactly the point of the message that was sent. The people do not want the work of the last two years. And, subtly by insinuating that the people have "betrayed themselves", they will reinforce their core belief -- that the people do not know what's good for them, but only the liberal elite do.

In doing so, they will echo these words, "they betray me. They do not deserve to live. They are not worthy of me."

And they will not heed the words of Abram Lincoln, "We, the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts - not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow men who pervert the Constitution."

Reminder: If you're getting this via RSS or Email, check the Blog at http://wethepeoplegovern.blogspot.com for embedded links that may be omitted.

2010-11-01T11:20:00.002-05:00

Here it is, November.

I've been idle on the blog for several months, but not in real life. I've been following through on my plan and I look forward to that plan bearing fruit, tomorrow.

As a last "shot across the bow" of this particular administration (though I don't plan on stopping the blog, despite what it may seem), I was pointed to this editorial from Sunday in our local paper and asked to respond by one of my colleagues. Below, I present that response:

"Whatever you think is wrong in Washington, you can be sure of two things," the first is that the Post Crescent does not understand the fundamental arguments and dissatisfaction with the current administration and the second is that, as a part of the entrenched political structure, Russ Feingold not only represents but is the epitome of what is wrong in Washington.

To say that the October 31st editorial is filled with more half-truths than can be definitively refuted in the few words allowed for rebuttal is an understatement. So instead, we'll examine just a two of the more glaring errors that underscore your and Mr. Feingold's myopia.

At one point, you say that Mr. Feingold believes that "if you spend more, you have to find cuts to go with it." And yet, he voted for the $800 billion stimulus bill. You attempt to defuse that argument by noting that this immensely expensive debacle "saved several million jobs" and that "many economists say the recession would have been much worse without" it.

How do you defined "saved"? No reputable economist (or, for that matter anyone who does not engage in hyperoble) would make such an unverifiable claim. In point of fact, as reported by CNN on September 30, all this stimulus bill did for jobs was to delay the jobless numbers release until after the election. And the economists that would state something so rash (and, again, unverifiable) as "would have been worse without" it are nothing more than adherents to the largely discredited school of Keynesian economics. One does not "spend" themselves out of debt or recession. This has been proven time and time again throughout the twentieth century.

Nancy Pelosi, in her 2007 inaugural address, stated that there would be "no new deficit spending." And yet, since that time (a time which coincides with Mr. Feingold's tenure) the national debt has increased BY (not "to") $5 Trillion. How is this "fiscally responsible"?

Then you try and defend his record on health care reform. You say that he said the "people very much wanted us to do something." Yes, we did. However the people also made it abundantly clear that this particular "something" was not what they wanted. They protested, they wrote letters, they made calls, and the great, silent majority made it clear they would be silent no longer. The mainstream media has tried to play this off as "radicals", "extremists" and "rednecks". They have done so unsuccessfully.

You assert that Mr. Feingold is "a paragon of responsible governing." Mr. Feingold is a Senator, not a Governor. He is elected by the people of the State of Wisconsin not to govern them, but to represent them and their wishes. The people of Wisconsin, through their letters, through the public forums and through their activism have made their feelings clear. But, as you point out by citing Mr. Feingold's record on even these two issues, he has ignored the will of the people. He has decided that he, alone, knows what is best for the people of this state. He has taken up the banner of Senator Rockafeller, who said, "We're going to push through health care reform regardless of the views of the American people."

In a last-ditch effort to save Mr. Feingold and the Titanic that is this administration, you have invoked the trinity of desperation -- fear,uncertainty and doubt. You have no substantive ability to attack the positions of Mr. Johnson, who is simply responding to the groundswell of backlash against the entrenched politicians. So instead you offer the obvious whitewash of "the devil you know."

Russ Feingold is an entrenched politico. He represents everything that the people of this state and of the Union itself have come to loathe, the professional politician. As Ronald Regan once said, "The one thing our Founding Fathers could not foresee -- they were farmers, professional men, businessmen giving of their time and effort to an idea that became a country -- was a nation governed by professional politicians who had an interest in getting re-elected. They probably
envisioned a fellow serving a couple of hitches and then eagerly looking forward to getting back to the farm." It's time to send Mr. Feingold back to the farm instead of living off the people of the state of Wisconsin.

Reminder: If you're getting this via RSS or Email, check the Blog at http://wethepeoplegovern.blogspot.com for embedded links that may be omitted.

Dogma

2010-07-15T10:30:00.005-05:00

As long as I've decided to blog about one "taboo" subject (politics), I will blog about the other... religion.

Now bear with me, here for a moment. One of my prime missions in life is to find and eliminate hypocricy in my life. And so I expect others to point it out to me as I point it out in others (the "mote in your brother's eye" style of thing).

One of the conclusions I've come to is that no one is so hypocritical as the dogmatic. This applies to all areas of life, whether it be ones personal opinions ("I'm right, because I'm never wrong"), politics ("No party, no matter what"), culture ("You can't use the n-word, only we can use it") or, of course, religion.

To be dogmatic is to be unthinking, to not use one's brain and make one's own decisions. This is, in the "religious debates" something that the atheists declaim as being one of their primary criticisms of believers. And yet many of those self-same people who ridicule belief hold their own views so tightly that they have created for themselves a system of belief every bit as dogmatic as any religion.

Consider, for example, the case of Christopher Hitchens, the self-professed "new athiest". Recently, he was diagnosed with oesophogeal cancer. A catholic priest commented on CNN on Tuesday that people should pray for Mr. Hitchens. Predictably, this has outraged athiests.

Why do I say "predictably"? Because, like the most vocal elements of any group, the extremists in the athiest community are so convinced of their own beliefs (or non-beliefs) that that cannot tolerate anyone who disagrees with them. That is, they feel that religion is being "shoved down their throat". And yet they can't see that their "morally superior" attitude of outrage is shoving their opinion down people's throats.

Let's look at this rationally. A priest has given his opinion; an opinion that, if adopted and acted on by others would have zero effect on Mr. Hitchens rights. In fact if, as his supporters believe, there is no God, then it would have zero effect on Mr. Hitchens in any way. Where is the violation of rights, then? Where is anything in any way, shape or form being "forced" upon Mr. Hitchens? If one even stretches the point to say that this is being done "without Mr. Hitchen's permission" it begs the question of the things that are done by the Freedom From Religion foundation against the permission of believers.

The point is simple and is being missed, as Maxwell Smart would have said, "by that much" -- the athiests "up in arms" about this are being as intransigent and dogmatic about their beliefs as those whom they deride. In a word, hypocritical.

Science and faith are not incompatible. Even Stephen Hawking has averred this. Why are they not incompatible? Because they are apples and oranges.

Science, by definition, is a system by which the mechanics of life, the universe and everything can be explained. Faith is a system which explains the unexplainable. Science is a system by which hypothesis are testable and provable. Faith is a system by which there is nothing provable but "taken on faith".

It is just as erroneous and disingenuous to try to "prove" with science, logic or rationalism that God does not exist as it as to attempt to inject religion into biology, cosmology or any other scientific realm. Forget, for a moment, that its a logical fallacy to prove a negative ("God does not exist") -- something that many atheists seem to forget, meanwhile touting logic. Even if such a thing were possible, by definition that would not invalidate religion because religion does not account for proof, only for belief.

Galileo said, "I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use." Religious zealots who deny science would be well served to remember this.

But equally, the radical, or as I call them, "agressive athiests" must realise that, as Shakespeare put it and science continually confirms, "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy." (William Shakespeare, Hamlet Act 1 Scene V). Humans are not the pinnacle of the Universe. What hubris to believe that all of the Universe has culminated and came into being for the purpose of creating any one person and that any person knows everything there is to know about and in the Universe.

But that's what dogma stems from and feeds on - pride.

Jack McDevitt's book "Odessy" is a wonderful scifi adventure that touches on this dichotomy as an intergal part of the plot. This section puts the entire problem of dogma in perspective where either extreme is concered:

"We can create the appearance of knowledge, the illusion of knowing how to grapple with a problem. Far too many educational systems have done exactly that. The result is generations of mouthpieces who can pour forth approved responses to programmed stimuli that contribute nothing to rational discussion. Dogma is for those who wish only to be comfortable. Catechiems are for cowards; commandments, for control freaks who have so little respect for their species that they are driven to appeal to a higher power to keep everyone in line. If indeed we have a Maker, I suspect He is proudest of us when we ask the hard questions. And listen for answers."

But he sums it up, a bit later, most eloquently:

"This must have been what it was like in Tennessee three centuries earlier during the Scopes trial. He retreated to his hotel and listened to the crowd thumping and banging in the streets. The counterdemonstrators, unfortunately, were just as fanatical. They were at the moment trying to shout down the organist and his choir. MacAllister looked around hopelessly. His supporters were every bit as deranged as those arrayed on the other side. The real enemy, he thought, was fanaticism."

Amen.

Reminder: If you're getting this via RSS or Email, check the Blog at http://wethepeoplegovern.blogspot.com for embedded links that may be omitted.

2010-07-12T15:31:00.005-05:00

It's been far too long since I've posted. It's not for lack of material, simply a lack of time. Unlike many of my media compatriots, I don't have the luxury of sitting around commenting on life, but actually experience it.

However, a discussion today was too good to pass up. I was talking with a colleague/friend and he brought up a list of the "best Presidents" according to several sources. This morphed into a list (thanks, Cracked.COM) of the "most badass Presidents".

I was amazed because Ronald Regan wasn't on the list. But this got me to thinking about some of the memorable quotations of our esteemed Commanders in Chief. How would they be "spun" by our current administration? To paraphrase the genius comedian Bob Newhart, "I think they would go something like this:"

"Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall." - Ronald W. Regan
"Mr. Gorbachev, I apologise for antagonizing the peaceful people of Soviet Union and for the shameful things America has done to cause you to have to create this wall."

