J. Keynes and the Pizza Parlor

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

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

"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:

1. 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.
2. I am getting involved with a candidate.
3. 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.
4. 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?

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:

1. 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.
2. I am going to get involved, right now, with a candidate.
3. 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.
4. 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

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

"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:

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.

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:

1. 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.
2. I am going to get involved, right now, with a candidate.
3. 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.
4. 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

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