October 23, 2009

Whatever Happened to the Hippie Slogan "Question Authority?"

by: Guest blogger Jon Thomas

Well, it's looking more and more like the Democrat party is using any means necessary to pass legislation which will take over anywhere from 18-20% of our increasingly nationalized economy, public opposition be damned. Behind closed doors, (transparency for Democrats,) Senate majority leader Harry Reid, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel, and Obama's 'brain', David Axelrod are busily bypassing the legislative process by essentially reconciling the several health care reform bills into one. These people have only contempt for you and your petty Constitutional protections. Reid, Pelosi, and Democrat stenographers in the press continue to blame Republicans for the difficulties they are having, and are seemingly oblivious to the fact that Republicans are completely powerless to stop any legislation! Remember Obama's admonishment, "We won?"

This is only the most recent contradiction of the radical-lefts promises of "open" and "transparent" governance when they were wresting control of our country from the ravages of the "Republican monopoly on power." But now the shoe is on the other foot and faced with the reality of actually governing the radical left sees no problem with a monopoly of their own. The fact that the Mao-admiring left holds itself to no standard is nothing new and to enumerate their hypocrisy would be a Quixotic endeavor. But I digress.
What I cannot understand, however, is why otherwise intelligent people, with so many examples of government ineptitude on display, are so willing to surrender their personal sovereignty to an incompetent federal government with its unaccountable bureaucrats. All of the greatness enjoyed by this nation are the product of liberty and the free market system and yet we seem indifferent to turning it over to an ever more powerful central government, our grandchildren be damned. Today significant numbers of people cannot get a swine flu vaccine because of the 1993 Clinton-era Vaccines for Children program. This law compelled vaccine producers to sell vast quantities at half price directly to the feds to be distributed to the poor and uninsured. Who could be against that, right? The unintended consequences however, were a dwindling number of producers and routine shortages of all types of vaccines. Oh but it will be different when we get health reform and let the government run it all. Um....right. The dirty little secret is they have got to have government run health care because Medicare/Medicaid is quickly going bankrupt. (See, "A Case Against Government Health Care" http://tinyurl.com/nsa98t)

The Imperial pay czar Ken Feinberg is kneecapping company executive salaries that took TARP funds. On principle, I feel if you get in bed with the government don't complain when you get smothered. However, as a stockholder, is capping salaries in the best interest of the long term prospects of the company? Honestly, put yourself in the position of having your salary cut by 90%. Regardless of whether you make minimum wage or millions, are you willing to stay and take it? If you're honest, you'll admit that you would go looking for work at a non-TARP company. What do you think will happen when all of the talent leaves the government run companies? And when the central planners in White House get slapped in the face with that reality guess what happens next? Well, then the government will be 'forced' to put the same pay restraints on those who did not take the TARP money. It's only fair right? And, maybe, the government will just have to take over the other companies anyway. It's the only way we can get the peoples money back from those greedy Wall Street types, you know?

Our country has lost its skepticism of power and those who seek to obtain it; we notice only the slick packaging and promised results. In granting power to fewer and fewer at the highest levels we must ignore the tyrannical nature of concentrated power and suspend the principles of human nature and economics in order to convince ourselves that the predictable results will be different this time. Isn't that insanity? Are you truly willing to bankrupt your grandchildren for your own personal gain? Are you truly willing to give up liberty, fought for with blood and treasure, for your own comfort, leaving future generations no choice but to expend more blood and treasure to retrieve it? We simply must wrap ourselves in the armor of knowledge. Never leave it to the wolves to assess the danger in the bush.

One of the original hippie idealist, Benjamin Franklin said it best "...it is the first responsibility of every citizen to question authority."

Won't you take on your first responsibility?

Minor editing by: Keith D. Rodebush

October 18, 2009

Fear, Hatred and Insanity = Modern Politics

Why do liberals hate George W. Bush so much? Of course, he's a member of the Republican party and that gets you the typical stereotypical attacks of rich, racist, war mongering reprobate, but the level of hatred vehemently espoused towards our former president was not known since Richard Nixon's glory days. In reality, George Bush was more liberal socially than many democrats in congress. His spending policies were rivaled only by those of Franklin Roosevelt and Lyndon Johnson. Liberals purport to want to embrace Muslims and have closer ties to Muslim countries. George W. Bush liberated tens of millions of Muslims from oppressive dictatorial regimes, setting up governments with at least some semblance of democratic format which could become friendly nations to the United States in future middle east policies. If liberals really love Muslims so much, wouldn't they love a president who helped so many of them? Liberals love government programs that interfere with all minutia of our everyday lives. With 'No Child Left Behind' and 'Medicare part D' ol' George solidified the government hold on education and health care in America. Don't even think about educating your child or providing for your parents health care without first checking with Washington D.C. Thanks, George, we appreciate your 'smaller government' stance there buddy! So why on earth would liberals hate a like minded politician? Well, the answer of course is, fear and hatred are all the democrats have to offer their constituents in the modern era.

