No doubt, there are many factors, and opinions, that could be cited, as to how our country has arrived at this point in our history; but, please allow me to share a few of my general insights:

In The United States, indeed, every citizen should have the God-given right to vote; however, in our Federal Constitution, The framers gave The United States Congress 16 explicit, and Enumerated Powers, to which they could legislate; all other matters were to be left to the respective states.

Sadly, over the years, Congress has completely rejected these limitations; and, as a result, has allowed our country to be enslaved in debt; and, with trillions of dollars in unfunded liabilities, for so-called entitlement programs.

As a result, from their lack of prudence to our Constitution, our Congress has enabled the voters to vote for almost anything that any legislator could dream up! Therefore, while Congress has been constitutionally-elected, they have still set the stage for the voters to knowingly, or unknowingly, vote their fellow citizens out of their freedoms and property.

And, this is likely why we still have the ‘illusion’ that we have our Constitutional Republic; when, in fact, our Federal Government has been transmuted into a quasi-Socialist National Government.

For many years, and particularly over the last few years, we hear the term Conservative, used, generally, to describe the political right, in The United States; but, can such an ambiguous word be used to accurately describe the political right? Are all said Conservatives indeed to the political right?

According to the Founders of The United States, the further left, is the addition of more Government, and the further right, was less Government. Therefore, the furthest left would be, rightly called, tyranny; with the furthest right, anarchy. (ref.) It is said that the majority of Americans are center-right, which, in my humble opinion, would accurately describe where our Founders positioned us, Constitutionally, in 1787.

If we were to sub-divide the word, Conservative, we could begin to really start breaking it into many different sub-categories; to name a few: Social Conservatives, Christian Conservatives, Political Conservatives, and Constitutional Conservatives.

Unfortunately, and perhaps, naturally, I suppose there is a general hypocrisy in most politics, in all countries; but, in The United States, it really does seem that most people, in some way or another, wants our Federal Government to be limited; in other words, less intrusive in certain areas of our lives. On the other hand, while most people want a Limited Government in some areas, they still want The Federal Government to intervene in other areas of our lives. This thinking is not only arbitrary among different groups of constituents, but, it lacks any sort of cohesion upon which we can have a Federal Government that is fair, just, limited, and operates with any sort of real continuity.

Allow me to elaborate:
read more…

Well, sadly, here we go again! Last night, The United Nations approved a ‘No Fly Zone’ over Libya. Isn’t that wonderful? Has anybody, who is reading this, voted for members of The UN?

Today, I called the offices of Congressman Boehner, and Cantor; as well as my own Representative. Congress, our ‘elected officials,’ did not even have a vote as to whether or not America should be involved at all, in Libya! Therefore, we not only have ‘unelected’ officials determining our foreign policy, but we also have ‘unelected’ officials, at The Federal Reserve, who are likely funding it. But, in the long-run, of course, we will be expected to pay for it!

Regardless of what is happening in Libya, there is no apparent threat to The Continental United States! Our Constitution says that only “Congress” can provide for The Common “Defense,” and Declare War:

–
Article 1, Section 8:

“The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States”

“To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water; To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years; To provide and maintain a Navy; To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces”

“To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions”

“To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress”
–
read more…

I, Pencil, is a famous essay, published in 1958, by Leonard E. Read, who founded the Foundation for Economic Education, in 1946. This beautifully, simplistic, essay, clearly demonstrates, through the eyes of a pencil, how a free-market, free from Government-intervention, or coercion, allows millions of people from all ends of the world, through hard work, and individual initiative, to provide for the needs and desires of a free people.

