Archive for the ‘Blog’ Category

Socrates said “The unexamined life is not worth living.” I believe he was on to something and so let’s indulge in a little speculative thinking. Let’s ask “What if?”

What if candidates for representative office were drafted by random lottery?

This could function something like jury duty does now. The emphasis is on duty, which is where most citizens believe it should be. Notice I am suggesting candidates be selected this way, popular vote would still decide who was to actually serve. Additionally, all the same Constitutional qualifications would still apply as are required now.

Some likely outcomes include:

Term Limits – serve your tour of duty and then come home.

Special Interests’ Power Curbed – groups could no longer promise support for a future election.

Truly Representative – millionaire status would no longer be required. Most Americans are not “rich” despite what the Left constantly asserts!

De-emphasis of “Experience” – what is political experience anyway unless it refers to effectively spending other people’s money?

Emphasis on Character – the public would be inclined to scrutinize the character of prospective candidates rather than a professionally polished image.

The most interesting thing about an idea like this lies in how it completely changes the way Washington currently operates. Power immediately returns to the people and the entrenched establishments suddenly find themselves utterly up-rooted. It stirs the imagination, don’t you agree?

Unfortunately this does nothing to rid the nation of the so called “Fourth Branch of Government.” Bureaucracies are the unelected lawmakers of the nation. Anyone have a “what if” that might rid us of their tyranny? Please let us know!

Thanks for reading.

Several weeks ago, while waiting for my lovely wife, I was listening to talk radio. I am always good for that. Anyway… up came the subject of compromise.

Compromise – it’s a word we’ve all heard our whole adult lives. The secret to a good marriage is compromise… politicians should be willing to compromise… we should all be willing to give and take – compromise… the world would be a better place if we could all just compromise; all ideally valid points, ideally. And all wrong in reality.

Compromise is nothing more than giving away something. Give me your wallet! No? Okay, let’s compromise; just give me your cash; okay, just the credit cards. That’s fair; I’ll buy you lunch. Still no? Okay, I’ll shoot you. Again, let’s compromise; I’ll just shoot you in the toe – how about the little toe? Either way, you’re losing money or blood.

Consider our lawmakers. We all have principals, and we all have ideas that we feel represent the best interest for our state and America. Conservatives have certain ideas (or at least they did): limited government, lower taxes, strong military, etc. If we compromise our fiscal principals in a “Compassionate Conservative” way, we have giving away our livelihoods. If we compromise our advocacy for the unborn simply because the best choice happens to be pro-choice, we compromised our morals. And if we weaken our military to gain popularity in the world, we compromised our sovereignty and freedom. Compromise is what brought us the McCain-Kennedy Education Bill, aka No Child Left Behind, the McCain-Feingold  Elections Ethics Bill; how has that worked for curbing the money problem in politics. Compromise brought us Medicare Part B, the auto industry bailout, and countless other boondoggles at Americans’ expense.

Why must we compromise to select or elect the lesser of two unfit candidates? The national Republican Party has been losing popularity, because it’s been losing its soul compromising on the issues and moving slowly to the left. Whereas we conservatives have been firmly planted on the right, unwilling to compromise, unwilling to give up on our values, our principles, and our foundation.

I agree with Elbert Hubbard, “It is the weak man who urges compromise – never the strong man.”

Here are a few thoughts after considering the so called health care summit…

Clearly, President Barack Hussein Obama has major ego issues. Arrogance looks as bad on him as it does on anyone else.

Republicans can stop being timid about “philosophical differences” they have with the president. Those differences are the reason we voted for them.

President Barack Hussein Obama dismisses the deeply held concerns of tens of millions of American citizens as “talking points.”

The Republicans get points for having the chutzpa to attend what everyone knew was theater directed by the enemy.

“That’s what elections are for” seems to be understood by the president as Carte blanche to bypass the legislative process. Note to the president…You are not the king!

The real problem is not  in fact health care. We enjoy the best health care in the world. The actual problem is one of delivery, it’s too expensive. Too expensive can only mean one thing…inefficiency!

Health care delivery is inefficient because there is a third party involved in the health care transaction, insurance companies. They are now the customer.

Customers make the demands, customers are catered to and served as opposed to patients who read old magazines and wait…and wait…and wait…

The reason health care is complicated has little to do with medicine, doctors or patients. It has everything to do with a third party having no medical incentive whatsoever.

The most telling and disturbing moment of the “summit” came when the President was in fact and in point incorrect about the costs of his plan. He countered with the justification that insurance would be “better” under his plan. By dismissing objective fact with the subjective notion of better insurance he clearly exposed the ultimate problem with all Liberal and Progressive ideology. They don’t believe in personal liberty, not if it conflicts with what economist and author Thomas Sowell refers to as the “Vision of the Anointed.”