"Ich Bein Ein Berliner." - John F. Kennedy
"Ich Bein Ein African-American who sympathizes with the plight of oppressed people everywhere realizing that every one of them has a right to their views and that all their sentiments are equally valid."

"It is hard to fail, but it is worse never to have tried to succeed. In this life we get nothing save by effort." - Theodore Roosevelt
"It is hard to fail, but it is worse never to have been given a level playing field. In this life, only my administration can insure fairness."

"We believe that all men are created equal because they are created in the image of God." - Harry S. Truman
"I believe that all persons are equal, created or not as you may believe, and that those who have more should be made to be equal with those who have less."

"The only thing we have to fear, is fear itself." - Franklin D. Roosevelt
"The only thing my people have to fear is those who have more than they or don't believe in the policies and positions for which I stand."

"And so, my fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your county." - John F. Kennedy
"And so, my fellow Americans, ask not what you can do for your country, ask what my administration can do to ease your pain and suffering and to undo the policies of previous administrations."

"Those who deny freedom to others, deserve it not for themselves; and, under a just God, can not long retain it." - Abraham Lincoln
"Those who have denied freedom to others, no matter their offenses against this Country, deserve it not for themselves; and, under whatever faith you think is appropriate, can not long retain it unless they are members of my Administration and are doing it to further my policies."

"The buck stops here." - Harry S. Truman
"The buck stops with the previous administration or the big business."

The hubris and contempt for his own country that this President and his administration has and continues to show are nothing if not obvious. All these paraphrasing do is to underscore them and provide food for thought. It is evident that this administration is built on ego, socialism, apologies for its country's greatness, and egregious appeasement that would cause even this party's own predecessors and scions revulsion.

Is this who you want representing you to the world? It's not who I want. So I'm continuing to work for change. What are you doing?

Reminder: If you're getting this via RSS or Email, check the Blog at http://wethepeoplegovern.blogspot.com for embedded links that may be omitted.

The Price of Liberty

2010-05-31T11:36:00.002-05:00

"It is foolish and wrong to mourn the men who died. Rather we should thank God that such men lived." - Gen. George S. Patton

I was having a discussion the other day with someone who was asking me why we had two holidays for veterans, Memorial Day and Veteran's Day. The latter, I explained, was originally the observation of the end of World War I (the Great War, the War to End War) at "the eleventh hour of the eleventh day of the eleventh month".

I noted that while Memorial Day is a day to honor those who've fallen in service to our country, Veteran's Day is a day to honor any who've served in our armed forces. But it occurs to me that this is wrong.

We live in a nation that is free. We enjoy liberties that no other nation on earth possesses (regardless of what people like Michael Moore would like to portray). And yet those freedoms come at a price. In the words of John P. Curran (often misattributed to Thomas Jefferson), "The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance." People popularily paraphrase this as "The price of freedom is eternal vigilance."

And while the attributions and direct quotation may not be wholly correct, the idea remains. But the oft-overlooked part of this statement, or at the very least misunderstood, is the word "eternal". Our military stands a watch over us and our freedoms. That watch is constant and eternal. As the misguided Col. Jessup in "A Few Good Men" nevertheless correctly exclaimed, "Son, we live in a world that has walls, and those walls have to be guarded by men with guns."

This is a 24 by 7, 365 job. Our forefathers not only said this numerous times, they were prescient enough to acknowledge that what is guarded against is not always from without when they included in the military and civilian governmental oath, "I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic." They and their successors reaffirmed the necessity of being on guard against threats both military and political:

"God grants liberty only to those who love it, and are always ready to guard and defend it." - Daniel Webster

"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." - George Orwell

"Experience should teach us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the government's purposes are beneficent. Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by evil-minded rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding." - U.S. Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis

The fact is that the securing of liberties of which the Declaration of Independence speaks is a neverending task. And those who are charged with it deserve to be thanked and acknowledged not just one, not just two nor even three days a year but every single moment of every single day. They stand on that wall so that we, the protected, don't have to.

"For those that will fight for it, freedom has a flavor the protected shall never know." - L/Cpl Edwin L."Tim"Craft, B Co 3rd AT's Khe Sahn Combat Base, February 1968

When I see a vet, any vet, I walk up to them and thank them for their service not on our country's behalf, but on my behalf. Their job, their choice, their sacrifices enable me to live and remain free. This means not just our military, but those who serve our government. I may not always agree with them, but I appreciate that and honor their choice of career ever day. I take their role in our nation as seriously as I take my own.

As a citizen of the United States, though I've never formally taken the oath, it is my duty as well to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

This is what I do. What do you do?

Reminder: If you're getting this via RSS or Email, check the Blog at http://wethepeoplegovern.blogspot.com for embedded links that may be omitted.

The Cost of Reality

2010-05-27T09:09:00.004-05:00

Oh, God, another "money" posting. Quick, get my No-Doze! I'll try, at least, to keep this a little interesting.

In an unobtrusively placed segment, ABC News has noted that, according to the Treasury Department, the National Debt has now hit $13 Trillion. *Yawn* So? Who cares, it's just government money, they can print more, right? The debt's always getting worse, right? We're no different than any other country, right?

Wrong, Wrong and..... wait for it... RIGHT (and that last one's the scariest). So let's take these one at a time:

"It's just government money, they can print more"

Government money. Is that like that "Obama Cash"? Ladies and gentlemen, this is your money. You gave it to the government on April 15. There is no such thing as "government money". The government does not have some secret stash somewhere that it somehow 'earns' itself. It pays for its services, programs, givebacks, and bailouts with taxes. Period, end of sentence. In the words of John Coleman, "The point to remember is that what the government gives it must first take away."

And yes, it can print more. But our money has no actual value except that which is placed in faith in the government itself. There is no gold or other tangible asset that backs our currency. It is simply the faith that the U.S. Government is "good for it." And the more it prints and less faith other countries have in us, the less each dollar is worth. This, for those born after 1980, is something called "inflation" and it was considered the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression.

You see, our government -- the administration and the yes-men in Congress -- are "giving away" more and more. They are raising taxes and, even faster than that, increasing spending. They are trying the eminently unsuccessful and discredited Keynesian practice of "spending your way out of recession". In order to do that and not infuriate the citizens even further, they print more and more money. This devalues the money, meaning that have to print even more and it becomes a downward spiral. Analysts have been warning since this current government took office that we are destined for a crash even worse than that of the 70's that will make the current economic crisis look like a mere blip on the radar.

"The debt's always getting worse."

Once again, not so much. Some governments (notably, the Clinton administration) have decreased the National Debt. Now let's think about that. How was that accomplished? Under a Democratic President? Yes. Because it's not the President alone who sets policy. It's Congress. And if you'll look at the graphs supplied by a Clinton apologist, you'll note that it was only after the "Contract with America" which resulted in a conservative anti-tax-and-spend backlash that the National Debt decreased under that administration. At the beginning, it kept increasing. You see, Congress must approve budgets and therefore is complicit in anything that occurs with regards to taxation and spending.

"We're no different than any other county."

That's correct -- and scary. All one has to do is to turn on the news to look at what's happening in Europe. Nations, like ours, that tax and spend continuously, are failing and falling like dominoes. The most recent example, of course, is Greece, but there are rumblings that the underpinnings of other socialist economies are shaking as well. All because their citizens have bought into the idea that their government "owes" them anything beyond "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

But our government's smarter than that, right? Consider Obamacare. It proponents promised that this would be $900 billion and "no more than that." Now, however, the Congressional Budget Office is predicting $1.15 Trillion and some are projecting it to top $2 Trillion.

Who's responsible for this impending fiscal trainwreck? Certainly the current administration shoulders responsibility for laying the track and putting the engine on it. But those who are supposed to be watching out for our best interests and responding to our will, Congress, have put a fire to the boilers and stuck the throttle on "full speed ahead" towards the bridge that's out (ok, I stretched that metaphor as far as I could... or maybe not).

Congress spends, as my father would've said, faster than a drunken sailor. They are blithly partying in the egineroom as we, the nation, rush headlong toward the abyss. They do this because they've lost touch with reality. And they are all to blame, all complicit in the ensuing tragedy. So how do we avoid it? By kicking out the engineer and hiring a new one who will hit the breaks before we plummet off the end of the bridge (ok, I'm done now with the metaphor).

I'm just as committed to sound fiscal policy as I am to compassionate and social liberty. I want the government out of my pocket and out of my moral and personal decisions. And I am committed to replacing my "representatives", who don't represent me, with ones who do.

This is what I'm doing. What are you doing?

Reminder: If you're getting this via RSS or Email, check the Blog at http://wethepeoplegovern.blogspot.com for embedded links that may be omitted.

A Clear and Present Danger

2010-05-26T16:46:00.004-05:00

I'm back from the "Vacation From Hell" and am raring to go with postings. Thanks to those of you who've kept me "in the loop" as I've been away. I have a number of topics I'll be covering, soon, but I wanted to take this time to address a concern.

The Tea Party movement is in danger; not from the liberal media, not from the Congressmen that it assails, not even from the White House, but from within. It is in danger because some of its members (and some non-members) have bought into the hype of the popular media and are assuming that it can be used as a grass roots political organization. One of my friends has pointed out that he's become disillusioned at some of the recent rallies which have turned into nothing more than Chautauqua tents for people to announce their various candidacies.

Upon my return, I received an email from one of the local Tea Party organizers that asked his readers for ideas on how best the group could promote a certain candidate. I was about to compose my response when someone else struck the first blow. I followed up with the following, which is my warning to all those who attend or organize these rallies and, to a greater extent, those who would attempt to co-opt this massive tide of revolt.

Dear xxxxx,
I was going to write something VERY similar. The Tea Party movement in specific and Conservatism in general are not political parties. I, for one, am upset that they've been co-opted to be that by members who wish to run for public office.

What has defined the Tea Party movement is that it is a sentiment that well and truly cross cultural, racial and political barriers. That's its major strength. To reduce it to a political party or lobby destroys its credibility and demeans those who believe in its principles -- less government and more involvement "of, by and for the people".