Enjoy!
–

read more…

In this very unfortunate time, in our country’s history, we have come to a point, economically, where we are faced with some very daunting choices…

Naturally, and understandably, there are things, that, as a nation, we have come to expect from our Federal Government; whether they are wholly Constitutional, such as having a military to defend our nation; or were created without explicit Constitutional authority, as with Medicare and Social Security, these three things, among others, are often referred to as sacred cows. They are referred to as such, because, while the majority of Americans appear to be realizing that we do, indeed, need to make some tough fiscal choices, in regards to Government-spending - generally-speaking, it is always some one else’s programs, or sacred cows, that, when asked, should be the first to be cut, or eliminated.  I suppose that should be of no surprise, as it is a very part of our human-nature to not want to be forced into making potential, life-altering decisions.

Irregardless, according to most professionals, these are the three items, in our Federal budget, that seem to be placing our Federal Government, and country, in very serious danger of  going broke. Therefore, in my humble opinion, all programs, and all agencies, in the Federal Government, must be put on the table; and every American, who really wants to see our country be passed onto future generations, as a free and prosperous nation, must be willing to make some difficult choices.

Most, if not all, Americans, would agree, a military is absolutely critical to our security; and, like it or not, millions have become dependent on Medicare and Social Security. For these reasons alone, these three items, in our country, are classified as the third rail of politics; simply, because, they are very hot things to touch, politically. And, generally-speaking, only the most honest of politicians will give us the truth, in regards to the sovereignty, and longevity, of these three items. 

While some, in our Federal Government, including our President, have publicly acknowledged that Medicare, then Social Security, are the two Government programs, that, if unchanged, will put our nation most at risk, few are putting fourth any serious legislation that would deal with any of the these increasing monstrosities.

I don’t have all the numbers, and I am not an economist, but one idea I have heard, and really liked, was to block grant Medicare and Social Security down to the respective states, and let the states manage them, and decide their fates, going forward. That would not only be a great step, Constitutionally, in regards to states’ rights, but it would also allow our Federal Government to get back to the few things that they were initially created for, by our Founders; while, getting their own fiscal house in order! read more…

As most Americans are aware of, The First Amendment of The United States Constitution, contains these words:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” 

As Americans, we should be outraged by the horrific, and tragic, shootings, that took place, last weekend, in Tuscon, Arizona. And, we should all want our Representatives, and all members of Congress, to feel secure, when they are out seeing their constituents. However, even more frightening, in light of this tragedy, is some members of Congress, who think they have some right of ownership over our speech, and political discourse, are talking about creating new laws that would regulate certain types of political discourse in America! That would not only be outrageous, but very misguided, and very un-Constitutional!  

Everyday, I hear political discourse, and often from Congress themselves, that is infuriating, and divisive! However, I would never, in a 1000 years, go out and harm another person, simply because I don’t like what they are saying! 

Consider this:

So often, in the last two years, we hear members of The Democrat Party, in Congress, and The President, himself, perpetually bash rich people, and perpetuate this class-warfare, divisive, rhetoric. Now, God-forbid, if a poor person were to go out and start gunning down millionaires, can we call for a Federal investigation of members of Congress, for antagonizing murder? Of course not! Even the thought of it is ridiculous!

And, if Congress were given the ability to regulate speech, where would it end? And, how long would it be before they start regulating our religious freedoms? As our Founders, wisely, knew: such powers, in the hands of a central government, would undoubtedly become arbitrary, and inevitably, despotic! In fact, in countries where the Freedoms of Speech are suppressed, it is very likely that the bigger guns do prevail! Our Freedom of Speech, and free elections, are absolutely necessary for free people to vent their frustrations, and discontent, with their government; which, ultimately, prevents a free nation from digressing into a chaotic, and despotic, state! read more…

Inflation is caused by excessive currency printing by our Federal Government; and, inflation causes our currency to devalue; which, in return, causes the price for goods and services to rise…

To continue with their current level of spending, our Federal Government basically has two options:

1. Borrow more money from other countries – which increases our national debt; causes the interest on our current debt to compound further; and which needs to be paid back at some point in the future.