They plan to see their vision become policy, even if they have to make back room deals, treat the people of different states unequally and/or subvert the legislative process to accomplish it.

Please feel free to comment and let us know what you observed.

Thanks for reading!

Most of you who were around during the Vietnam War error probably remember that famous line, “What if they gave a war and nobody came?” When Carl Sandburg made those comments, it became a cultural motto. Charlotte Keyes wrote a poem, the Monkeys recorded a song, and countless others used it in media.

So, what if they gave an election and nobody came? Those of us on the right are fed up with those on the right – a great deal of words and not enough action, too much spending, and not enough discretion, and the list goes on. And interestingly those on the left are fed up with those on the left. There hasn’t been a legitimate conservative representative in 30 years. Yes, there have been a few candidates of late who have shown some promise, Doug Hoffman, Sarah Palin, Marco Rubio, and couple others. But, every time someone shows potential the media lights them up or they fall on their face, a la Governor Mark Sanford. The mainstream GOPers are entrenched in beltway politics, the almighty dollar, and never-ending GOTV efforts.  The national Republican Party has promoted liberal candidates like Dede Scozzafava and Charlie Chris, and quietly tossed away the Tea Party as nothing more than a temporary uprising. After last week’s CPAC conference last week, the closing straw poll showed Ron Paul as the front-running conservative candidate. Yes, the same Ron Paul who drew a whopping 3.5% of the required delegates in the ’08 primaries. To us, that was significant; we are craving a conservative candidate. To the mainstream party reps, “it was a straw poll.” Go figure…

Here’s the problem I see with November, and why, I think, there may be an election where nobody shows up; at least no one on the right. In most states, there are two recognizable parties – Republican and Democrat. Some states have other parties, but the ballot requirements are outdated, unfair, and frankly, un-American. In my home state of NC for example, primaries are closed to unaffiliated voters, and this year independent candidates will likely have to have 90,000 signatures to make it on the ballot anyway. So, if those of us who are generally supportive of the GOP aren’t impressed with the GOP’s representative, we’ll likely go third party, or stay home. There are some things where you just can’t compromise.

Hmmm… compromise; there’s a post for a later day.

 The serenity of your blissful domestic existence is interrupted by a stark “Knock Knock” at the door.

Answering, you find a group of people who politely explain they have come to enslave you and your family. Oh! Yes, your grandchildren and great-grandchildren too!

Question: Do you (a) thank them for assuming this responsibility or (b) use whatever force necessary to stop them or die trying?

If the answer is as clear to you as it is to me and millions of other citizens, then we should have no trouble understanding the basis for the anger brewing in our nation. The knock at the door story portrays, with frightening clarity, exactly what has and is taking place in America. Yet politicians and the media focus on the anger and ignore the altogether legitimate reasons for the anger…how convenient!

Let’s be clear, violent acts are morally reprehensible and usually end up accomplishing nothing save injury to the innocent. Shame on those who try to use the acts of twisted individuals to either credit or discredit whole groups! Violence results when anger is the foundation upon which actions are built because at the heart of anger is malice, the desire to hurt. Otherwise why would people get angry at someone for getting angry at them?

But we do a great disservice to ourselves by refusing to explore the root cause of the issues, and they are easily discerned. In fact three words sum up the heart of the ground swell taking place in the USA.

SLAVERY

Common people with that rare commodity, common sense, understand clearly what a quadrupling of the national debt, so called Health Care Reform and underhanded back room deals mean to them and their families…SLAVERY! And it is slavery of the worst kind, to a faceless tyranny where statism swallows individuality.

DUPLICITY

Duplicity describes Liberals, Progressives and Democrats precisely. They refuse to say what they actually mean, but ever engage in redefining words to mean the opposite of what Webster (and everybody else) understands them to signify. The very label “Liberal” is misleading as a descriptor of political direction. Liberty, equality and justice, when evoked by a Progressive Liberal, have meanings which are poles apart from the Constitutional definition of these terms.

INCONSISTANCY

Now, as for Republicans who posture and pose in the fight to defeat pork-barrel spending and then line up at the trough when the hogs are slopped, disgraceful! If it was irresponsible last week then it’s irresponsible this week. Millions of Americans are coming to think that partisan fights are nothing more than comic theater designed to distract from the “business as usual” work of bilking the citizenry. Thanks, but we’d rather rent a movie… your acting stinks and you’re WAY over priced!