Education of the principles of Conservatism are the key. That will allow people of any political stripe to then examine their consciences and their candidates and make decisions based on principle instead of voting the "straight party line". Anything else, as evidenced by H. Ross Perot and Ralph Nader, falls apart and fails due to internal doctrinal difficulties.

In the words of Harlan Ellison, "Everyone is entitled to an informed opinion."

And the corallary, as voiced by Adolf Hitler, is "What luck for the rulers that men do not think."

Independence and freedom include independence of thought and freedom of action. No single candidate nor political party embrace or align with all my views. Instead, as I have stated and is a point of my "Action Plan" (look to the right of this page), I will support the candidates who most closely align with my core principles regardless of party affiliation. Why? Because We the People have been betrayed by both parties. We have been sold a bill of goods by career politicians (including you, Mr. Roth) and you are all at risk.

It is time for revolution and I am taking this revolution to the "rulers" regardless of party. This is what I'm doing. What are you doing?

Reminder: If you're getting this via RSS or Email, check the Blog at http://wethepeoplegovern.blogspot.com for embedded links that may be omitted.

A Taste of Things to Come

2010-05-11T14:03:00.003-05:00

1984 has indeed arrived, albeit several decades late. And in no small measure, as indicated by a number of very disturbing stories from around the world.

In his seminal work The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, English historian Edward Gibbon points to the "loss of civic virtue" of the Roman citizens. He shows that as they gave up their Rights, outsourced their strengths (hiring mercenaries, allowing their military -- a strength of their state -- to fracture and atrophy) and become fixated on "immediate gratification", their civilization became decadent and rotted from within. In essence, the Empire became so wealthy, so great, that its citizens felt "entitlements" and they were no longer interested in being "winners" on the world stage, let alone competitive. They became complacent and relied on their government to "provide" for them.

How prescient for what happened to Gibbon's own country. The British Empire, once the most powerful and wealthiest nation on the face of the earth has descended into a socialist chaos. A state where the government not only spies on its citizens, monitoring their every move, but where the "slackers" have a "right" to be paid to stay home and drink all day (yup, you read that right, the guy gets £20,000 per year so he can stay home and drink and his kids can have video games -- and he boasts about it).

Successive leftist governments in Great Britain, including the socialist in conservative colors, Gordon Brown, have left the country as the punchline to a joke -- often referred to by bloggers and others as the Nanny State.

But this isn't unique to England. This last week, a good friend went to Greece for his honeymoon; just in time for he riots. Now, I know a lot of people don't have the foggiest about what's going on over there, so let me simplify it in bullet points:

The country of Greece (yup, the whole damn country) is bankrupt. Why? Simple -- because the government is responsible for providing nearly everything for their citizens so that they can enjoy a life of leisure. Think I'm kidding? Read on.
So, since Greece is part of the European Union and because the tanking of their economy could bankrupt most (if not all) of the EU, they needed a bailout package (sound eerily familiar?).
The sticky point was the Germans. See, the Germans said, "Whoa, wait a second... if we're going to foot the bill," (Germany will pay more than half of the bailout), "then we expect the Greek citizens to enact some austerity measures and cut back on some of their union benefits, vacations, etc." In other words, we expect you to live within a budget and work for a living.
That didn't sit so well with the Greek citizens. They said "No way" and proceeded to riot, killing people in the process. They told their government, "Take the money, but give it to us."

In essence, the citizens have become so socialized that they refused to agree to be "responsible" and instead wanted "handouts". The only thing that put a damper on this whole mess was that the Greek government realized its own stupidity and that of its citizens. It woke up and decided to accept Germany's terms.

But it won't stop there. Spain, Ireland and Portugal, other socialist havens, are also circling the economic drain. So more "good money" will be thrown "after bad" and the entire European Union may go with it. John Keynes must be rubbing his ectoplasmic hands in glee.

"Oh," you say, "That's just Europe. That doesn't have anything to do with me."

Hold on a second, there, Skippy. You and I are paying part of the bill -- to the tune of $108 billion. Seems that President Obama, our very own socialist (as even the London Telegraph describes him) slipped that little line items into the "Support the Troops" bill in order to get past the outrage of the citizens againt the $700 billion bank bailout.

But more to the point, the same things that caused this whole mess -- the socialization of Europe -- is happening right here:

Now we have Obamacare. We've beat that horse to death and even its supporters acknowledge it as socialist as they go running for their "free handouts."
This week, Michael Bloomberg, mayor of New York, is visiting London. Why? To see how the most surveilled city in the world can teach us how to spy on citizens.
The Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, is brokering a treaty to circumvent the Second Amendment and take away the Right to Bear Arms without having to go through Congress.
Meanwhile, the Obama administration and a compliant Congress is setting up the country for a continuous series of bailouts and power grabs under the guise of the Dodd Bill, effectively taking over private industry and "socializing" it under government control, one industry at a time.

And, in another classic Socialist Party move, having already moved to take over the private sector and take away the public's right to defend itself, the administrations regulatory advisor, Cass Sunstein, has recommended an Orwellian "Ministry of Truth" by suggesting that the government infiltrate and crack down on what it considers to be "conspiracy theory groups" -- basically anyone who says anything that the administration decides is seditious.

Yup, you read it right. Remember when "Dissent is Patriotic" was the cause celebre? Now that those folks are in power, you'd better not complain or you'll have to face the MiniTruth and Thought Police.

We are sliding, as a compliant group of sheep, into the abyss. We can see it happening in Europe and yet the populace of this country refuses to acknowledge it. Or so the legislators would like to believe. It's time for revolution -- the revolution our Forefathers guaranteed and required of its citizens. I, for one, have had enough of the professional politicians who are allowing this great nation to follow Europe down the drain. I am taking the fight to the polls. I am actively working to get rid of the incumbents who are leading us down this path to destruction and I am encouraging others to do the same.

This is what I'm doing. What are you doing?

Reminder: If you're getting this via RSS or Email, check the Blog at http://wethepeoplegovern.blogspot.com for embedded links that may be omitted.

A Sign of Things To Come

2010-05-04T12:24:00.002-05:00

The Administration and Congress who, in the words of Senator Rochefeller of West Virginia pushed through "health care reform regardless of the views of the American people," and are, not surprisingly, exempt from this law, keep telling us that this is "not government run health care." This is simply not the case. Occam's Razor says the the simplest explanation is usually the correct one. When it comes to the Health Care Bill, the "co-op" is government owned, so by extension, it is government run.

Today, we find out another reason for this: A private citizen can't sue a government health care provider.

Yesterday, the Supreme Court ruled on a case that has direct implications and sets precedent for the future of Health Care in the United States. In this particular case, an illegal immigrant (and drug smuggler) sued doctors at the US Public Health Service after they refused to treat a lesion. The high court ruled that it is the U.S. Government that is the provider and since Public Health Service doctors have "absolute immunity for their official actions" the doctors cannot be held accountable.

I am of the firm opinion that one of the major causes of health care costs is the litigation-happy society and the lack of tort reform that allows people to get multi-million dollar judgements for "emotional pain and suffering" and the like. However what the court is doing by setting this precedent is to create a system by which, if a patient is truly wronged by a health care provider, that patient has absolutely no recourse.

Follow the dots, here.

The government, ipso facto is now a Health Care provider. This is well established. Therefore, all health care professionals are employees of the government and, by simple extension, subject to the Public Health Service. Since that service's members have "absolute immunity" for wrongdoing, the "Patient's Bill of Rights" goes right out the window (along with the rest of the Rights that the administration and successive Congresses have seen fit to remove).

Dr. Kagen has claimed that more people now "have a choice" in health care. Not only, as I've pointed out, is this untrue because one cannot choose to opt out of health care, but now that choice is further limited because one has no legal recourse should their government-sponsored physician "screw up". While I'm certain that few doctors relish the idea of being sued for negligence, the opposite is actually an anathema to the profession as it allows the worst, most incompetent elements to go unpunished for their misdeeds. This ruling sets the precedent for that scenario.

The Health Care law is fact. Sure it can be undone (an uphill battle, but a winnable one) and when it is, the next step towards sane health care reform is to reform tort law and remove the unjust, irresponsible and incredible punitive damages from the table. Litigation is powerful, albeit unfortunate motivational factor when wielded appropriately. Without it, with the protections given to doctors in the PHS, the government has simply created another "trade union" where mediocrity, regardless of ability, is the rule and longevity is the only thing that's rewarded.

Reminder: If you're getting this via RSS or Email, check the Blog at http://wethepeoplegovern.blogspot.com for embedded links that may be omitted.

You Can't Have It Both Ways

2010-04-25T17:56:00.003-05:00

A new law in Virginia highlights the hypocricy that's rife in politics.

It seems that when the state passed legislation in March to include safety information in public school cirriculum, someone screwed up and the legislation got passed with holes. In specific, they left out information on firearm safety.

So, the state has included information in its mandated cirriculum from the National Rifle Association. Predictably, this has gotten the "fur" up on some folks.

Now let's back up a moment.

First of all, since almost half of American households exercise their clear Second Amendment rights, firearms are the rule, not the exception. Second, since they are as liable, in misuse or accident, to cause death and injury as, say, household poisons, electricity, fire and other tools of everyday life, they constitute something about which children should be taught.

Third, the NRA's information is neither "pro-gun" or "pro-hunting". It is simply a program that emphasises safety. For example, the NRA mascot, Eddie the Eagle, advises kids, "If you see a gun: STOP! Don't Touch. Leave the Area. Tell an Adult."

Nothing terribly controversial there. Or so one would think.

The hypocricy, however, is thrown sharply into focus when one hears the "horror" comments from some Helen Lovejoy-like ("Won't Someone Think of the Children!!!") parents:

"I personally don't think firearm safety has a place in the schools,that's up to the parents to teach that at home."

Now while I don't disagree, consider subtly changing just a few words:

"I personally don't think sex education has a place in the schools,that's up to the parents to teach that at home."