2. Raise taxes on the citizens.

Since raising taxes is not very popular, politically, and continuing to borrow money is not very prudent, our Federal Government, instead, creates money out of thin air, to support their desire to spend more money. Therefore, anyone who insists that our Federal Government spend more money, without cutting spending in other areas, should keep in mind, that, all people, of all income levels, at some point, are going to be affected by inflation. And, likely, not too far in the distant future. For anyone who remembers the late 70s, not much else really needs to be said.

While the current income tax rates were recently extended by Congress; and, while it is better, economically, for people and businesses to keep more of their own money – as long as The Federal Government continues to create and spend more money it doesn’t have, eventually, down the road, this will still be tantamount (in the form of inflation) to a consumption-based, or national sales tax. For these reasons, and several others, it is said that inflation is the most insidious tax of all. read more…

In this 1959 interview, Mike Wallace is interviewing the famous author, Ayn Rand; who is most famous for her 1957 novel, “Atlas Shrugged.” In this interview, Rand, eloquently, and intelligently, explains how, and why, Capitalism is far superior to Socialism; and what has gone wrong with The Free-market system, since our Founders first implemented it, with the creation of our new Republic.

Enjoy!

–

–

Below, in this December 14th, Fox News interview, Sean Hannity is debating Congressman Anthony Wiener over taxation in The United States.

In this interview, I agree 100% with Sean. I am beyond tired, and frustrated, with this class-warfare rhetoric that is coming from the hard-left of our Federal Government!

The United States was founded on the idea of Equal Rights and Equal Protections. And, this quasi-Socialist rhetoric, coming from the left-wing side of our Federal Government, is not only disconcerting, but, potentially, very divisive to The American people!

I pray that all Americans of good faith, will not allow this nonsensical, and irresponsible, rhetoric, to put a wedge between you and your fellow citizens! The only thing that I really hear coming from Congressman Weiner is, we The Federal Government, know better then you commoner peasants in the private sector. This interview really crystallizes the classic debate between Collectivism vs. Individualism.

–

As most Americans are aware of, in The United States’ Federal Government, we have three branches of Government: The Executive Branch, which includes The President, Vice-President, and their cabinet; The Legislative Branch (Congress), which is made up of The Senate and The House of Representatives; and The Judicial Branch, which is The Supreme Court. But, do we really have three branches of government? …

After it was decided by the framers of our Constitution to incorporate the theory of seperation of powers, as conceived by Charles-Louis de Secondat (Baron de Montesquieu), the question, of course, then became: how do the occupants of these three branches get elected or appointed?

While the framers debated as to how The President of The United States shall be appointed, the opinion seemed to be most in favor of allowing Congress to appoint The President. There were also some who thought the state governors should appoint The President. And, finally, some who thought The President should be elected by a popular vote by the citizens. After much debate, it was decided, that allowing Congress to appoint The President was a slippery-slope to legislative tyranny, as it could have made The President beholden to those who appointed him, if he were to retain his position of power. The framers, not thinking it was prudent to allow an often uninformed, and disengaged, citizenry, to directly elect The President, decided on creating the electoral process (Article 2, Section 1, Clause 2), which directed state legislatures to select electors (virtuous and trusted citizens) from their respective state, and these electors would select two people who they would elect as President – with the most votes being President, and the runner up, Vice-President. The number of electors was to be equal to the amount of Representatives and Senators that each respective state had in Congress.

And, here is where it began to get dicey:

read more…

While The Constitution is The Supreme Law of The Land, we should always keep in mind, that,
The Declaration of Independence not only declared our independence from England, but, was also a declaration, by our founders, of their philosophy on governance, and the foundation for the newly established United States.

Keynesian Economics, which derives from The British economist John Maynard Keynes’ 1936 book, The General Theory of Employment, has had a recent resurgence in The United States, as well as in several other countries around the world.

Historically, in The United States, these economic theories were employed in The Franklin Roosevelt Administration, during The Great Depression, in the 1930s. And, most recently, starting with The Bush Administration, and increased, exponentially, during The Obama Administration.

