Originally posted on 11/13/09 at ConservativeCompass.com

When does the Obama administration begin?  Twelve months?  Eighteen months?  Two years?  Just tell me so we can stop with the mantra "It was much worse than we thought" and "Bush left us in a mess".  I am far from an apologist for President Bush, but for all his shortcomings, he didn't leave the United States many trillions of dollars in debt, with double digit unemployment and fighting a foreign war with the apparent goal of protracted stalemate.  More troubling still, Islamic extremists have become emboldened enough to strike us on American soil once again.  I just want to know on what date I can lay this train wreck squarely in the lap of this administration and Congress, and start holding them accountable for the consequences of their mis-management and irresponsibility.

Further, in return for the billions we've spent in "stimulus money", the American people have received:

Banks that still refuse to loan money for fear that they will be audited by the Government and found to have insufficient capital.

People driving new cars that were subsidized by taxpayers at over $20,000 each.

One million phantom jobs "saved or created", while four million real jobs vaporized.

A future tax burden that will hurt small business, chase big business offshore and assure increasing poverty and dependence upon Government for the American people.

A published unemployment rate of 10.2% which is bogus because it doesn't include people who have fallen off unemployment as their benefits were exhausted or the self employed sitting at home watching Oprah.  I'm betting it's closer to 16-19%.

Ownership of a big shiny car company.

Dependence on foreign oil that hasn't decreased one gallon since February 2009.

A toxic business climate in which companies are paralyzed by fear of the unknown, and crippled by lack of short term capital and onerous regulation.

A Government that presumes to tell us what the fruit of our labor is worth, based on some skewed sense of social justice and "fairness".

I could go on...

Where does it end?  On the horizon we've got Cap and Trade legislation that will increase energy costs for Americans while redistributing wealth to foreign countries.  We've got the health insurance reform bill that will destroy medical care for 80% of Americans just to cover 10%.  There will be immigration reform that I predict will offer some kind of amnesty or sanctuary to illegals in this Country (and get them that health care).  We've got school districts that want to feed not only breakfast and lunch to school kids, but dinner to
them and their families as well.  I've even seen the suggestion that we nationalize sick leave to cover all American workers because of the H1N1 virus.  What's a few more bucks anyway?

Where does it end?  When the ink runs out on the printing presses?  When the money in your wallet, bank account and 401-K isn't worth the paper it is printed on?  When we level the playing field to the point that no one succeeds, excels or triumphs in this Country anymore?  When we all succumb to inefficiency, mediocrity and corruption in a Government that controls every aspect of our lives from cradle to grave?  

The American people are concerned.  Largely, they haven't gotten what they voted for.  They want to believe in their President, but frankly he scares them.  People have a real concern about the future.  If they're out of work, they know how ineffectual our Government has been dealing with the economy.  If they are working, they live with the daily knowledge that things can change in a heartbeat, and there is no indication for anyone that things are going to get better soon.

So where does it end?  It ends where Americans draw the line.  When they finally say "enough is enough".  When they tell their lawmakers loud and clear that paybacks are hell and their pink slips are in the mail.  It ends when we start voting them out, and those remaining realize that being a Congressman or Senator is not a lifetime appointment.  It ends where citizens care enough to take back this Country and return its governance to people who love it and the principles it was founded upon.  It ends when we decide it ends.  We just have to muster the resolve to fix something that has gone terribly wrong.

Originally posted on 11/06/09 at ConservativeCompass.com

One thing is for sure about this week's election results:  Everyone has an opinion.  What does it mean?  What effect will it have on 2010 and 2012?  Is this a wakeup call for the Liberals and Democrats?  Is it an invitation to Conservatives and Republicans to become over confident?  Was it simply a replay of patterns we have seen for years?  It may be all of those things including a figurative warning shot across the bow, but who's ship is being fired upon?

There were some notable Republican victories to be sure, but don't read too much into that.  The Democrats are quick to think this is all about them.  They flatter themselves.  In reality this election was a referendum against "politics as usual" and any politician that doesn't get that, R or D is in for some trouble.  At the town meetings we could only shout.  In an election, we can end a career.

This isn't really about red or blue.  It is about dissatisfaction with our current leadership.  The American people are tired of duplicitous, corrupt, self-serving lawmakers.  Americans are tired of being lied to and they’re tired of seeing elected officials say and do whatever is necessary to remain in office.

This is the democratic extension of the Tea Party Movement.  Everyone whether they have had their say or not, will now and forever speak with their vote.

If politicians want to survive this movement, it is very simple.  All they have to do is stop lying to the American people.  They need to tell the deadbeats in our society to get off their butts and work hard for what they want just like everyone else.  They need to stop trying to take the rewards of that hard work from those who are successful, only to distribute to those among us who refuse to provide for themselves.

They need to understand that the solution to social problems is not the formation of 111 new federal agencies.  They need to know that the success of a program is not judged by the number of digits in front of the decimal point, but by careful consideration of its consequences and results.