Hatred is the most powerful of all human emotion and is very useful to those who want money and power. For tens of thousands of years, corrupt, self promoting tyrants have used fear and hatred to consolidate the ignorant populous behind their bid for power. Whether it be the Roman's leading a propaganda campaign against the Gauls or Hitler trashing the Jews or Al Gore inciting fear and hatred of those evil corporations (which he owns and operates btw); politicians hungry for money and power find it useful to incite fear and hatred of their opponent to mobilize the masses to 'defeat' them, and by default elect the instigator. And we fall for it; time and time again. We fall for it. Because we are sheep who have lost our sense of self reliance we now turn to government for answers. But they only have one answer, regardless of party affiliation. "Give us more money and more power and give up more of your liberty and we will save the day!" Of course they never do; in fact they always make things worse. Yes, even the iconic Ronald Reagan who did more to slow government growth than any modern president, nevertheless grew government, spent more and solidified government control by backing such programs as Medicare, public education, and Social Security. Yes, he argued against all of these, but in the end he signed multiple bills that further ensconced the federal government as the ultimate authority in all areas of our lives - cradle to grave. And we fell for it. We always fall for it. And we will fall for it again and again. Isn't that the epitomy of insanity? Can an insane country survive?

There is only one answer. Vote them out. All of them. Start with the leaders and work your way down. We usually do the opposite. When we are upset with one party, we vote out the peons of the other party, leaving the 'leadership' in place, then elect them to run the country. Then we sit back and whine, "Why doesn't anything change?". Start with the leaders of the Republican party in next years primary. Vote them out and replace them with principled conservatives. Not one on the ballot? Then RUN RUN RUN! Your country needs you! Vote them out in the primary. Then in the general election, vote out the democrats. Then, next election vote them out again in the primary. Clean out the whole rat's nest. The only politician that deserves your vote, is one that has voted against every single bill that expands government in any way shape or form. Any politician that voted to raise pay, expenses or benefits doesn't deserve your vote. Any politician that voted for more government spending of any kind, on any program other than the few constitutionally mandated areas does not deserve your vote. Regardless of what they say in the next campaign, if they have voted even once for a federal spending program, they do not deserve your vote. If you fall for it again, then not only is there no hope for you; there is no hope for your children or grandchildren; and your great grand-children will have to fight a bloody revolution to take back the liberty that the last several generations have frittered away. Are you insane? Well, prove it, sheep!

by: Keith D. Rodebush

October 13, 2009

You Want to Talk About Race?

Guest Blogger Jon Thomas...

Back in February, speaking to Justice Department employees on the topic of racism, US Attorney General Eric Holder said "We have always been, and we, I believe, continue to be, in too many ways, a nation of cowards." He followed up with a less terse statement saying that "Americans of all races should stop avoiding the difficult issues of race." I'm not so sure about the charge of cowardice but maybe we are just so browbeaten when it comes to issues of race. So, at the risk of inviting more ad hominem attacks, let's talk about race.

The other night my wife and I watched the Clint Eastwood film Gran Torino. The story is quite moving in its juxtaposition of racism and redemption. Without spoiling the plot, it's a story of a recently widowed retired man whose once blue collar neighborhood is becoming more and more a community of mostly Asian immigrants. Still struggling with the demons of his service in the Korean war, he grudgingly befriends the immigrant Hmong children next door after saving one of them from a brutal gang attack. The following day, I saw the horrendous video of Derrion Albert, an honor student on his way home from school, killed by black gang thugs simply because he stumbled upon this brawl. An innocent black kid with a promising future killed by black kids with no regard for themselves or anyone else for that matter. Positively senseless. Earlier in mid September, also caught on video, a white student was beaten by two black students on a school bus in some sort of dispute over a seat. In both instances the attack was seemingly unprovoked -maybe some words were exchanged earlier in the day, who knows. But perhaps even more disturbing is the apparent fact that this is just a normal every day occurrence for these kids. Why would any group of people or culture look the other way when such despicable acts happen in their midst? I see these things and I ask, is this how you want to live? Do you wish to live as animals? Is this how you want to be perceived by others? Is it your intention to continue to fall on the crutch of racism and proclaim yourselves helpless? If so, I can assure you -it is a dead end road that leads to misery and loathing.