Behind all is a grim knowledge concerning the anger we need to fear. Broken promises make people angry and two generations of Americans have been lied to and miseducated as to the civil nature and Judeo-Christian origin of our society. Progressive promises of a New Deal were really a Raw Deal, the Great Society actually a Giant Sham, now clinging to Hope and Change we discover instead fists full of Hype and Chum.

Where will those fists be directed and who will pay the price when there is no more bread and the Liberal circus tent comes crashing down? The politician who piled up debt promising to provide prosperity for posterity? Doubtful! More likely the life and property of average citizens will be endangered by roaming mobs when the welfare jig is up.

Why, it’s enough to make you…angry.

Thanks for reading.

TO:                        President Barack Hussein Obama

FROM:                 Conservatives of all stripes

REFERENCE:    Invitation to bipartisanship

Mr. President:

We welcome your invitation to participate in debating so called “Health Care Reform.” Please understand we will not be used for political ends and will only engage in meaningful discourse. If by bipartisanship you mean for us to abandon our principles then let us assure you that will not happen.

Firstly, let it be known that health care is not a right but a privilege and therefore falls completely outside the scope and purview of Constitutional government. We will not compromise on this fundamental truth.

Secondly, it needs to be pointed out what dismal failures other government sponsored initiatives (such as Medicaid and Medicare) continue to be. These unconstitutional and misguided programs were doomed at their inception. As predicted they have swollen far beyond all initial estimates and completely failed to check costs. To call such moral disasters opportunity is a lie. We will not help you create yet another bureaucracy boondoggle and purloin more freedom from our citizens.

In conclusion let us zero in on the basis of our continued discord. It is not your goals with which we take issue but your methods. Nearly every policy you propose eradicates some freedom. The issues are valid but depriving the populace of freedom, be it personal, economic, etc. will never be a viable option, never! If you are hopeful that “putting everything on the table” demands we consider turning our backs on the principles of personal freedom and personal responsibility the answer is a resounding NO!

Mr. President, are you willing to discuss methods? If so we look forward to a meaningful dialogue.

PS.  Can you help us identify the fundamental principles you and your party will never abandon? We are sure there must be at least one.

Completely Sincerely,

We, the People, of the United States of America

My wife is a multi-talented woman with charms that still captivate me after twenty-six years of marriage. But of all my bride’s enchantments none is more irresistible than her white chocolate chip cookies. In fact, I have a confession to make. If she bakes them I will eat.

You can safely infer two things from the above: First, the goodies are indeed good! Second, my resolute resistance is, well, pretty much irresolute. Don’t laugh…you couldn’t resist either! But if we fail to resist baked goodies with frightening regularity, what about governmental goodies?

Our system of Representative government was established to safeguard our political, economic and personal freedom. That’s the way it was designed to function. But now we send men and women to Congress to “get our fair share of the pie.” Completely understandable given the existence of such a “pie” but that’s just the problem.

It Should Not Exist!

“The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.” – Alexis de Tocqueville.

Do you and I have the courage to follow truth to logical conclusions? Certainly the politicians don’t. And we can’t really blame them for doing what we ask them to do, that is, getting our “fair share” of pork and entitlements. Such waste of money is absolutely shocking! (In someone else’s state.) The real issue is the pie. If it’s there we will eat it.

The stated goals of many governmental initiatives are good and desirable, at least to someone. But these goals must be philanthropic rather than governmental or they degenerate into political tools. The existence of the pie changes everything including motives and behavior. The pie causes us to lose sight of the long term best in favor of the short term good. The pie makes us believe we really can have something for nothing.

The conclusions are inescapable. The Federal government must stop all programs not specifically mandated (enumerated) by the Constitution. Yes, that means social security too. See what I mean about courage? The only alternative is slavery and tyranny just as de Tocqueville (and so many others) predicted.

Let’s have the courage to at least start the conversation and conduct it in civility.

Thanks for reading.

Talk about a middle class dream home! It was brick with three bedrooms, two bathrooms, a garage, concrete patio, fenced-in back yard situated on a half acre plot in the “good” part of town. What more could a young family need? It was truly a wonderful place to live and raise a family. But beneath the surface (literally beneath the floor) there was a cracked drain pipe which leaked warm, bacteria laden water every time the washing machine operated.

The results, although slow to be noticed, were none the less devastating. The base of the residence became a breeding ground for mold, mildew and who knows what else. The very foundation of the home was “living” and changing. Only a tremendous effort saved the structure from total collapse. The really sad news? A simple inspection followed by some low-skilled maintenance and the whole ugly, costly episode could have been avoided.