I could begin listing a host of reasons why, economically, I don’t believe Keynesian economics is a viable system, however, there are 1000s of books on this subject, and tons of information on the Internet. I would prefer to take a more philosophical approach:

Our founders, in The United States, created a Constitution which clearly limited the powers of The Federal Government; as evidenced by the enumeration of (explicit) powers to Congress, in Article 1, Section 8. And, to The President, in Article 2, Section 1.

Keynesian economics presupposes that our Federal Government can tax the citizens of The United States for any amount they like, and spend it in any way that they see fit! This presumption is not only a subversion to our free-market system, as set fourth by our founders, but it’s also an abridgement to the freedoms of The American people! Every dollar that our Federal Government taxes away from the citizens, is one less dollar the citizens have to feed their families, pay their bills, and create, or invest into, their own businesses – which provides sustainable capital, and employment, for more citizens! There is also a presumption that they, The Federal Government, can mandate and manage the very goods and services that The American people are to acquire!

If our founders were so certain that The Federal Government could solve all problems, they certainly would not have limited it’s powers! And, most certainly, they would not have created a Republic that allowed “free-people” to pursue their own lives, and their own happiness. Clearly, our founders fought a war because of the same style of top down, heavy-handed, government, that made them feel oppressed by Great Britain in the late 1700s!

For anyone who believes a central government can solve all the problems of the it’s citizens, then Keynesian economics may work for you. But, for those who still believe in individual liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, as declared by our founders, then we must see that this growing Federal Government is reduced, exponentially! And, bound by the chains of The Constitution, as conceived by our founders!

–

After two long-suffering years of these unbelievably left policies of The Democrats and The Obama Administration, I am so thankful to finally be able to see the November – midterm elections on the near horizon. It’s hard to believe that only a little over two years ago, I too was a Democrat. It was after doing hours of reading, on the history of political parties in our country; their platforms over the years; and free-market economics, that I came to realize, in principle, I really am a Jeffersonian Republican.

That being said, it won’t be hard for one to surmise that I will likely be voting Republican in November. If for no other reason, it will be to restore a little more balance in our Federal Government, in hopes that the pendulum will start to swing the other way, toward a smaller government, and a more stable economy.

While I am trying very hard to be optimistic for the future of our country; and while I am heartened to see so many Americans waking up to the political and economic realities that are now facing our country, I still find myself having trouble to be overly optimistic about The Republicans coming back to power in D.C. While I am very thankful to The Bush Administration for their strong and relentless fight against the terrorists after 911, there seemed to be very little effort to control our national debt, while growing the federal government, exponentially. Of course, in retrospect, the amount of debt accrued under The Bush Administration, seems almost welcoming in comparison to the debt accrued by The Obama Administration. Regardless, let’s face it, both parties, especially over the last 10 years, have played vital parts in placing our country on its current trajectory.

Some people will argue: after spending two years in the wilderness, and after much reflection, The Republicans have learned the error of their ways - this very well may be true; however, our country is in a very precarious state right now, and if sound, conservative, policies are not put in place, our country may not get another chance to reverse course, and not spiral out of control.

read more…

Unfortunately, it looks like The United States economy is starting to slip backward again. This doesn’t come as a surprise to those of us who have been opposed to most of the spending policies of The Obama Administration, and the current Democrat majority in Congress.

Certainly, over the last 10 years, both parties are to blame for the fiscal irresponsibility, and lack of prudence with tax-payer money;  however, the current spending policies, which appear to be mostly ideological, do not promote the growth needed to get the economy moving again. In fact, many of us would agree, that the current policies are making our situation much worse.

Please watch Bill O’Reilly on the state of the economy:
–

–

In this previous post, there is a video of David Asman, interviewing three guests, which included Congressman Ron Paul; they are discussing a recent poll of 1000 American voters, who were asked, is President Obama a Socialist? 55% of those polled, answered yes…

Politically speaking, this is, of course, very good news for The Republican Party, with the upcoming midterm elections in November; however, to have a President, or anyone in our Federal Government that advocates such policies, is never a good thing. It is certainly one thing to be in a political science class, or on a college campus, discussing different political systems; and theorizing why certain systems may have succeeded or failed; it is quite a different story when people are elected to high office and attempt to put such policies in place; especially without an overwhelming consensus from the people who elected them to office!