Continuously branding broad groups of people with the baseless charge of racism will, in the log run, do two things. First, it trivializes the true meaning of the word thus drawing an ever diminishing reaction from the accused. I have been called racist so often that I refuse to answer the charge. It no longer has any meaning to me because it is always pre-qualified by my political vantage point. Second, it sows deep the seeds of mistrust and resentment. The former can be easily reversed simply by stopping the behavior. The latter, if not reversed, will steep for generations and will undo what was fought for with blood and treasure since this country's founding. And oh what a tragedy it would be.

October 11, 2009

The Emperor of Peace Has No Dress

This week the Nobel committee gave the Nobel Peace Prize to president Barack Hussein Obama. The nomination for Obama came less than two weeks after he took office. President Obama now joins the ranks of such historical pillars of peace as Kofi Annan and the terrorist killer of women and children, Yasser Arafat. The Nobel Peace Prize is a joke to any thinking person with a modicum of knowledge of world history. Throughout known history, peace has been achieved by freedom loving peoples applying targeted aggressive use of force to annihilate dictatorial leaders and their armies who spread violence and fear in their realm of influence.

From Herodotus' The Histories to any tome following the second world war, the oppression of peoples around the world has been ended by good people, yearning for liberty and peace, not just for themselves but their neighbors. These principled men and women used massive force with deliberation and focus. They gathered all resources necessary and available to overwhelm and kill as many of the enemy as needed to make the oppressors kneel in a genuflecting observance of power. This aggressive use of force has freed more peoples world wide, resolved regional conflicts, fed more hungry, stabilized more countries and led to the building of world wealth more than any speech or Utopian desire of the misguided leaders among us.

The United Nations spent 10 years and passed almost a hundred resolutions trying to get the dictator Sadaam Hussein to stop harassing his neighbors and terrifying his own people. He raped, pillaged and plundered all the while. He raised two sons who were poised to take over his oppressive regime and continue their terrorism of the Iraqi people and their neighbors in perpetuity. Only the aggressive use of force by the United States under the visionary guidance of president George W. Bush put an end to this tyrants reign. What the impudent 'peacemakers' of the U.N. could not accomplish in 10 years, president George W. Bush accomplished in 5. For that he has been scorned and ignored by the 'noble (Nobel) peace prophets' of the modern era. And yet, this same committee has no qualms about a man who bombed airplanes, murdered people in the streets, blew up old men, women and children in markets and on buses only to be made a leader of his people and engage in 'peace' talks that were nothing more than capitulation by the West. His people have continued their terrorist ways and fomented world wide aggression towards the Jewish people, resulting in the current crisis with an Iranian government whose stated goal is to wipe Israel off the map and currently is seeking to build a nuclear weapon to that end. To this man, Arafat, they awarded a Nobel Peace Prize on December 10,1994. Whose next Ahmadinejad? Kim Jong Il?

Congratulations, president Obama on this 'prestigious' award. If our president had one decent bone in his body, he would send a United States Marine, in full combat dress with loaded M-16, to accept the award on behalf of the U.S. military and their families who continue to bring peace and prosperity to a world which largely ignores the debt they owe to this great nation and it's aggressive use of force to physically stamp out the evil oppressors of mankind.

The Nobel Peace Prize is nothing more than a sick joke on the world so they may continue to pretend that love of fellow man, capitulation and negotiations are sufficient to stop the terrorism of peace loving peoples around the world. Sadly, this impotent leadership actually has caused the death of millions throughout history. Millions have died because of the misguided policies of those who share the philosophy of the Nobel Peace prize committee members. Think about that the next time you see a U.S. soldier. It is abundantly clear in the case of liberal leaders especially in Europe, when it comes to bringing peace to the world, the 'Emperor' has no dress!

October 4, 2009

The Dichotomy of the Deity

Our Greatest Strength; Our Greatest Weakness

Life is full of ironies. Books have been written on the subject. One of the tragic ironies of our age and particular to our nation is that of our greatest strength becoming our greatest weakness. America was founded on Christian principles by mostly faithful men who based their belief in liberty and freedom on the concept that it was God given and therefore to be cherished and defended even to the death. They dedicated their property, their fortunes and even their very lives on this principled stand against despotism. Two of the signers of the Declaration of Independence were ministers by trade; John Witherspoon of New Jersey was a presbyterian minister and Lyman Hall of Georgia was a congregationalist pastor. Our founding fathers did not draw a distinction between the protection of liberty and the teaching of the Gospels. They were one and the same fight. Religion in America today has become a part of the problem that threatens to steal our liberty and replace it with soft tyranny.

Religion is compassionate and giving by it's very nature. People of faith tend to be believers in the human spirit and want to give their fellow man the benefit of the doubt. This unfortunately extends to politics. As our country has grown and the level of communication has tied us together ever more expeditiously, religion tends to look at the country as a whole as one big congregation. It is only natural, given that perception, for them to look to the federal government as a means to spread the compassion of the faithful to the 'congregation' in need.