The hypocricy is clear. Some folks want to abdicate their Responsibilities for teaching children morals, safety and other personal lessons to the state (schools) but they draw the line at firearm safety?

Personally, I believe that government has no place to legislate morality. Morals, ethics, hygene and other such personal issues should be taught by parents. Attempts at such legislation (hello, 18th Ammendment) are doomed to failure. One cannot legislate human nature. However, too many parents have decided that they'd rather have someone else doing their job. And now, when the government simply extends that job to a safety item as pervasive as others it already covers, they are aghast.

As I have said before, there is a clear law of the universe -- one cannot have a Right without a commensurate Responsility. As people give up their Responsibilities, their Rights are equally curtailed. We have given up many Rights in the past decades and our present administration is actively seeking to 'end run' the Second Ammendment and remove our Right to Bear Arms. If we don't live up to our responsibilities to teach our children and instead expect the state to, we can't be surprised when the state takes away our rights, too.

Reminder: If you're getting this via RSS or Email, check the Blog at http://wethepeoplegovern.blogspot.com for embedded links that may be omitted.

The Poor Woman and the VAT

2010-04-19T13:45:00.004-05:00

[Luke 21:1] As he looked up, Jesus saw the rich putting their gifts into the temple treasury. [2] He also saw a poor widow put in two very small copper coins. [3] "I tell you the truth," he said, "this poor widow has put in more than all the others. [4] All these people gave their gifts out of their wealth; but she out of her poverty put in all she had to live on."

Usually, those who hear this story interpret it as someone giving their all being more generous than those who give just what they can afford. In truth, that's the idea that's being pursued, but there's a much deeper lesson for the taxpayers and citizens of this country.

Faced with a massive deficit and burdened with the costs of the new Health Care program, the administration and Congress (both of whom like the "and spend" portion of "tax and spend" so they must do the "tax" portion as well) are seriously looking into a European style Value Added Tax (VAT). What's that? Well, put simply it turns a "tax" into a "fee".

What happens is that a good or service, instead of being taxed at the time of sale, is taxed all along the line from the point where its created to the point when its delivered. That is, each time "value" is "added", there's a tax. This, then, becomes "hidden" in the cost of the item. So let's say you go to McDonald's for their (damn you, Ronald) highly addictive Iced Coffee. It costs $1.49, plus tax (I disavow all responsibility for knowing this). So, in Wisconsin, that's 5% sales tax. I see $1.49 on the menu and I have to pay $1.56.

In Europe, I'd see $1.56 on the menu, instead.

This is insidious for a couple of reasons.

What you don't see, you don't think about. That means that you just "see" the $1.56. You don't realize that there's a tax in there. When the price goes up, you don't know if its the Cost of Business, if it's materials, if there's a coffee bean farmer's strike, or if Congress just voted themselves another pay raise.
That is, this gives Congress a silent, perpetual bank account in the form of the consumer's pocket. They can levy whatever taxes they want and keep up their spendthrift ways without much repurcussion against them. They don't have to blatantly raise taxes that you feel on April 15. Instead, they can just quietly do what they want and you'll think, "Hmm... guess my coffee's a bit more expensive, now."
Also, bear in mind that this is additional to, not instead of, state and local taxes. Yup, that's right, if this goes through, you'll not only be paying Uncle Sam on April 15th from your wages, you'll also be paying him for nearly everything you buy for your day to day living. And remember that the states, themselves, are facing huge budget deficits of their own, for which they will be raising taxes.

The administration and Congress know that there's not nearly enough money for them to fund not only the programs they've already put in place and mandated, but the ones they're now floating like the Dodd Plan. So they have to come up with an "inexhaustable supply" of cash (other than Obama's Stash) and this is their proposal for doing just that. As Jack Welch (former GE CEO) said on his April 15th Twitter,

Don't fall for a VAT tax plan "to get us out of hole"..It is a politicians dream PIGGY BANK

But one has to ask if it does, in fact work, then why not use it? For the answer, let's look at what happens in Europe. It turns out that Europe's VAT, the model for the U.S. lawmakers, is being used exactly as Mr. Welch predicted (and as any reasonably logical person would predict) -- it's a neverending stream of income that depends on subtly and constantly increasing rates.

But JT, what does this have to do with the "Poor Woman" parable?

Well, that's another of the insidious points to this -- it hurts exactly the people its proponents like to say they're helping. But then, this is nothing new. Already, the President has reneged on his pledge to not increase taxes on those making $250k per year. He has to. There's no money left.

But I digress. Remember the mantra of the administration and Congress that all these entitlement programs, including the Health Care bill are "for the poor"? Not so much. You see, a VAT is not a progressive tax. Its an across the board tax that taxes everyone based on their consumption.

I know this can be hard to follow, so let's take it back to the McDonald's analogy.

If I pay $1.56 for a cup of coffee, which includes 5% VAT (in my example), I do it out of $10 in my pocket. If someone not as well off as me, with say $2 in their pocket pays $1.56 for a cup of coffee, they have paid 4% of their available money in tax whereas I've paid less than 1%. They have, in effect, paid four times more than me because they have less to begin with.

A VAT therefore discriminates against those who have less to spend. Like the "Poor Woman", its a larger percentage of her available money than those who have more to spend.

And, in many ways, a VAT is nothing but a trough (excuse the applicable pun). It is, as I've pointed out earlier, a way for the government to go on an eternal feeding frenzy.

Our government has learned the hard way that taxes are a hotbutton issue. They have seen that We the People get a might testy when they tax us. But they need more feed in the trough, so their solution is to hide the source of the feed. Once again, they have attacked the symptom, not the cause. The cause, as so eloquently pointed out and proved by Eisenhower and Reagan, is spending.

Until and unless We the People demand, by ousting the hogs from the trough, an end to the spendthrift ways of our legislature, we will continue to be taxed. And now, we will be taxed without even being aware of it.

I, for one, am sick and tired of this endless cycle. And so, as I've said before, I've come to the conclusion that those who feed and feed and feed at the public trough are through. Using the guidance of our Founding Fathers, I am working actively to oust the incumbents -- all of them regadless of party -- who believe that "tax and spend" is their "right" and have failed to insure the blessings of liberty.

This is what I'm doing. What are you doing?

Reminder: If you're getting this via RSS or Email, check the Blog at http://wethepeoplegovern.blogspot.com for embedded links that may be omitted.

A Modest Proposal

2010-04-17T21:44:00.003-05:00

This was passed to me by one of my readers. I wholeheartedly agree. Much like King George, our Congress sees fit to pass laws to which they, themselves (and their special interests) are exempt.

It's time to change that. I won't detract by commenting further, but I present the letter, in total, hoping some of you will pass it along.

This will take less than thirty seconds to read. If you agree, please pass it on.

An idea whose time has come.

For too long we have been too complacent about the workings of Congress. Many citizens had no idea that members of Congress could retire with the same pay after only one term, that they didn't pay into Social Security, that they specifically exempted themselves from many of the laws they have passed (such as being exempt from any fear of prosecution for sexual harassment) while ordinary citizens must live under those laws. The latest is to exempt themselves from the Healthcare Reform...in all of its forms. Somehow, that doesn't seem logical. We do not have an elite that is above the law. I truly don't care if they are Democrat, Republican, Independent or whatever. The self-serving must stop. This is a good way to do that. It is an idea whose time has come.

Have each person contact a minimum of Twenty people on their Address list, in turn ask each of those to do likewise. In three days, most people in The United States of America will have the message. This is one proposal that really should be passed around.

Proposed 28th Amendment to the United States Constitution

"Congress shall make no law that applies to the citizens of the United States that does not apply equally to the Senators and/or Representatives; and, Congress shall make no law that applies to the Senators and/or Representatives that does not apply equally to the citizens of the United States ."

If you don't have twenty, pass it on to whatever number you can.

Reminder: If you're getting this via RSS or Email, check the Blog at http://wethepeoplegovern.blogspot.com for embedded links that may be omitted.

The Party Line

2010-04-17T20:13:00.002-05:00

One of my readers was good enough, recently, to forward to me the letter he received from Representative Steve Kagen, 8th Congressional District, D-Wisconsin in response to a number of letters he'd sent to his Representative.

Below is Dr. (yes, he's an MD, perhaps you remember the (in)famous "I'm Dr. Millionaire" debacle) Kagen's response (in italics):

Thank you for communicating with me to express your concerns about our nation's health care system. I appreciate you taking the time to share your views with me.

Interesting that he "appreciates" the time taken to share the views. He certainly didn't "appreciate" people "sharing their views" that opposed his at his Town Hall meetings. In fact, he seriously curtailled his meetings with his constituents after finding that those same constituents were opposed to his support of the Health Care bill.

I believe that when you finally see what is really in our new health security law, you're going to like what you see, for it improves upon what we already have: private health care - and it is not government-run.

In my talks with a number of people who were at the few Town Halls that the Representative had, he repeatedly failed to know specific sections of the Bill that they (having copies with them) cited. So one has to ask, does the Doctor actually know what's in it? His constituents made their opposition clear and yet he seemed to think he knows what's best.

As for "not government run", this once again shows a woeful ignorance of the facts, as we'll see again and again throughout his response letter.

"Peace of Mind," that is what people are saying when they hear that no onger will a family go broke or lose their home just because a loved one has an accident or gets sick. It is good for our health and our economy by putting patients first, strengthening Medicare, and guaranteeing access to care for all of us.

No, Doctor Kagen, instead they will go broke because they have been taxed to and beyond the point of breaking. And how, exactly, is this "good for our ... economy" when the law raises taxes on wages and investments... two cornerstones of the economy? Further, it puts such an onerous weight on corporations that it will cost them billions of dollars. Kind of difficult to keep a strong economy when you have to lay off workers due to the costs imposed on you by the government.

No longer will Wall Street-run health insurance corporations be allowed to discriminate against small business owners by charging them higher premiums than big corporations, or dropping you if you become ill. After half a century of trying, we finally applied our constitutional rights, which protect all citizens against discrimination, to our health care system.