The events of this week were indeed a shot across the bow of any politician who has forgotten that the American people sign their paycheck, and that they hold office at our will.  Their political affiliation will not be refuge, only integrity and common sense.

Originally posted on 10/25/09 at ConservativeCompass.com

It has been a reoccurring theme in many of my posts that the Obama administration is playing a game of massive misdirection.  I've been imploring American Conservatives to keep their eye on the ball, and pressure on their lawmakers.  I've been reminding our citizens to avoid diluting their energy by dealing only with the things that are truly important.  Over the last several months however it has become almost impossible to ignore the troupe of "useful fools" populating the White House, and I believe that is by design.  No matter how capricious or senseless it may appear, nothing this administration does happens without careful planning and calculation, and this collection of whackjobs is no coincidence.

President Obama isn't a fool and he wouldn't surround himself with them if he didn't have a reason.  His group of Czars and advisors is the screwiest collection of radicals, leftists and revolutionaries ever to collect a Government paycheck, and he knows it.

Valerie Jarrett, Eric Holder, Cass Sunstein, Van Jones, John Holdren, Kevin Jennings and many more, must have been vetted by a White House that not only knew of their backgrounds, but sought them out, and today revels in their radical views.  Only when they become a liability as did Jones, does this administration relieve them of their "duties" and send then to work at some Liberal think tank.  

I know this sounds crazy, but it is almost as if the President maintains this batch of unrepentant miscreants just so they can take the heat and distract attention from what is really going on in Washington.  It seems every time Obama wants a little cover for his pet projects, one of these useful fools suddenly comes under increased scrutiny.

So although these people are dangerous and disturbing to anyone who loves America, believes in our Constitution and is a patriot, we have to be careful about allowing them to occupy too much of our attention and energy.  When this administration ultimately and inevitably runs its one term course, these kooks will be history, and their ideas and philosophies will be relegated to obscure academic publications.  The big things however, health insurance reform, cap and trade, immigration law and nationalization of our largest business sectors will have far reaching effects for many years to come.  That is what we need to be watching.  That's what you gotta' get excited about.  Don't wait for another round of town meetings.  We have to stay after that other batch of fools, the members of Congress who think we aren't watching.

Originally posted on 10/17/09 at ConservativeCompass.com

In one of my posts a couple weeks back, I criticized the Republicans for not having a viable alternative health care proposal.  Further research has proven me to be inaccurate in that charge.  I was convincing enough however, to have my blog post picked up by NPR online.  It's funny what those people will believe if it supports their agenda.  At any rate, while my original point was that the Republicans haven't been widely promoting their proposals and amendments, there is a Democratic engineered reason that they look as if they have brought nothing to the table.

First, let's be clear:  The Republicans presented HR-3400 (Empowering Patients First Act) to Congress back in July of 2009.  It was immediately sent to the House Appropriations Committee to die a quiet death without seeing the light of day in the House. In addition, in spite of all the President's talk about "bipartisanship", the Democratic controlled Congress has thwarted every Republican attempt to add amendments to various health insurance bills working their way through the House and Senate.

This total freeze out of Republican input is not surprising in the context of what Nancy Pelosi and the House did back in January of this year, prior to President Obama's inauguration.  As described by Connie Hair in a January 5th article at HumanEvents.com :  

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi plans to re-write House rules today to ensure that the Republican minority is unable to have any influence on legislation. Pelosi’s proposals are so draconian, and will so polarize the Capitol, that any thought President-elect Obama has of bipartisan cooperation will be rendered impossible before he even takes office.

In reaction, the House Republican leadership is sending a letter today to Pelosi to object to changes to House Rules this week that would bar Republicans from offering alternative bills, amendments to Democrat bills or even the guarantee of open debate accessible by motions to recommit for any piece of legislation during the entire 111th Congress.

With this backdrop of House majority thuggery, is it any wonder the Republicans are reluctant to sign on to Democratic bills?  Why should they support any legislation they've had no input on?  I can't say I disagree. 

This isn't about being obstructionist or the "Party of no".  This is just the same as Pelosi's pre-preemptive rules change in January.  It is politics, pure and simple.  They are saying loud and clear that the Dems have a majority and can pass this disaster if they want, without bipartisan support.  They are telling the Democrats to do what is best for our Country, and if that includes passing this legislation, they can own it, and we'll see how it all shakes out in 2012.

Originally posted on 10/10/09 at ConservativeCompass.com

The Swedes have exercised their yearly ritual attempt to show their relevance in the world wide picture.  They awarded the Nobel Peace Prize to President Barack Obama, not apparently for his accomplishments, but rather for what they hope he will accomplish.  Admittedly I am not a scholar of the Nobel Prize, but I think this approach is a bit of getting the cart ahead of the horse.  Even Obama's most ardent supporters were left scratching their heads over the announcement, but the Nobel committee's past winners list should leave no one surprised by the capriciousness of this current decision.