The problem with this of course is that it is short-sighted and fails to perceive the inherent evil of a strong central government that our forefathers consistently warned against. While a minister may extol the virtues of providing health care to our senior citizens in the form of Medicare, do you expect that he has foreseen the bankrupting of future generations to that end? While the former is compassionate the latter is despicable. How many ministers when excoriating their congregations for not doing enough for the needy, have thoughtfully and logically determined what is best for them? If you give blindly to the needy without regard to future ramifications, are you helping the needy; or just your self image? Is it compassionate to break up families for generations as welfare has done? Is it compassionate to steal your grandchildrens liberty for your health care? Is it God's will to ignore one of His greatest gifts, Liberty, in pursuit of His greatest charge to aid the poor?

The big lie is that you cannot do both. The people that envisioned this country were very savvy. They knew of our capacity for kindness and giving. They also knew of the evil and corruption of an all encompassing government. They gave us the framework to do both, protect liberty and provide for the comfort of millions; the free market capitalist system coupled with a republican form of government meant to give power to the persons closest to the people. This is how you provide for your neighbor while never trusting your government. Keep your friends close and your enemies closer. Government is by it's very nature your enemy. Keep them closer. Local and state control at all costs. Federal solutions for only issues of freedom, liberty and leveling the field for all to participate in the free market system. Capitalism has done more to help the poor and disenfranchised people of the world than anything ever conceived by Man. Government has done more to perpetuate poverty and dependence than anything ever conceived by Man. No system is perfect and people must be held accountable for their actions. But nothing is more compassionate than to protect free market capitalism and a repubican form of government for the generations yet born. The protection of liberty and capitalism will put you in God's favor more than anything a tyrannical government can possibly conceive.

by: Keith D. Rodebush

October 3, 2009

Love means never having to say you’re sorry.

Another poignant post by guest blogger Jon Thomas.

Is there anything about this country that the President finds worthy of praise? Is there anything good about us as a nation? Listen to any of his foreign policy speeches he has made and one could understandably come to the conclusion that they were listening to Hugo Chavez or Dear Leader Kim Jong Il. Liberals quickly become defensive when someone "challenges their patriotism" or suggests they might not hold this country in the highest regard. We need only revisit recent remarks of the President to understand why that is so. Several times during his campaign Obama allowed his true colors to shine through the centrist veneer he presented. The following was one of the most profound and frankly, quite disturbing. "We are 5 days from fundamentally transforming the United States of America" he said at a campaign rally in Missouri the week before his election. President Obama is not stupid and chooses his words carefully. A country needing fundamental change is a country flawed to its core. It means it cannot be salvaged. It must be razed to its foundation in order to be reconstructed. In other words, America doesn't just have problems, it is the problem!

In just nine short months President Obama has - in the interest of restoring America's global standing and reputation - apologized for our existence in Egypt, France, Ghana, London, Russia, and Turkey but just can't bring himself to say anything nice about us. Latest on the appeasement tour was his first address to the United Nations. Just days after kicking sand in the face of Poland and Czechoslovakia, Obama wasted no time in throwing Israel under the bus. The day prior to his address, former would-be President for life, Manuel Zalaya -undoubtedly emboldened by Obama's support- was smuggled into the Brazilian embassy to rouse his rabble in Tegucigalpa. Then there was the spectacle of the worlds despots praising our President at the UN. Why wouldn't our enemies laud the person who seeks to abandon our eastern European allies, emasculate our military, and hamstring our economy, all while adding harmony to the global cantus firmus of "it's America's fault." Is it just me or does it seem Obama is more interested in kissing the posterior of the world's dictators than acting in the interest of the country which he represents and to which he is beholden?

So what is being accomplished by the President's eorum culpa? I suppose he could he be employing the Corleone maxim of keeping your enemies closer but I don't remember Vito being so transparent about it. This seems to be directed to and for the consumption of his left-wing base which -it appears- has grown to include many of the world's tyrants. (Democrats, that's why we often challenge your patriotism.) He seems to be saying to his base and to the world "you know those old white guys that preceded me, they really screwed up and I apologize for it. But the good news is I'm here to make you feel better about us." Now while that may sound comforting to the emotionally-driven domestic "blame America first" crowd to the international thugocrats this only exposes just how weak he is. I came to the conclusion early in the campaign that our world adversaries had already sized up all of the candidates running. That knowingly or not they had ranked them according to their own preference. Obama most assuredly was their top pick. Not because he would return America to greatness. To the contrary, he seemed to share their loathing for this country. I guess love really does mean never having to say you're sorry -doesn't it Mr. President?