The moral of the story is A FOUNDATION THAT IS “LIVING” DESTROYS THE HOUSE.

Don’t you find it alarming that people claiming the Constitution of the United States to be a “living” document are everywhere trying to kill it? I believe this is the defining thread pulling various groups on the Right together. Give us back our Constitutional government! Let this be the rally cry of Libertarian, conservative and Tea-Bagger alike.

Let’s not kid ourselves; we are past the point where a simple inspection and a little maintenance will do. We have to do difficult things that are going to be painful. Perhaps most difficult of all will be to admit we were wrong. The truly “Great Society” provides equal opportunity, not redistribution. Redistribution is only a disguise for slavery and tyranny. No more “New Deals” it was a lemon, just give us back Old Ironsides.

Through neglect, we the people have seen our foundation become infected with a disease called Progressivism. Make no mistake, Progressivism means to progress beyond the Constitution. Those who trumpet this tune mean to completely change America. The infection has spread, our foundation is crumbling, and our civil society is on the brink of collapse.

We can still vote the bums out. The question is, will we?

Thanks for reading.

 Imagination is a wonderful and useful tool, or an awful and wicked weapon, depending upon how and why it is employed. Every act of every man, woman, boy or girl takes place first in the imagination. Sobering, wouldn’t you agree? I don’t believe we could “imagine” a more powerful and significant concept than imagination.

So how does imagination apply to the body politic? The answer is simple: imagination is a factory. Notice that it is not the raw materials but the place where these inputs are built into a product. Next we have to consider the process and it goes something like this. Observations about the current state of affairs are measured against the “way things ought to be.”

Stop right there, don’t gloss over that sentence!

Thoughtful observation yields empirical evidence, objective facts, if you will, most everyone agrees upon. But the word “ought” presents a serious problem, namely, inescapable subjectivity. Appeals to “the way things ought to be” necessarily demand an accepted standard. That’s precisely where it gets sticky, personal and political.

The standard of what ought to be can find origin in only one of two places. Either it is external transcending mankind and is objective, or it is man-made, synthesized and quite subjective. This presents special problems for the so called Liberal as they find themselves on the horns of a dilemma.

The mission and reason for existence of the Liberal is to “liberate” mankind from outside, transcendent values and behavioral standards. But then they must imagine a system which administers this absence of objective truth as, well, an objective truth. The horns of the dilemma are long and Liberal thinking is wholly skewered upon them. Let’s embark upon a thought experiment that will help our understanding.

Imagine a society where everyone does what is “good” (whatever that might mean) for their neighbor, where everyone willingly shares and everyone gives their best efforts regardless of who will benefit from the work. In short, imagine a complete reversal of the observably verifiable nature of mankind. Now imagine the best way to administer such a utopia and, voila, you arrive, more or less, at the core concepts of modern Liberalism. This is the “ought to be” in the Liberal imagination factory. The obvious fallacy is starting with a false view of mankind.

Imagine, instead, a society where we observe man’s natural tendency towards self-interest and then begin to devise a systemic solution that harnesses that selfishness to serve the desires of the society at large. Knowing that selfishness fully applies to those who govern or administer power is kept in check to avoid despotic tyranny. Placing power and faith in a system safe guards our freedom. This is the “ought to be” of the Conservative imagination factory.

To put it in other words and more succinctly, Liberals start with a fictitious view of mankind as an input in their factory. Conservatives begin with observable objective fact as a raw material for their factory.

Like it or not appeals to what “ought” to be imply a transcendent standard of “good.” The standard either comes from outside man, reflected in words like “…we hold these truths to be self-evident, that men are CREATED equal and are endowed by their CREATOR…” or the standard is synthesized by man, reflected in notions such as a “living constitution.” One is systemic and objective; the other is despotic, developed and applied subjectively.

What do you think?

Faith is an absolute requirement for those lacking omniscience. Everyone relies on things they can’t see and don’t fully understand.

Depriving individuals of their inalienable rights is slavery and tyranny, even if 51% vote for it!

Equality of outcomes is immoral. It is also quite impossible outside a completely totalitarian system.

Equality of opportunity is a God-given right the protection of which is a legitimate use of coercive police powers of government.

For a person to disagree with you does not automatically consign them to the “lunatic fringe.”

Classic literature became “classic” for a reason. Read it and discover why!

If you’re not reading Thomas Sowell that could be your problem.

If you’re not reading the Holy Bible that’s definitely your problem!

Rejecting a culture based on the character of what it produces is not bigotry. Accepting a culture in spite of what it produces is not virtuous.

Words and rhetoric can be used to communicate truth or falsehood but only truth can be consistently demonstrated.