In many ways it appears as if the Nobel Committee is trying to guide and formulate a future agenda by awarding their prize to particular individuals.  Some past winners include:

Al Gore and the IPCC  (2007)
"for their efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change, and to lay the foundations for the measures that are needed to counteract such change"

Jimmy Carter  (2002)
"for his decades of untiring effort to find peaceful solutions to international conflicts, to advance democracy and human rights, and to promote economic and social development"

UN and Kofi Annan  (2001)
"for their work for a better organized and more peaceful world"

Yasser Arafat, Shimon Peres, Yitzhak Rabin  (1994)
"for their efforts to create peace in the Middle East"

It's a good thing they don't rescind the award for future failures.

Additionally one might ask:  If the Nobel Committee is so smart, how come they missed the most famous and celebrated peace activist of all time, Mahatma Gandhi?  He was nominated on several occasions, but never received this revered award.  If you want to see a piece of skillfully crafted spin, I recommend you read the Committee's own explanation at: http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/articles/gandhi/index.html .  They even go so far to suggest that they left the Peace Prize un-awarded one year to honor him.  "Thanks a lot."

So here we are today with the Nobel Peace Prize being awarded to President Obama.  Never mind that the nominations had to be submitted only 12 days into his new administration.  Never mind that the Prize is to be awarded for accomplishments of the previous year.  Never mind that the world doesn't seem any more peaceful than it was under the previous President.  Never mind that Obama's previous year was spent as a Senator from Illinois who was campaigning non-stop for the office of President...  I present to you:

Barack Obama  (2009)
"for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples"

In his own words, Alfred Nobel wrote in his will:

"The capital shall be invested by my executors in safe securities and shall constitute a fund, the interest on which shall be annually distributed in the form of prizes to those who, during the preceding year, shall have conferred the greatest benefit on mankind."

Notwithstanding those crazy Swedes, I must have missed something.

Originally posted on 10/03/09 at ConservativeCompass.com

The news broke today that Late Night television host David Letterman has been the victim of an extortion attempt by someone threatening to expose his sexual trysts with various co-workers.  Ordinarily his conduct really wouldn't be newsworthy except for the half-wit trying to get rich quick by shaking Letterman down.  Over the past year, David has had an issue with Sarah Palin, using her and her family as fodder for many jokes both humorous and in some cases cruel.  Now that his private, personal life has become public, I thought it would be interesting if Sarah Palin were to send him a letter of support and condolence.  It might go something like this:

Dear David,

I can't tell you how sorry I am that some deranged person has violated your privacy and exposed you and your family to public ridicule and scrutiny.  Believe me when I tell you, I know the pain and heartache that one endures when personal matters become public through no fault of their own.  We, as public figures expect a certain amount of interest in our lives and families.  We don't however expect to have our lives laid bare for all to see and criticize.  There are limits of decency that all too often are set aside by people in pursuit of financial gain.  David, I know you will persevere and put this behind you.  Time will dull the sting of these personal violations of your privacy and hopefully the future will offer you and your family the appropriate separation of public and private life that everyone deserves.

God Bless,
Sarah

Originally posted on 09/30/09 at ConservativeCompass.com

Today I had an epiphany.  It was as if the sky opened up and revealed to me the basic fundamental universal truth of humanity, responsibility and our relationship with our Government.  The debate over Government controlled health insurance reform has presented to me a matrix by which we can structure our society now and for the future.  It all comes down to one simple concept, that of "God given rights".

While listening to a radio call in program, I heard someone make an impassioned case that quality health care is a God given right to everyone regardless of their socio-economic standing or ability to pay.  He totally rejected the concept of for profit business with regard to doctors, hospitals or insurance companies.  In his world, some high moral authority is charged with deciding what is right and fair for American citizens and
business.  Strangely, it is all starting to make sense to me.

I'm so on board with this guy, that I would like to add a few suggestions for other areas of human need that could be interpreted as "God given rights".

I believe that access to food and shelter is a "GGR".  We can't allow fellow citizens to starve or live under the stars just because they aren't gainfully employed.  Let's mandate that grocery stores must give free food to anyone who's family is living under four times the poverty level.  There are also plenty vacant houses and apartments around.  Why doesn't our Government just buy them up and give them to people who have no place to live?  In addition, since we don't want them to lose their homes because they can't pay property taxes, we should waive, subsidize or just cover the cost of taxes related to shelter.

In addition, all Americans have a right to be comfortable and safe in their homes.  That is why Government should make electricity and gas free to all who can't afford it.  Phone service should be a right as well, you know for safety and security.  I'm only suggesting land lines, not cell service...that would be crazy.

The right to work is important.  Everyone who wants a job, should get one.  If work is not available, or the worker is unqualified, the Federal Government could set up "job banks" just like Detroit.  Job bank participants can earn a wage while sitting in large Government cafeterias and doing cross word puzzles all day, just like Detroit.

The ability to travel freely is a "GGR".  Everyone needs a vehicle and fuel to run it.  How about a "clunkers for the poor" program and gas vouchers or Government paid credit cards?  Better yet, we could provide hybrid vehicles for the poor.  Social justice and green too!

It is a "GGR" for every citizen to be informed.  For that reason, the Government should cover the costs of not just the converters, but also cable television and Internet access for all Americans who can't afford it.