Wall-Street runs the insurance companies? Odd thing to say for a physician, especially one from Wisconsin. You see, Dr. Kagen, you made your millions because of your "franchised" allergy practice. Which is due, in no small part, to the money from insurance. Second, last I checked, Wisconsin is headquarters, not Wall Street, to a large number of nationwide insurance companies, including Wausau, American Family, Peachtree, Thrivent, Acuity, All American Life, Allied Insurance, etc., etc. And they say that the Tea Partiers are full of rhetoric?

It's obvious that Dr. Kagen has a vendetta, as he also sees the spectre of Insurance Company conspiracy in those voicing their opinions in the Town Hall meetings.

As for higher premiums for smaller companies and coverage based on risk, perhaps you're unfamiliar with how "risk pooling" works or the concept of insurance to begin with. In order to be able to pay the costs, those with higher risk must necessarily have higher premiums. Artificially limiting them is like putting artificial limits on anything free-market (ask the Soviets how well that worked out).

Oh, but you said that Health Care isn't government run. So... those artificial limits are, what, Doctor... "helpful hints"?

In 2005, I promised to work hard to secure access to affordable care for all of us, with no patient left behind. Promise made. Promise kept.

Yes, Doctor. Regardless of what the majority of voters wanted, you "kept your promise". Sounds like you took a chapter from Senator Rochefeller of West Virginia, who said, "We are going to push through health care reform regardless of the views of the American people."

Here are a few of the winning ideas in this landmark law:

* No Discrimination against any citizen due to pre-existing medical conditions
* Begins to close the "Donut Hole" in Medicare Part-D
* Small Business Tax Credits for of up to 35% of the costs for health insurance
* Increased Competition across state lines for insurers
* No Annual or Lifetime Caps on Coverage
* Full Coverage for Prevention Services
* No Dropped Coverage if You Become Seriously ill
* Guaranteed Insurance Renewal as long as you pay your premium in full.

WHAT'S IN IT FOR YOU?

WINNERS BENEFITS
114,000 SENIOR CITIZENS ON MEDICARE Begins closing the "Donut Hole" in
Medicare Part-D

No Deductibles or out-of-pocket expenses
for prevention services, like mammograms
and colonoscopies

17,000 SMALL BUSINESSES There is no mandate to buy insurance if
your business has fewer than 50 full-time
employees.

In 2014, small business owners may buy
health coverage at the same discounts as big
corporations.

475,000 PEOPLE HAVE COVERAGE Nothing changes. It is your personal choice:
if you want to change doctors or insurers,
then you can.

186,000 FAMILIES WHO CANNOT Health care coverage will be affordable by
AFFORD COVERAGE NOW making subsidies available to those who are
in need.

53,000 YOUNG ADULTS Children can stay on their parent's insurance
plan until age 26.

$ 45,000,000 FOR 8th DISTRICT Increased reimbursements for Medicaid
HOSPITALS + PHYSICIANS and Medicare covered services in Wisconsin

Just a selected few (I could go on for pages, here) items:

"Small Businesses" - This is defined as anyone with more than 50 employees. At this point, you are required to enroll in the mandated Health Care system or face fines. And yet, this isn't "government run" health care.

"It's a personal choice" - No, sir, it's not. You cannot choose to opt out. Every person is required, under penalty of fines from the IRS, to subscribe to health care. Whether or not they want it, whether or not they wish to pay for it themselves. This is akin to Henry Ford's choice of "You can have any color you want so long as its black."

"Subsidies available to those who are in need" - Medicaid. Medicare. Badger Care. Apparently these don't exist.

"$45,000,000 for 8th District Hospitals and Physicians" - And now the "ah-ha" moment. Dr. Kagen, remind me again where your practice is? Oh yeah, the 8th District! How... convenient.

Thank you again for contacting me. Let's continue to work together, as we build a better nation for all of us.

Dear Doctor Kagen - You are not working with the people of Wisconsin. You refused to listen to their views. You've violated their trust. You have decided, unilaterally, that you know what's best for the people instead of the people themselves. You are arrogant. And your days in office are numbered.

I am working against you. I am voting against you. In the new vernacular, "I can see November from your house."

Reminder: If you're getting this via RSS or Email, check the Blog at http://wethepeoplegovern.blogspot.com for embedded links that may be omitted.

J. Keynes and the Pizza Parlor

2010-04-13T08:02:00.004-05:00

John Maynard Keynes is the darling of Government Control so it's no surprise that his theories (Keynesian economics) are being trotted out again by the current legislature and administration. *YAWN*

I've already lost 99% of any audience I'd address with this opening line including, if I'm totally honest, myself. I'd find it more interesting to read the Software License Agreement on Windows Vista. What does get me interested, though, is when I see my taxes going up while the economy tanks. So I noodled on how best to make this personal.

So, here goes... let's pretend the economy's in the toilet (ok, not too much of a stretch, there). Since I'm salaried, I have to live within a budget. So I cut back and maybe go out to dinner less often, as do most of my neighbors. The restaurants in town have less business, so they get rid of some of their teenaged waitstaff and cut back. With me so far?

In the meantime, the guy down the street from me, who owns a local pizza joint, says, "Hmm, this is bad. Here's what I'll do... I'll hire the teens who were laid off. And my family will eat every meal at my pizza shop." Sounds like a good idea, on the surface. The folks in my small community see the teens getting hired back and the local pizza shop has customers in it all the time.

The problem is, while I'm happy for the pizza guy, its not going to make me want to go out more often. But hey, unemployment is down and the local pizza place is open, so no harm, no foul.

Now extend this a bit more. The pizza guy doesn't have the money himself to hire the teens and to keep patronizing his own place, so he asks everyone in town to chip in money every week -- for the good of the community. Actually, he goes to the town council and gets it set up that its mandatory for everyone to throw $100 a week into a fund to keep up this practice.

Wait, what? I just said I didn't have the money to go out to eat, so why the hell am I paying this guy to go out to eat and to keep the kids working?

Well, that's Keynesian economics in a nutshell.

The basic idea is that if the government (the pizza guy) spends money and creates jobs, that will encourage the private sector (the rest of the folks in my town) to start spending money. The problem is that the government doesn't have money of its own. In the words of John Coleman,

"The point to remember is that what the government gives it must first take away."

That is the pizza guy (the government) gets its money (taxes) from the community that it then redistributes in the hopes that everyone will think the economic troubles are over.

In point of fact, whats happened (and what any layman can see from the analogy) is that an artificial economy has been created that is separate from the real one. It's an illusion with the hopes of becomming reality. But in reality -- and history -- it doesn't work.

FDR and his "New Deal" is pointed to by apostles of Keynes as the perfect example of this economic theory in action. The problem is, FDR did not, in point of fact, get the U.S. out of the Great Depression. The New Deal, which was exactly Keynesian, was doomed to failure as even FDR himself knew. When Truman tried to reaffirm these policies in a postwar world, he was rebuffed by a congress that saw the handwriting on the wall. Instead, Congress cut taxes and lowered its own spending directly resulting in the boom of the 1950's.

Again with the stagflation and energy crisises of the 1970's, the Ford, then Carter administrations and a compliant Congress tried to spend their way out of the problems, increasing taxes. Only when Ronald Reagan came in, lowered taxes and slashed government spending did the economic swell of the 1980's take off. By this time, a number of economic theorists believed that Keynesian economics had had the final nail put in its coffin.

But now, those who (in George Santayana's memorialization) have "forgotten the lessons of history" have taken power, we're seeing the old Keynesian theories trotted out again. England's socialist-in-conservative-clothing Gordon Brown tried (and failed) to tax and spend the UK back into solvency. And the Obama administration and a compliant Congress are attempting the same thing in the U.S. despite warnings from all quarters of the economic analysis community.

The Dow is over 11,000 this week, but its clear that this is nothing but a 'false reality' like the pizza shop hiring all the teens. Even those on capitol hill acknowledge that they can't spend enough, fast enough and so will need to increase taxes even more.

One definition of clinical insanity is doing the same thing, over and over, with the expectation of a different result. If that's so, then the administration and legislature are clinically insane. So obvious is this to even their own support base, the college-age crowd, that they're turning on the very people they helped put into power. Should they be representing us? They sure as hell shouldn't be representing me, and I'm taking the revolution into my own hands.

This is what I'm doing. What are you doing?

Note Bene: I've decided to keep that phrase "This is what I'm doing" in as many of my blog postings as possible to remind me that this must be a personal fight. But in the interest of brevity, I've updated and posted what my friend Steve calls the "We the People Challenge" (my Four Points) as a permanent part of the We The People blog page. So I won't be boring you with that each time.

Reminder: If you're getting this via RSS or Email, check the Blog at http://wethepeoplegovern.blogspot.com for embedded links that may be omitted.

I Want Health Care Reform

2010-04-10T19:24:00.004-05:00

Contrary to what that the pundits, talking heads, ObamaCare supporters, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and others might want to portray, the vast majority of Americans want Health Care Reform. They just don't want the odious Bill that was, against the will of the majority, crammed down their throats.

I, too, want Health Care Reform. Health care costs are too high. But this is not the way to do it. My parents always said that I should never present a problem without a solution. I've done that very thing in my previous posts and its the essence of this blog. And so I present a solution. But first, let's break down the major pieces and follow the logic.
Fact: Not everyone can afford Health Insurance.

Why is this a fact? Most would say its because health care professionals make "too much money". However the vast majority of professional health care providers average no more than any other professional (from $24,000 to $100,000 per year, depending on expertise and field). Compare that to the average major league baseball (average, mind you) salary of from $600,000 to $6,800,000 per year.

Not a fair comparison because there are much fewer professional baseball players than health care professionals? Ok, how about computer technicians: they vary from an average of $41,000 to $70,000 per year.