And regardless of ones motivation to advocate such policies, Socialism has a proven record of failure, and makes no real sense, economically-speaking; it generally requires a top down, authoritarian type of government, which, inherently, makes it a very dangerous system to a free nation.

Certainly, most Americans are not opposed to some short-term, transitional, social programs, to help fellow citizens get back on their feet; but The American people also realize, this great country was built on hard work; and most people in society, one way or the other, can be a useful and productive member of society.

Most of The American people have an intrinsic desire to be productive, and believe in freedom, and our free-market system of commerce and enterprise. And, because of our history, most Americans realize, the free-markets are a great contributor to what has made our country free and prosperous since the days of our founding.

Since the very early days of The Obama Administration, many Americans have claimed that President Obama is a Socialist; or he at least advocates Socialist policies…

Now, after one and a half years of Obama’s presidency; some very questionable political appointees; and after a long string of redistributive, and general far-left policies, 55% of The American voters say that President Obama is, indeed, a Socialist.

Please watch David Asman’s interview with Congressman Ron Paul and guests:

–

–

–

–

As with many Americans, I have been thinking about Arizona, our borders, our immigration laws, and how this all relates to our most treasured, and necessary, United States Constitution. 

Undoubtedly, for many years, under several administrations, and spanning both parties, there has been a failure to effectively secure our borders. Sadly, like many other things that are wrong in our country, failure to secure our borders is greatly due to political posturing; as opposed to doing what is morally, and judiciously, right for The American people. Most Americans would agree, our borders need to be secured, once and for all! And failure to have done so, after 911, is truly reprehensible! 

In a time when people are simply attempting to survive job losses and economic challenges, I am reminded of how our country was founded and what turn of events transpired to bring about the greatest experiment in self- governance that has ever been conceived. To fully appreciate how far we have moved away from the original designs of our founding documents, we must first understand where it is that our country came from. In particular we should look at the personal aspirations of the brave souls who fought against all odds to not only come to this new land, but then to battle the tyranny of government from afar and overcome hardships that we dare not imagine.

The history of the United States is mired with many tragic events, wars, popular and unpopular political leaders and outspoken critics of government. Certainly there is no shortage of those types of folks today, however there is a key difference between the political leaders of history and those of today. The missing ingredient – in this writers eyes – is honor. Many, and dare I say most, of our political leaders lack honor. Not ’honor’ in the classical sense, but rather an honor that is so deep that it is espoused as a permanent and integral part of their essence. This honor is of the highest magnitude, it surpasses doing what is right simply because it is right and it holds a stronger bond than any familial blood line; no, this honor is about doing what is right because not doing it would grate infinitely harsh against the inner core of your being, such that you would rather suffer immeasurable and irreparable harm than fail at preserving it.

Too often our political leaders view holding office as a power grab, despite their assertion otherwise. It ends up being their golden parachute or fulfilling an internal desire to be famous. Whatever the reasons may be, it is seldom that we find true statesmen. Who do we have, or have we had in our midst in the last 20 years that would begin to measure up against the bar set so high by those such as George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and Samuel Adams. Certainly they exist, but unfortunately they are very rare. The political climate of today instead reflects the poor quality of self-deserving politicos who would rather do what is expedient for the purposes at hand and forgo doing that which is honorable.

The interesting thing here is that it stems not from politicians, but rather the citizens of this once great country who vote them into office because their personal needs would be better served by a political type buying votes as opposed to one doing what is right and just – honorable. Of course we must not forget those who do not vote, as an abstained vote is tantamount to condoning the status quo or roughly the same as a vote against the trailing candidate. But then this isn’t a lesson on why one should vote, but rather why it is important that we maintain the utmost respect for an institution that transcends individual desires.