Everyone has a right to look good.  How about covering the costs of make up and tattoos?  Maybe cosmetic surgery?

Shoes, nobody should have to go barefoot in this Country.

Wow!  I'm feeling so good about myself helping all these downtrodden citizens.  Power to the people!  Stick it to the Man!

Silly, I know, but it brings us to an interesting point.  Who presumes to determine what is a right for Americans and how it will be paid for.  What happened to the virtues of hard work, education, innovation and paying your own way?  As has been the case time and again with this administration, those virtues are becoming irrelevant.  This invasive Government and Liberal administration insists on choosing winners and losers, and in doing so destroys our free market and blurs the line between right and wrong.  We do have "God given rights" to be sure, but they have nothing to do with forcing others to pick up the check for goods or services we desire.

Originally posted on 09/16/09 at ConservativeCompass.com

Jimmy Carter continues to remind us why he presided over the most lackluster, embarrassing single term of any modern President.  Why anyone listens to him or finds him newsworthy is beyond me, but his nutty comments this week have the main stream media buzzing.  I guess race pandering, especially when dished by an ex-president is simply too delicious to pass by, so the major networks gave it more time than deserved.  In doing so, they largely ignored real news about illegal ACORN activity, the war in Afghanistan going badly, medical professionals overwhelmingly opposing the Government health care plan, or the estimated costs of Cap and Trade being many times more than the White House was admitting.  At any rate, the favorite pastime of Liberals, name calling, has taken center stage and the American people are becoming weary of this worn out tactic.

Ex-President Carter asserted in an interview, that anyone in America who disagrees with Obama's policies, does so because they are racists and don't believe a black man should be running this Country.  This comment is so patently stupid, it doesn't really deserve acknowledgment.  However, it has started a mini-avalanche of similar sentiments from other officials trying to defend this administration by ignoring the true issues and redirecting criticisms of substance into the straw man of racial discrimination.

I get a sense that the impact of such language is waning with the American people.  After all, we've been called Nazis, hate-mongers, flat earthers, obstructionists, mobs and so on.  The words of racial hatred, a powerful weapon for so long, are losing their ability to shock, intimidate and coerce.  Increasingly, the purveyors of verbal terrorism are finding their rhetoric is losing its power to control, and they must confront the facts and argue the actual issues.

Ironically the people in this Country who clamor the most for a level playing field, aren't interested in playing the game if they don't have a trump card ready to toss in when their arguments fail.  I believe that Jimmy Carter is wrong.  I believe that the majority of citizens who disagree with President Obama's policies, do so because they don't agree with the intent or consequences of those policies.  I also believe it is time for Liberals like Carter to stop using race as an excuse, and hatred as a defense for lousy policy.  It is time for them to join the rest of us, and judge President Obama by his ability, political philosophy and content of character...  Not the color of his skin.

Originally posted on 09/14/09 at ConservativeCompass.com

In 2008, Lil Tuttle wrote a book review of Amity Shlaes' "The Forgotten Man" for the Clare Boothe Luce Policy Institute.  I could spend a lot of time and energy writing my own review of this excellent book, but at the end of the day, it would be no better or more insightful than Ms. Tuttle's.  Instead I have chosen to  reprint it here.  Hopefully you will find time to read "The Forgotten Man" because it is a glimpse into America's future, drawn from America's past.  Written in 2007, this book really has nothing to do with President Obama, and yet, it has everything to do with President Obama.  If you are concerned about the direction this Country is heading, it is a read well worth your time.

What happens if government intervenes in a nation’s economic crisis and makes it worse? Amity Shlaes tells such a story in her book, “The Forgotten Man: a New History of the Great Depression” (HarperCollins).

School children are generally taught this standard history lesson about the Great Depression: The 1920s was a period of false growth, high living and low morals brought to a halt by the 1929 stock market crash. The crash led to crippling inflation and the nation’s economic collapse. President Franklin D. Roosevelt took control and ushered in the New Deal to revive and save the nation.

Drawing upon original records by and about the era’s major public and private players, Shlaes provides an insightful, and markedly different, account of that period of American history.

The 1920s was a decade of true economic gain during which the radio, telephone, and automobile dramatically improved American life. Between 1927 and 1929, the Dow Jones Industrial average (DJI) doubled from 168 to 343 – a rise that reflected the DJI’s best effort to quantify the value of American electrification and industrialization. The 1929 stock market crash (in which the DJI plunged from 343 on August 1st to 230 on October 29th) was a necessary correction of a too-high stock market. However, it alone did not cause the Great Depression.

The “annihilating event” behind the Depression was deflation (not inflation), which neither Herbert Hoover nor Franklin Roosevelt fully understood. Both presidents blamed business and businessmen: Hoover for “uncontrolled speculation” and FDR for businessmen’s greed and selfishness. Both presidents “preferred to control events and people” and “overestimated the value of government planning.”