So if the health care professionals aren't making the money, then it must be the hospitals themselves, right? Interestingly enough, hospitals compare their pofitability to industry regularily. Their average profit margin is around 10%, which is actually #77 of the Top 100 most profitable industries. Why? Because their own costs are so high. Mostly that's due to the cost of drugs, insurance and medical equipment. So one has to ask why that is. The root cause, with a bit more digging, is that the drug companies and medical equipment suppliers are paying huge insurance premiums.

Oh, so its those evil capitalistic profit centers. Turn out they're not even in that same Top 100. Eventhough insurance costs are high, the providers (as evidenced this week in Massachettets) don't make a high enough profit margin to pay out the claims they've been forced to take on.

So what's going on?

Here's what's going on... they all (health care professionals, hospitals, drug companies, medical equipment manufacturers, insurance companies) have to bear the cost of outrageous medical malpractice judgements. It turns out that the Government Accounting Office (GAO) reported to Congress on this issue as early as 2003. However, since Congress is largely made up of members of the legal profession, no action was taken.

Tort reform, already acknowledged as being a key to reducing health care costs, would cut in on their profession (their other one) and that of their "pals". Once again, Congress has shown that they have their own bests interests at heart, instead of that of their consituents. They have exempted themselves from their own laws, they have created their own banking and postal systems, their own privileges. The are not representative of We the People.

I want Health Care Reform. I want affordable health care. So where do we start?

We do not start by adding onerous taxes to an already overtaxed populace. We do not start by pushing through a law contrary to the will of the people. We do not "work with the law we now have" as some of the professional politicans have said.

Instead, we start with tort reform. Then we push this to insurance reform. These flow through to drug cost and equipment cost reform which ends up in lower health care costs.

This is exactly what the much maligned but undeniably successful "trickle down" policy of Ronald Regan accomplished by cutting taxes. It resulted in lower unemployment and a robust economy. Regardless what the self-proclaimed intelligensia would like to claim, it worked. And it did so because "A" connects to "B" connects to "C". It didn't start and end with "C".

Ronald Regan attacked the causes of unemployment and economic problems, not the symptoms. Likewise, as with heath care itself, we must attack the causes, not the symptoms of health care costs.

But before we can accomplish tort reform, the vested interest must be removed. That is, the professional politicians must be replaced with those who can "follow the money" and see what must be addressed. The people who sold us, We the People, down the river must be removed and replaced. It's time for revolution.

The willy-nilly spending, unwillingness to address the real problems, arrogance and hubris of the administration and legislature over decades have lead to this. This citizen has had enough and is, by Right of the Founding Fathers, taking the matter into his own hands. I am calling for open, civil rebellion and revolt. I am actively working for it.

This is what I am doing. What are you doing?

Trust Us, We're From the Government

2010-04-09T14:34:00.003-05:00

"Buy now, pay later!"

Isn't that the mantra we where from the "discount" stores on TV? It's obvious that this is the attitude of the government when it comes to the Health Care bill. Repeatedly called to account by the constituents (whom they ultimately ignored), people like Nancy Pelosi, Steve Kagen and our "representatives" (I can't use that word without laughing) the response was along the lines of "Don't worry about it. Universal Health Coverage is a good thing. Everyone deserves insurance," and "Oh, we'll know the costs once we get into it."

Um.... WHAT?

I don't know about the Senators and Congressmen, but I have never started a home improvement or other major investment project without knowing the costs up front. And yet we were told "It doesn't matter," and "don't worry about it."

Meanwhile, those who did read the bill and do the math warned that the cost will far outstrip the income. Even the administration admitted after the fact that costs will exceed projected revenues. So what's the response? Add more taxes.

In addition to an already onerous income tax level, the administration and congress has announced that we're in for a Value Added Tax (VAT). This mean that not only will we be taxed on our income, taxed at the state level for sales, but we'll be taxed at the federal level on everything we buy as well.

We have dug ourselves into a massive deficit and, like all holes, you can't get out of it by digging deeper.

But it's not We the People who have dug this hole, its the administrations and legislatures of the last several decades. Our elected officials have betrayed our trust and their duty to "defend and protect the Constitution of the United States" and instead have put the future of the country in peril.

Hold on, though. We need to give it a chance, right? I mean, it hasn't been tried.

Not so much. The Governor of Massachusetts, against the wishes of many of his state's citizens, implemented Health Care Legislation that was pointed to by Congress and the adminitration as the "model" of how this could work for the entire country. It was held up as a paradigm. And so it is.

You see, just months after the Governor made the move to socialize and take over the insurance companies (which he did by, just as ObamaCare will do, setting price controls on premiums, etc.)
the insurance companies have run out of money to pay claims and have had to close their doors, temporarily. That is, you can't get insurance right now in Massachusetts because there's just not enough money anymore. Why not? Because the insurance companies have been forced by the state to underwrite policies on people who they previously would have avoided due to risk.

Oh, but the insurance companies are money-grubbing soulless profit-motivated scumsuckers, right? They were making so much money that they can afford to pay out. Right? They are just a whining bunch of private corporations, right? Sorry, but they are now state agencies! The nanny state of Massachussets owns and runs them and tells them who to provide coverage for. So where, I ask, are the profit motives there?

The fact is that this type of "reform" cannot and does not work. And yet our legislators refuse to acknowledge that fact. They continue to, as my dad would have put it, spend money like a drunken sailor.

But wait, you say, this is the Federal Government. They can't go bankrupt. And they know how to handle risk.

Again... not so much. Consider the housing crisis that lead in no small part to the current economic situation. What were the primary causes? The Federal Government took over lenders by specifically directing them to offer subprime mortgages to people that the lenders would not have, under normal circumstances, taken on as a risk. The lenders were told, "Don't worry about it. More people buying houses is a good thing. Everyone deserves a house. We'll handle the costs when we get into it."

Sound familiar?

But surely they've learned, right?

Well, they took over GM and Chrysler. They gave a $50 billion bailout. And yet the companies, now effectively run by the Federal Government are still $17 Billion in the red for their pension payouts.

This isn't a red state/blue state thing. This isn't a Republican/Democrat thing. Since the end of 80's, our "representatives" (sorry, threw up a little in my mouth, there) all have been on a spending spree. They have mortgaged our future and the future of our children. They have "bought now" and the "later" has finally come. The Health Care bill simply hastened that day.

They have, in direct contravention of their job as stated in the Constitution, failed to "secure the blessings of liberty, to our selves and our posterity."

Every single one of them has been complicit in this betrayal of We the People. And We the People have been complicit by our tacit assent to their shennanigans.

As I have proved beyond a shadow of a doubt, the Founding Fathers gave We the People a recourse. They gave us the Right and Responsibility to rebel, revolt and reform.

People like Bart Stupak (D-MI) have seen the handwriting on the wall. Regardless his claims to the contrary (and those smack of "methinks thou doth protest too much") he has seen that his betrayal of his constituents means that his career is over.

I'm going to make sure that my "representatives" (sorry, I'm holding my nose) know that their time is up as well. We have a chance, albeit a slim one, to stop this mess. So I reiterate that I am committed to my Four Point Action Plan:

I have purchased small American flags. Each week I am pinning one upside-down to a piece of paper and sending one each to my Congressmen and Senator with the simple notation "11/2" as a prediction and warning.
I am getting involved with a candidate.
Through the winnowing of the primary process, I am going to choose and throw my support not just to my canidate but whomever is the closest to my philosophies and opposes the incumbent, regardless of party. We have been betrayed by both parties and all incumbents must therefore be voted out.
I am, each week, going to personally and directly ask two people to do these four steps and to ask those people to do them as well. In that way, there will be a groundswell, a snowball of We The People.

This is what I am doing. What are you doing?

Wouldn't It Be Nice if Everyone Was Nice?

2010-04-07T17:24:00.004-05:00

Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it.

- George Santayana

My first blog entry, here, was entitled "I Love My Country, But I Fear My Government". That sentiment could be just as aptly applied, here. I fear my government because it has abdicated its sole responsibility to secure the Rights of its citizens. Recent decisions and policies of our government not only seek to reduce the unalienable Right of Liberty, but are openly hostile to it. Bear with me, this is gonna be a long 'un, but I'll try to keep it on point.

In the last week, two policies are being pursued which directly undermine the Right of Liberty. First in the annoncement of a new Nuclear Posture Review.

First let me be totally clear: no sane person wants nuclear weapons to be used. However, much to the chagrin of the naysayers over the last 70 years, nuclear weapons can be and indeed have been an effective deterrent to major agression. Like it or not, MAD (mutually assurred destruction) works. It insured that no nuclear or WMD-capable power launched a war of aggression. These weapons did so by their very presence, not by their use. Contrary to the sentiments of General Sline in the movie Spies Like Us, it is not the case that "A weapon unused is a useless weapon."

Now, however, the administration and legislature have decided, unilaterally, that the United States will enter into a treaty with other nuclear powers in which we will not only further reduce our arsenal of democracy but we will pledge never to use these weapons against any signatory of this accord.

On the surface, this is laudable. And I don't disagree with part. After all, how many times over does one need to be able to obliterate the face of the earth before you consider it "overkill"? However, examining it deeper, it becomes evident that this is either a very myopically optimistic view of the world or a deliberate attempt to reduce the United States from its position as the sole superpower and insurer of Pax Americana.

You see, there are a couple of provisions and oversights that have been overlooked by the mainstream media. The major non-US signatories to this treaty can, without notice, reason or justification, exempt themselves at any time from the treaty and its provisions. That is, Russia, China, Pakistan, India or any other member of the "nuclear club" can decide that they don't need to abide by the provisions of the treaty. And yet, as signatories, we will have pledged never to use nuclear weapons against them no matter what. Yes, that's right: NO MATTER WHAT.

Also, this means that if a rogue state -- say North Korea or Iran -- receive weapons or technology from a signatory, we have no nuclear recourse against the signatory. Basically, it's a Get Out of Jail Free card for other countries: "So what, I didn't attack you, they did; I just sold them the technology."