What made the depression “great” was unbridled government intervention in the marketplace. Hoover ordered wages kept artificially high (which increased business losses and unemployment), instituted new trade tariffs (which sparked retaliatory tariffs by Canada and Europe), and imposed a “class tax” (the top tax rate jumped from 7% to 63%, choking investment capital). By 1932, the economies of at least 8 other nations were on the rebound, but the U.S. economy languished.

Entering office in 1933, FDR made “different but equally disastrous errors.” He created myriad new federal regulatory, aid and relief agencies: some useful, some inspiring, and some ultimately so harmful that they delayed the nation’s economic recovery for a decade. In one year alone, his National Recovery Act produced 10,000 pages of new federal laws – an amount exceeding the entire legislative output of the federal government in the preceding 144 years!

FDR set consumer prices and imposed an array of new taxes on individuals and businesses, some of which were retroactive and deliberately vindictive. His justice department aggressively persecuted and prosecuted successful industrialists whose chief crime was resistance to his New Deal programs. His administration’s war on private investment capital caused it to flee the U.S.

FDR also carved out favored political constituency groups – namely farmers, big labor unions, and senior citizens – and bestowed upon them unprecedented government largess. Although he would eventually press for passage of the old-age Social Security pension program for political reasons, FDR initially resisted it for budgetary reasons, telling his Secretary of Labor Frances Perkins:

Ah, but this is the same old dole under another name. It is almost dishonest to build up an accumulated deficit for the Congress of the United States to meet in 1980. We can’t do that. We can’t see the United States short in 1980 any more than in 1935.

FDR didn’t get all he sought. His attempts to nationalize the utilities and health care industries were unsuccessful, as was his effort to change, by decree, the structure of the U.S. Supreme Court.

FDR’s relentless experimentation with the nation’s economy created uncertainty, uncertainty turned to insecurity, insecurity became fear, and fear paralyzed the private sector. America was simply a bad place to invest.

In January 1938 - nearly 10 years after the stock market crash - the DJI stood at only 121 and the unemployment rate was again soaring to 1931 levels: 17.4% and climbing to 20% within months. FDR’s New Deal programs were losing in the courts and wearing thin with the electorate, even among disillusioned classic liberals in his own Democratic party. In mid-term elections that year, Republicans won 80 House seats, 8 Senate seats, and 11 governorships.

Whatever good intentions FDR may have had, Americans and the U.S. economy were worse off for the New Deal. Editors of the Economist in London would later conclude that “institutional obstructions to a free flow of capital” caused the U.S. to make no economic progress in the decade of the 30s. Employment in America didn’t reach 1929 levels again until World War II, and the stock market didn’t reach its 1929 high until a decade after FDR’s death.

The Forgotten Man

“The Forgotten Man” was a familiar theme in the popular culture of this era. Yale philosopher and classic liberal William Graham Sumner created the “Forgotten Man” within a larger argument for classic liberalism and against the new socialism that was sweeping Europe. Sumner defined this man as the individual coerced to pay for others’ dubious social projects:

As soon as A observes something which seems to him to be wrong, from which X is suffering, A talks it over with B, and A and B then propose to get a law passed to remedy the evil and help X. Their law always proposes to determine . . . what A, B, and C shall do for X.

But what about C? There was nothing wrong with A and B helping X. What was wrong was the law, and the indenturing of C to the cause. C was the forgotten man, the man who paid, “the man who never is thought of.”

FDR appropriated the Forgotten Man theme and successfully redefined him to fit his evolving liberal-progressive political agenda. In the 1932 campaign, his Forgotten Man was the one “at the bottom of the economic pyramid” – the poor man in need of government aid. In his reelection strategy four years later, FDR’s Forgotten Man wasn’t a man at all; it was the constituency interest groups – large voter blocks – to whom he granted special government privilege, notably farmers, big labor unions, and the elderly.

Whereas Sumner's classic liberalism emphasized the individual, his God-given natural and property rights, and the free-market economy, FDR’s liberal-progressivism emphasized special interest groups, their government-granted rights, and a government centrally-planned economy. His new political strategy would become his party’s standard for decades to come.

In 1940 a former Democrat and FDR ally, Wendell Willke, ran as the GOP presidential nominee against FDR reminding the nation of the original Forgotten Man. “Whose forgotten man?” Willke asked in his convention acceptance speech. “Is it enough for the free and able-bodied man to be given a few scraps of cash … is that what the forgotten man wanted us to remember?”

Willke argued no, that classic liberalism was about the primacy of the individual and his freedom … that economic growth, not government, would lift the U.S. out of its troubles … and that wealth redistribution was a loser’s game. Alluding to home and abroad, he contended it is “from weakness that people reach for dictators and concentrated government power …”

Although Willke won 22 million votes (more than any GOP candidate before him), FDR had built a powerful political machine of voters under obligation to him, including millions of newly registered Social Security workers. These constituencies, a promised truce in his assault on business, and a looming world war gave FDR the votes he needed for an unprecedented third term.

There is no good reason to believe the economic and political policies that didn't work in the 1930's, are going to work today.  Shlaes' book only points out the brilliance of George Santayana's quote:  "Those who do not learn from the past are condemned to repeat it."  Hopefully we can all learn from this well documented past, and alter our course before it is too late.

Originally posted on 09/08/09 at ConservativeCompass.com

Ok everybody, take a deep breath and re-group.  Pick your battles carefully and do not lose sight of the goal.  Everybody is now all excited about President Obama addressing the school children of America.  I've read the speech and it is posted on this site for you to see.  Senator Rick Santorum believes it is a sanitized version of the original speech, rewritten only after questions were raised about the "study guides" sent to teachers by our Department of Education.  Since I can't prove otherwise, I'm willing to take the speech as it now exists at face value and consider it a typical pep talk.  A more important element of this whole story however, is its effect upon our Conservative goals with regard to this administration.

The American people are intoxicated with their new found power.  Citizens who have never in their lives raised a question, much less raise their voice in protest, are realizing that Government of the People, by the People and for the People is more than just a inscription on some dusty museum display.  It is a living, breathing phenomenon that they have resurrected and are taking to Washington in the form of meetings, questions and debate, the likes of which Government has never seen in the history of this Country.  Stay peaceful, stay respectful and don't dilute your energy.

But beware.  Things like this school speech controversy, misdirect your attention.  They are also perfect opportunities for the Left to accuse Conservatives of acting like crazy people.  Right now, we've got President Obama so locked down and under scrutiny that he can't scratch without someone criticizing him.  I used to call it the Britany Spears syndrome.  For a while, she couldn't do anything right.  But we have to be careful to chase what is important, and let the silly stuff go.  Don't dilute your energy.

Another example is those of you who want to prove that Obama is not an American, and therefore not legally entitled to be President.  You need to get over it.  At this point it wouldn't matter if you had documents indicating he was born on Mars, the fact is he was duly elected by the American people and he is going to be President for at least four years, so we all may as well make the best of it.  Don't dilute your energy.

The health insurance plan is utmost in people's minds right now, but don't forget that Cap and Trade has not been finalized, it only passed in the House.  It is almost a sure thing that immigration reform of some kind is in the works, probably early next year.  This administration and its Diversity Czar in the FCC would love dearly to shut down free speech (Conservative) on the airwaves, and this is an area that will require continued vigilance for years to come.  The Employee Free Choice Act has not gone away, it is just temporarily off the radar screen, and Obama continues to surround himself with people who have radical affiliations and even more radical beliefs.  Don't dilute your energy.

Take comfort in small victories.  You got rid of Jones.  There are still five or six more Czars that have to go.  The Dems are in disarray as they try to patch together some consensus for their stunningly expensive health insurance scheme.  President Obama has become tentative, weighing his words and actions against a backdrop of widespread public questioning.  But don't let up, he didn't get where he is by being faint of heart.  The battle for the future of this Country is far from over.  Stay focused on the important things and ignore the static, but most of all, do not dilute your energy.

Originally posted on 09/06/09 at ConservativeCompass.com

More and more, Republicans have become content with failure.  They lost the Oval Office. They lost the House and Senate, and they lost tight races in individual states.  Now this Country is locked in battle over a Liberal health insurance plan that could well bankrupt America. It won't be enough to just defeat the plan.  Most Americans regardless of political philosophy believe that the health care system and how we pay for it needs some improvement.  The Republicans must not be content with merely diluting Obamacare, but rather present a complete, fiscally responsible and easily comprehendable alternative solution, and they've got to do it now.  If they don’t, they will risk yet another defeat that their party and this Country cannot afford.

Every time a Democrat wants to defend their crazy Government insurance program, the mantra is:  "Republicans don't have a plan."  It is time to take that excuse away from them.

I know that Republicans are basking in the glow of vocal town hall meetings where the American people have been rejecting this administration's spending frenzy.  Citizens don't like what they've seen so far, and they don't have much faith in what is still coming from the powers in Washington.  If the Republicans wish to build a strong foundation for 2010 and beyond, this is the perfect opportunity, and they'd better not squander it.  These newly awakened patriots and citizens are not protesting party politics as much as irresponsibility and lack of accountability in our Government.  I doubt that they will put up with baloney from either party anymore and we’ve seen how hot it can get.  Unless they want to be skewered like their associates on the other side of the aisle, Republicans better come up with more than just objections.

It's not enough just to make the other side lose.  You've got to bring something to the table that will benefit the American people.  I'm no great thinker, but here are a few specific suggestions that might get the GOP started:

• Tort reform.  Too much money is wasted for malpractice insurance and needless tests to protect health  care practitioners from unreasonable settlements.
• 100% covered care for terminal patients with one year or less to live, to preserve quality of life for the remaining time they have left.
• Insurance premium increase limits keyed to cost of living.
• An entitlement program for people with pre-existing health issues.  We put up with entitlements that are a lot less worthy than this.
• Extension of patent terms for non-generic drugs allowing pharmaceutical companies a longer time to recover development costs.
• Allow tax deductions for all out of pocket medical expenses, not just a small percentage as is currently the case.
• Health care vouchers for the hard-core needy.  These could be distributed at emergency rooms in cases where the patient does not require emergency care.  Recipients could then use the voucher to visit a general practitioner.
• Allow insurance to be purchased across state lines to encourage competition.
• Catastrophic assistance like "medical bankruptcy" to keep families from being financially ruined by big ticket injury or disease.