The apologists and spinmeisters say that this doesn't matter. They tell us that if a signatory violates the conditions of the treaty, they are no longer subject to it. But this ignores several facts. It ignores the fact that the deliberately murky nuclear response policy of the United States in the past has prevented nuclear-capable countries from overtly (and even covertly) exporting their technology to these rogue states. It also ignores the fact that this says nothing for non-nuclear WMD technologies.

If someone, let's say a terrorist organization, with the assistance of a rogue state who is not a signatory of the treaty (because they have no nuclear weapons) unleashes a chemical or biological attack on the United States our only response under this treaty is to wage conventional war. That means "boots on the ground". And the rogue states know that it takes quite a while for us to work up to that and that the citizens have less stomach for that than keeping our troops out of harm's way by using standoff weapons. Therefore, they are free to make first strikes at will.

Oh, but wait, we're told -- we're all adults here. In effect, we're being sold a "if we play nice, everyone else will" view of the world that is hopelessly out of touch with reality and history. Let's look back over at how effective treaties have been with countries bent on conquest.

Famously, Joachim von Ribbentrop, Nazi Germany's Foreign Minister made so many treaties that were broken by Hitler that Hitler once had an ornate box made for Ribbentrop. Upon presenting it, he told Ribbentrop that it was filled with the treaties that had been made and was a symbol of Ribbentrop's service to the Reich. When Ribbentrop opened it to find it empty, Hitler joked that he couldn't find a single treaty that Ribbentrop had made that he (Hitler) hadn't broken.

Germany was not the only one. Russia itself showed its duplicity by negotiating treaties with China, Japan and Germany which it violated at the first opportunity. North Korea, Vietnam, Iran and Iraq have, in modern times, along with Eqypt (against Israel), Argentina (the Falklands conflict) continued this dubious tradition. We, ourselves have broken so many treaties with the Native American population that it became a standing joke.

It's clear to anyone who can read that treaties are worth less than the paper on which they're printed, to those determined to circumvent them. So either the administration and legislature have the completely unfounded belief that everyone would get along together "if only" or they are purposely weakening the ability of this government to protect its citizens. In either case, they no longer insure our Right to Liberty.

The second policy announcement is that the administration and legislature have finally found a way around the Second Amendment.

For the last four decades, gun control advocates have been attempting to repeal or restrict the Rights granted in that portion of the Constitution. They have been repeatedly and soundly defeated by a citizenry that understands that this would cede its plan of last resort for maintaining Liberty to a central government.

This week, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton found a way around the voice of We The People. Instead of going through a process by which they've been defeated repeatedly, the administration has announced that it will seek a foreign treaty that will make it illegal to sell arms to United States citizens.

Having failed to sway the public in the past to remove the "demand", they instead will in effect, remove the "supply".
Why? Because they can. They can do an "end run", as they did with Health Care, around the will of the people and legislate through the judiciary or the executive branch (in contravention of the Constiution).

I'm not naturally paranoid, but having already shown that the United States is becomming, over decades, a fascist state I'm struck by the fact that, historically one of the first actions of such a state is to remove weapons from the control of the citizens. Fascist and socialist governments (Nazi Germany, Soviet Union, China, Cuba, Venezuela, the list goes on) have all made this a primary move. It's done for one very simple reason - an unarmed populace is a compliant and controllable populace.

You see, the Founding Fathers realized this. They realized that a government who has abdicated their responsibility to insure Liberty is fundamentally broken. They said 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 and they provided the citizens a means of last resort to insure that no govenment of this people could slide into such a miserable place. They provided that A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

The Founding Fathers knew what Lord Acton put into words: Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. They specifically said that when this occurs -- when a government abdicates its responsibility to secure its citizen's unalienable Rights, including Liberty, that those citizens should dissolve and reform the government.

We have the luxury of living in a time and under a system where this can be done without resort to arms. We can revolt, rebel and reform civilly against a legislature and administration that have for too many decades usurped the Rights of its citizens and has accelerated on that course.

We are on a slippery slope. I have learned from history - I fear my government. My government no longer secures my Right to Liberty. So I have a Right and Responsibility as given me by our Framers. For myself, I am committed to my Four Point Action Plan:

I am going to purchase small American flags. Each week, from now until November second, I am going to pin one upside-down to a piece of paper and send one each to my Congressmen and Senator with the simple notation "11/2" as a prediction and warning.
I am going to get involved, right now, with a candidate.
Through the winnowing of the primary process, I am going to choose and throw my support not just to my canidate but whomever is the closest to my philosophies and opposes the incumbent, regardless of party. We have been betrayed by both parties and all incumbents must therefore be voted out.
I am going to personally and directly ask two people to do these four steps and to ask those people to do them as well. In that way, there will be a groundswell, a snowball of We The People.

This is what I am doing. What are you doing?

Where the Rubber Meets the Road

2010-04-06T07:53:00.003-05:00

Today is election day. The first election day since I've arrived at my course of action. "What election?" I hear you asking. Local elections. That's right, there are local politics as well as state and national. And they are just as important, if not moreso, than those in the media spotlight.

See, here's the thing -- the same thing that prompted me to make my Plan of Action, to make my public annoucement, to create this blog -- change starts with me. The talking heads, the media, the pundits are all screaming at each other about national and state issues: about taxes, Rights, entitlement programs, etc. And while these are important issues, they start at right here at home.

We pay taxes at a local level, just like the state and national levels. And those taxes go to fund the programs, projects and works in our community. Sure, they may not have the media impact of Health Care, but they affect us just as much. Moreso, in fact, because the effects are much more immediate than things like the 2014 "kick-in" of Health Care.

The funny thing is, our polling places are expecting less than 20% of eligible voters will be showing up for this election. I say "funny" and I mean "strange". I look around, in my mind's eye, at the hundreds of people around me at the Town Hall meetings, the Tea Party rallys and other such events and I visualize only 20% of them showing up today. And yet nearly every one of the people in those hundreds seemed so passionate about change, so worked up about making a difference, so vehement about having their voices heard. Where will they be, today?

For me, this is part of the whole Rights and Responsibilities (not versus, and) thesis. Our Founding Fathers clearly gave us the Right to petition for redress of greivences; they clearly gave us the Right to make changes in our governance; they clearly gave us the Right to not just participate in, but control our politican and governing destiny. But the inseparable flip-side to those Rights are the Responsibilities to be a part of, to engage in, and to exercise the freedom of our political process. You just can't have one without the other.

And so, today, I am going to be at my polling place. I am going to vote my conscience. I am going to make my voice heard. I am going to not earn, but be worthy of the Rights given me by the constitutional documents of this great Republic.

I am going to put my money, my action, my principles where my mouth is. I am going to live up to the manifesto I've adopted. I am going to vote. What are you going to do?

Rights and Responsibilities

2010-04-05T07:07:00.006-05:00

"I have a right to..."

How many times do we hear that on the news, from friends and neighbors, or even coming out of our own mouths? It's become as commonplace (and meaningless) as the word love ("I'd love some pizza", "That movie? I loved it!") The problem that plagues many is that there are two sides to every coin, two edges to the sword, two ends to the mule -- where there are rights, there must be, by definition, responsibilities.

In the movie "Oh, God! Book II", George Burns' God character says, "my problem was I could never figure out how to build anything with just one side to it" ... "there can't be good without bad, life without death, pleasure without pain." To put it in terms my science geek friends use, "There is no magnetic monopole."

Likewise, you can't have a Right without a Responsibility.

For example, consider the right (Note: I will use a lower-case "r" when talking about something not a legal or natural right) to own a pet. Sure, you can have a dog, cat, flying spaghetti monster or whatever, but if you don't take care of it -- feed, water, clean up, medicate -- then it will die. You have responsibilities. Or how about kids? How many times I've heard someone say they have a "right to have children". Sure you do (unfortunate, in too many cases -- the gene pool needs some chlorine, but that's another thesis) but if you don't feed, clothe, care for, educate, etc. your child then they will die or otherwise be taken from you.

Sidebar: What's a right and what's a privilege? A right is something that, once assigned, cannot be taken away. A privilege is something that can be removed, temporarily or permanently by the issuing authority. Driving, no matter what the people texting on their cellphones on Highway 41 this morning might believe, is a privilege, not a right.

So what about the Rights that are granted us by Government? Well, let's look at the ones most often cited -- increasingly during the Health Care debate -- by those in favour of bigger government: Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.

Put aside, for a moment, the fact that it is the pursuit of happiness and not happiness itself that is a right and let's examine what it is that the Declaration of Independence (not, as some contend, the Constitution) actually says:

Let's take this apart:

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.

Note that these Rights - Equality, Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness are not given by the Government. They are given by God, Allah, Nature, Cthulu, Randmon Fluctuations in the Space-Time Continuum, whatever you want to call it. And they are irrevocable (hey, that's why they're called Rights, imagine that). However, they come with Responsibilities. Very simply, those Responsibilities are that each individual's Rights end at the doorstep of the next individual. That is, your Right to Life doesn't trump anyone else's.

In real terms, that means that you can go ahead and smoke your pack a day, sir, that's your choice for your Life. However, you cannot expect me to pay for your health care when you're laying in the terminal ward with emphysema or cancer. You can decide that its fun (pursuit of happiness stuff) to get "stoned to the bejesus belt" but that doesn't mean you can get in your car and endanger my life. You can be free and unencumbered by insurance if you want. But don't expect, then, to have the taxpayers foot the bill if your house gets destroyed by a hurricane.

That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.

Ruh-Roh, Rorge! A couple of things jump right out, here. First is that Government does not give these Rights. It secures them. It insures, through law and enforcement of law, that these Rights are not taken away by anyone else. It makes sure that there's that very real and hard line at the individual's doorstep. It does this by enforcing Responsibility. That's all. That's the extent of it.

And (and here's the part that rankles those in favor of centralized government) it derives its just powers from the consent of the governed. It gets its authority not from itself but by the continuous assent of those who band together to allow government to make these assurances. It is not a power unto itself, it is a government of the people, by the people and for the people.