None of these ideas would require gutting our current health insurance system, or forcing anyone to change their preferred coverage, and I would bet they wouldn’t cost over two trillion dollars to accomplish.  

Michael Steele the chairman of the Republican National Committee was recently asked in an interview on Fox News for specifics of an alternative plan, and couldn’t come up with a single point.  There is a little general, outdated information on the Internet, but you’ve got to go looking for it.  This issue needs more than that.  The RNC should be taking their proposals to the people via television, radio and print media and they should be hitting it hard.  If they don't, they will be forcing the American public to once again choose between the "lesser of two evils", and we know how that can turn out.  Representatives Cantor, Boehner and Senator DeMint, now is the time.  This battle is too important for all of us, to once again accept failure.

Originally posted on 09/03/09 at ConservativeCompass.com

My mother always told me that hanging with the wrong people could get me into trouble.  What she said made sense.  Many times I saw kids who were generally good and decent, end up in trouble with the law or expelled from school because they had let bad kids negatively influence their behavior.  It's true, we may all be judged by the company we keep.  This brings me to the issue of some people who were recently hired to work in the Federal Government.

Van Jones is the new Green Jobs Czar.  Mr. Jones has a history of not choosing his associates carefully.  In 1993 he was arrested at the riots following the acquittal of police officers involved in the Rodney King beating.  In 1994, while a member of STORM (Standing Together to Organize a Revolutionary Movement), he was arrested again in a confrontation with police.  Displaying a continuing pattern of bad decision making, he was arrested again in the 1999 Seattle WTO riots.  By his own admission, he progressed from a  revolutionary to a rowdy nationalist to a communist.  And now, an advisor at the highest level of Government.  A strange trip indeed.

John Holdren is the Science Czar.  Being an educated man of science, Mr. Holdren is fully aware that any country has finite resources, and therefore a finite ability to provide for its citizens.  That would include food, shelter and access to health care.  He does however support novel methods of population control.  In his own words:  "In the United States individuals have a constitutional right to privacy, at least to the extent that a woman has a right to choose not to have children. But that right's not unlimited. Where the society has a compelling subordinating interest in regulating population size, the right of the individual may be curtailed."  I guess in his world, rights are only rights if they don't run afoul of "compelling subordinating interests".

Regulatory Czar, Cass Sunstein certainly has some interesting ideas.  He is concerned about the open freedom of the Internet and at one time proposed a Government requirement for political websites to display links to opposing ideas.  If that's not screwy enough, he thinks animals should be able to engage counsel and be able to bring suit against humans when they've been poorly treated.  I wonder if putting ketchup on a good steak would qualify.  He also wants to ban hunting in this Country.  Apparently gotta watch out for the animals, but when it comes to involuntary human sterilization or organ donation, well that's another story.  I don't know about you, but a Regulatory Czar with such off the wall ideas doesn't make me feel real warm and fuzzy.

So to get back to my mother's advice, these three Government appointees have exhibited strange behavior and even stranger ideas.  Could it be because they have been negatively influenced by the company they keep?  Have they had their heads turned around by all the people they have associated with in the past.  Probably not, since I am sure they were all thoroughly vetted before being brought into the White House.  Could it be that there is some more recent contact who has had a powerful effect on them?  What one person do they all have in common?  What one person has assembled them for purposes we can't know.  Could it be...that guy named Barack?

Originally posted on 08/27/09 at ConservativeCompass.com

This week we said goodbye to the "Lion of the Senate"  An era has truly come to a conclusion.  No matter your political affiliation or philosophy, it is undeniable that this Country reflects in many respects the influence of the Kennedy political dynasty.

I remember vividly as a youth, living the American hell of losing our President, John Kennedy to an unimaginable act of violence.  So much promise, unfulfilled.

As a teen, I was emotionally crushed by the loss far too early of Bobby Kennedy, who we were certain would lead our Country out of the darkness of war and into the bright daylight of peace and prosperity.

In those days like most young people, I was quite liberal and my naiveté was as unbounded as my hair was long.  Since that time, I lost a lot of my hair and most of my gullibility.  I also worked hard, raised a family, bought a home, owned several cars, paid taxes and became conservative.  As a result, I never held Ted Kennedy in the same high regard as his two older brothers.  That's not to say that his passing isn't sad.  No one wants to lose a member of the family, and my sympathy goes out to the Kennedys and Teddy's close friends and associates.

Over the years I have found it difficult to support virtually anything Senator Kennedy has proposed and I've had a real problem with his sporadic lapses of judgment.  In spite of that, I have respected him for his single minded determination and his considerable political skills.  I have wished that the Conservatives could have fielded more lawmakers like him.  One or two Senators or Representatives with his drive, his passion or his credibility and perhaps we wouldn't be in our current political position in Congress.