Finally, the part that will really blow your mind:

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.

Think about that. Very simply, it is the Right of the People (that's right, us, the citizens) to remove and replace the government if it fails in its duty to insure (not provide, insure) these Rights. So, it is the Responsibility of the People to be vigilant. It is the Responsibility of the People to oversee and participate in their own governance. It is the Responsibility of the People to dissent and revolt when the People see our Rights in danger.

As I've proven in earlier posts, our Inalienable Rights are under attack. They are in danger. Therefore, it is our Responsibility to protect them, in the words of our very Founders, by rebellion.

You're given the Rights to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. They can't be taken away by any power on earth. And its your Responsibility, when Government won't protect those Rights or is, in fact, the very threat to those Rights, that you act to remedy the situation. Not by words. Not by force of arms, but by becomming involved in the process of Government. By giving your consent, as the governed, to whatever replacement is necessary to once again insure those Rights.

President Andrew Jackson, a Democrat, said "eternal vigilance by the people is the price of liberty." It's not enough to talk. We the People must act. It's mandated in our system of government. And so once again, I reiterate my Four Points for Action that I am following, each day:

I am going to purchase small American flags. Each week, from now until November second, I am going to pin one upside-down to a piece of paper and send one each to my Congressmen and Senator with the simple notation "11/2" as a prediction and warning.
I am going to get involved, right now, with a candidate.
Through the winnowing of the primary process, I am going to choose and throw my support not just to my canidate but whomever is the closest to my philosophies and opposes the incumbent, regardless of party. We have been betrayed by both parties and all incumbents must therefore be voted out.
I am going to personally and directly ask two people to do these four steps and to ask those people to do them as well. In that way, there will be a groundswell, a snowball of We The People.

This is what I am doing. This is my Right and my Responsibility. If you believe in your Rights, will you accept your Responsibility?

"Well done is better than well said."
- Benjamin Franklin

News Alert and Tax Day Rallys

2010-04-03T09:04:00.003-05:00

April 2, 2010, Milwaukee, WI - From Searchlight, Nevada, to Washington, DC, with stops in Wisconsin, The Tea Party Express National Tour III will roll through Madison, Milwaukee, Green Bay and Eau Claire.

The Wisconsin Chapter of Americans for Prosperity is co-sponsoring the Milwaukee, Green Bay and Eau Claire stops on Wednesday, April 7th with Herman Cain, radio talk show host on "The Herman Cain Show" on WSB in Atlanta, GA. He is also a speaker, author, and TV news commentator. He is President and CEO of THE new Voice, Inc., and additionally serves on the Boards of Directors for AGCO Corporation, Hallmark Cards, Inc. and Whirlpool Corporation.

Americans for Prosperity - Wisconsin will also sponsor a Taxpayer Tea Party on Tax Day,April 15th on the steps of the Wisconsin State Capitol from 11:30am to 1:00pm.

The Wisconsin State Director of Americans for Prosperity, Mark Block, says "We are excited that Herman Cain, one of the most popular speakers at our Defending the American Dream Summit, will join us the Wednesday stops of the Tea Party Express." Herman's message of Common Sense Solutions has been an inspiration to Tea Party Activist and Americans for Prosperity members across the country."

Wednesday, April 7th, 2010

9:30 - 11:00 am Milwaukee, Wisconsin

State Fair Park ( North Parking Lot Near Pettit Center)

640 South 84th Street

2:00 - 3:30 pm Green Bay, Wisconsin

Leicht Memorial Park

200 Dousman Street

7:30 - 9:00 pm Eau Claire, Wisconsin

3230 East Hamilton Avenue

Hwy 52 and Hwy 93

More information on Tea Party Express Tour and Taxpayer Tea Party - The Big One can be found at www.fightbackwisconsin.com

I Love My Country, But I Fear My Government

2010-04-01T07:48:00.000-05:00

We've been hearing the news for months: Health Care, Illegal Immigration, Bailouts and the list goes on. It dawned on me last week when listening to yet another pundit talking about the ramifications of the Health Reform Bill -- everyone's talking, but no one's saying what I can do. So I've decided to take the bull by the horns and put my beliefs into practice.

Let me set the stage.

Over the last few months there has been a lot of discussion about who is really running this country. Like many Americans (the majority, according to the polls), I've gotten madder and madder. We've heard about things like:

Government takeover of Health Care, the Insurance Industry, Banks, the Auto Industry and, soon, the Utilities ("Cap and Trade")
A massive backlash of the citizens in the form of protests and Tea Parties
The mainstream media and government accusing bloggers, protesters and talk show hosts of "lighting the fuse" and inciting violence (eventhough they can't show a single instance of this being the case)
Protests being labelled as "hate speech" when, just a few years ago, we heard that "Dissent is Patriotic" (remember "Bush Lied, People Died" and "Kill Bush"???)

The fact of the matter is that our politicians, our legislators, every single one of them have sold us "down the river". They have ignored the will of the people and have rammed through measures that contradict what their constituents specifically want. They have branded any dissent as hate speech and have embarked on policies that endanger not only the financial future of this country but the very lives of its citizens and protectors. In short, they've abdicated their responsibility and have shown that not only do they hold the citizens in contempt but that they hold themselves above and outside the law and that they are the ones who run the country. They have forgotten that we have a government of, by and for the people.

I had a suspicion that this isn't a unique situation. On that hunch, I decided to compare the Declaration of Independence to what's going on today. I was floored. Our Founding Fathers faced not a similar situation but the exact same circumstances!

So what did they do? They banded together as "We the People". As they did, I will do. I am going to revolt. I am going to say that

We The People will no longer be silent.
We The People will take back our lives, our rights and our responsibilities.
We The People will take back our government.
We The People will take back our country.

There is one and only one thing that puts fear into the heart of any politician, and that is We The People.

It's not enough just to say this. One has to, as our Founding Fathers did, take direct action. But first, as they did, I needed to "place before mankind the common sense of the subject, in terms so plain and firm as to command their assent" (Thomas Jefferson):

When it becomes necessary for people to band together and stand up for themselves and their legal and natural rights, it's common decency as well as a legal requirement to explain their reasons.

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.

The silent majority of citizens believe that its pretty obvious that everyone should be treated equally and that everyone should be able to feel safe, be free and try to pursue the American Dream. They also feel that its the responsibility of the government to safeguard - not to provide - these things. And, if the government doesn't safeguard them, that the people should be able to change the government to one that does.

It's common sense that one shouldn't change government on a whim and history shows that people will put up with a lot of nonsense instead of getting active in politics and changing things. But when a long list of abuses, scandals and ignoring the will of the people brings about a situation where they've had enough, its the people's right to say "enough's enough" and to throw out their legislators in favor of ones that will do their job.

The citizens of the United States have put up with a lot in the last few years and they've had enough. And so now its necessary, and our right, to make a change. The history of this administration and congress is a history of repeatedly ignoring the will of the people to the point of a dictatorship or monarchy. To prove this, here are the facts so that each American can decide:

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.

The United States is becoming a fascist state - that is, a place where although industry is owned privately, the government tells industry what it can produce, how much it can produce, who it can sell to and for how much. It has done this with the automotive industry, the health care industry, the insurance industry, the banks and soon the utilities with "cap and trade".

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

The "power elite" and mainstream media have made it dangerous to have any other opinions than the ones they hold. They've trumped up charges against anyone that disagrees with them. During other administrations, the chant was that "Dissent is Patriotic". Now, dissent is "hate speech". They've said that anyone who disagrees with them is inciting violence and yet they can't show a single specific instance of someone inciting violence.

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

Congress and the administration have violated the will of the people. They've gone against it by enacting legislation that the majority of the people don't want. They've made exceptions and exemptions for their cronies, special interest groups and political allies. They have plundered the future to pay for today by enacting laws that mandate spending that is higher than revenues.

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 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 cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

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

They have pardoned or released enemies of this country who have now returned to fight against us.

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:

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.

They have ignored the laws under which most American's ancestors came to this country and are extending the rights and privileges of citizens to squatters.

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.

During all this, the people haven't been silent. We have warned the legislators that we disagree. We've pointed out unconstitutional laws and even used the legal system to try and block their implementation. We have pointed out that all American citizens should be equal and that those who've come here legally have all earned the right to be a citizen. But Congress and the administration have ignored the American people. Instead, they have acted as dictators and tyrants. So, we must conclude that they don't have our best interests at heart and that they no longer represent us.

Therefore, the citizens of the United States, with the world watching, will now exercise their rights and declare that this government is at an end. We say that we are by right, free and that we don't consider ourselves the "constituents" of our current legislature. We say that we will recall and dismiss our legislators and put into place a government of, by and for the people. It is time for revolution. Not the armed revolt of the Founders and as preserved by our fathers, but civil revolt as they intended and is our right and responsibility "to appeal for redress of greivences". And we stand together, united in this cause.

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 British 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.

I am engaging in and calling for open rebellion and revolution. NOT an armed one, but the one which our Founding Fathers, in their wisdom, designed into our system. I am going to take direct, immediate action:

I am going to purchase small American flags. Each week, from now until November second, I am going to pin one upside-down to a piece of paper and send one each to my Congressmen and Senator with the simple notation "11/2" as a prediction and warning.
I am going to get involved, right now, with a candidate.
Through the winnowing of the primary process, I am going to choose and throw my support not just to my canidate but whomever is the closest to my philosophies and opposes the incumbent, regardless of party. We have been betrayed by both parties and all incumbents must therefore be voted out.
I am going to personally and directly ask two people to do these four steps and to ask those people to do them as well. In that way, there will be a groundswell, a snowball of We The People.

Indeed, 11/2 will be Change We Can Believe In.

The time for talk is over. The time for action is past. The time for revolution is now.

"All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent."
- Thomas Jefferson

You can find a copy of my radio program about this here and find a copy of my annotated Declaration of Independence here. You can post to my Facebook page here.