Though I didn't agree with his approach, I believe that Ted Kennedy really wanted what was best for this Country and was in his own way, a patriot.  He should be remembered for his tireless pursuit of what he thought was right.  His personal shortcomings are between him and his maker now, so Ted Kennedy rest in peace.  You've earned it.

Originally posted on 08/24/09 at ConservativeCompass.com

We are Americans, and we have a right to debate or disagree with any administration--Hillary Clinton

Go ahead, fill in the blank.  Angry mob, traitor, racist, hatemonger, nazi, flat earther, you name it.  I don't know about you, but I am getting tired of being dismissed and called derisive names just because I am a concerned American citizen.  The Liberals are reeling at the formidable resistance developing against their agenda, and are stunned that true, patriotic Americans are finally standing up and saying "enough".

"Ridicule is man's most potent weapon."  That is right out of Saul Alinsky's playbook.  When you can't debate the issues because you have no facts, you throw insults.  Watch Barney Frank.  He is a master at this tactic.  Ask him a tough question, and he will turn it around and put you on the defensive so fast you don't even know it happened. He was in rare form at last week's town hall meeting.  But so too were other members of Congress, who, with cameras rolling showed us all an unbelievable level of disdain, arrogance, elitism and disconnect from their constituents unprecedented in American politics.  These people really do believe the 2008 election gave them carte blanche to do to us and this Country whatever they wish, and they intend to make you pay dearly if you dare to stand in the way.

This post isn't about health insurance reform, cap and trade or the immigration battle that is sure to come.  It is about our lawmakers disrespect for the American people, and their constituents in particular.  In the last two weeks, we've seen Representative Jackson Lee talking on her cell phone as a cancer survivor addresses her at a town hall.  We've heard Arlen Spector tell his town hall attendees that he "isn't getting paid to appear there", (oh waaah).  And Washington State's Representative, Brian Baird making ridiculous comments about a Ryder truck parked out front meant for him.  Nobody has lynched you yet Brian, you're still good.  Finally, we had to endure Representative Frank belittling and insulting the concerned citizens of Massachusetts and Nancy Pelosi whining about swastikas offending her sensibilities.  Funny, that symbolism didn't bother her a bit when it showed up at protests against President Bush.

Our administration is no better.  In addition to setting up a web site that perpetuates lies, they wanted your fellow citizens to turn you in for "fishy" comments about their proposed programs.  The White House press secretary daily derides and ridicules any and all debate about administration policies, while being unable or unwilling to provide honest answers to honest questions. Robert Gibbs is in fact the "Wizzard of Ahs", seeming incapable of giving a straight answer within a single coherent sentence.

These people are embarrassing, and we as Americans should be embarrassed if we put them back in office.  It has become clear that most of our lawmakers are nothing special, but rather buffoons in business suits.  They are consummate carpetbaggers who play the system for their own gains, and they are not through with us.

A week ago we had momentum.  The administration blinked.  The Liberals are in disarray.  They are scrambling to salvage the pieces of their health insurance program and they fully intend to force it though the Senate by reconciliation.  Do not allow that.  You must keep the pressure on your lawmakers in Congress.  There is only one thing they love more than money, and that is staying in office.  You have no control over how much money they make, that is taken care of pretty well by the lobbyists and special interests.  You do however, have a lot of control over how long they stay in office, and you must make that abundantly clear.  Let them know, that call us what they will, they have not yet begun to see the angry mob.

Originally posted on 08/16/09 at ConservativeCompass.com

My friends, this morning the news is good , but beware, we face a determined foe.  The Obama administration is waffling on the so called "public option" health insurance reform.  They are signaling the possibility of dropping it from the legislation.  Anyone with half a brain who read the CBO report knows that regardless of the various contentious provisions of the proposal, in whole it is fiscally unsustainable.  What if the projected cost of this program balloons to nine times that estimate as Medicare did?  Do we have any reason to believe that this federal program will be different from any other? Here are the facts:

“Medicare (entire program). In 1967, the House Ways and Means Committee predicted that the new Medicare program, launched the previous year, would cost about $12 billion in 1990. Actual Medicare spending in 1990 was $110 billion—off by nearly a factor of 10.”

Having said that, now is a very dangerous time.  Like minded Conservatives around the Country are pushing hard enough for the administration to yield a bit.  But watch out.  There has been an unbelievable amount of money poured into this "public option" effort by many powerful special interest groups and industries.  They will not walk away quietly or without a fight.  If we let off on the pressure one bit, they will be back with their plan.  They may call it something else (we have a short memory), or they may try to introduce it in small disconnected increments hoping we won't see the whole picture (we're a bunch of bumpkins).

Stay at it.  Stay vigilant.  This is a victory that can be won if we only want it bad enough to not give up.  We've made our voices heard, and the Liberals in Congress are running scared.  This is proof that our Country can move in the right direction, if we only hold our lawmakers accountable to our will.  We may well win this particular battle, but the war to force common sense and fiscal responsibility upon the current leadership is far from over.  Don't go home yet.