Having spent a majority of my 29 years in education and having seen what is being taught, I would have to say that education is currently controlled by the extreme left. They teach group mentalities, white guilt and why capitalism doesn’t benefit all. My belief in why this is the case can almost directly be tied to the capitalist mentality that “those who can’t do teach”. This was a phrase I know I heard numerous times growing up. But while all the capitalists were out making money and advancing their careers, a slow cancer crept into learning institutions.

The ones who couldn’t “do” taught your children. They never taught them how to think, but what to think and they taught them to be good little socialists who don’t question government. In the need for expedience, you looked for the easy solution and thought it would never change from the days of your youth… but the free spirit, peace and love hippies woke up one day and decided they needed to earn some kind of money and education and media were their solutions.

So how does all this pertain to you now you might ask? Boomers who worked in the business world are reaching the age of retirement and with that, they will have free time in great quantity. What I would ask of them is not to waste their golden years, but to teach at a local college or become part of the administration apparatus (as I believe this is just as much to blame as the teachers themselves). Give back in this way and help the pendulum swing the other way. We need to take back the educational institutions from those who would poison the minds of the young against the capitalist ways and trust me, they are out there in droves.

Besides that, real world experience is more valuable in learning than a bunch of people debating over theories they have concocted with no real world backing. We don’t need more technology or crazy theories on how to teach, we need to teach our children how to think. The most effective for actual learning and toughest classes I’ve ever had have all been lecture classes that allowed for debate. The ancient Greeks understood this, why can’t we?

So boomers, come join the cause! Become a teacher and save freedom, save the republic and give something back that will make you feel like you changed the world!

Leonardo Da Vinci said “I awoke only to find that the rest of the world is still asleep.” NDAA allows American citizens to be detained indefinitely without due process at the whim of the government. It passed today to little fanfare. Couple this with a little reported fact that the Department of Homeland Security ordered 1.4 billion rounds of ammunition recently. The war in Iraq used 70 million rounds a year. At that rate it would take 20 years to run through that stockpile. That is more than 4 rounds of ammunition for every man, woman and child in America today. What exactly does a department meant to protect the homeland need with that 28,000 tons of ammunition? The price of freedom is eternal vigilance, and we have fallen asleep at our post. It is time to wake up or go quietly into the night.

I recently penned the article “Why I left the Libertarian Party”.
I sent some of my friends and people I grew up a link to the piece.  Below are comments from one of them in black and my rebuttal comments in blue.

I have to say I was disappointed and surprised by the comments.  I had no idea of the gap between my philosophy and that persons.  I also have to say that I cannot wrap my mind around some of these arguments as to me it is black and white that government who only provides protection from force and fraud as its only hat works.

Read the referenced piece above if you have not.  For more question and answer…see Liberal Questions

*********************************

This was a revealing article; deeply personal and a reflection of what
I feel is dangerous thinking.

Really? Wow.

The ideas expressed in your article
reflect the radical elements of today’s ordinary, law-abiding
Americans who yearn for stability in their lives. You yearn for a
return to an illusion of the past, that never existed in the first
place, where the Founding Fathers are all heroes, and Americans were
self-sufficient. You remain subject to and victim of the horrors of
WWI and WWII when Socialism and Marxism were branded as evil
ideologies.

I am surprised and amazed that:

1. There are radical elements of today’s ordinary, law-abiding Americans. I didn’t know such existed.

2. You don’t consider Socialism and Marxism evil. Can you tell me the reasoning behind you thinking it is not?

 Americans are subject to and victims of fear; fear of their culture being diluted and perhaps replaced by something alien.

I assume this is in response to my comment about open borders and unchecked immigration diluting our culture.  Americans have a unique culture, despite the sins of our past regarding our native population.  Certainly it is a shame on our ancestors over the last century.  That being said, you assume I “yearn for a return to an illusion of the past that never existed…”  This is evaluation of the worst kind…assuming you know what I yearn for.  In reality I yearn for something that has a potential of existing but never has and that is government doing only its proper functions of protecting individual right and the citizens from force and fraud.   I have stated elsewhere that if the government is “helping people” it not only is NOT protecting individual rights it is actively violating them.

All of this confusion results in unhappiness, thereby, making
Americans feel that their Constitutional rights to pursue happiness
has been violated. Americans are lost. They do not know that Jefferson
was a Humanist who called himself “an Epicurean”. The “Pursuit of
Happiness” was the foundation of Epicurean ideology. Jefferson was
wise enough to accept this philosophy and incorporate it into our
Constitution. But Americans do not know the larger context of those
words. They do not know that Epicurus avoided politics and thought it
was a waste of time.

The first thought I have is…So?

Jefferson was experimenting and the philosophy almost worked.

Almost worked? What did not work about it?

Just as Socialism and Marxism were experiments that failed, doesn’t mean that everything about those philosophies is wrong or evil.

What isn’t wrong or evil about It?

It’s the application that counts and who enforces (interprets) the application.

Please tell me how stealing the product of some to give to others is applied so it is not wrong or evil?

There is no one, clear, absolute application of any philosophy. They
are all subject to debate and rejection of parts. If Marxism and
Socialism have infiltrated the Democratic Party, it is because the
American public desires it and elects persons who support those
desires. You cannot say that Marxism and Socialism does not exist in
some of the platforms of the Republican Party, or even in your own
thinking.

You are absolutely correct.  I cannot say that and I did not. There are ALWAYS people who desire and covet the labor and product of others.  The Constitution was put there as a protection against this sort of thing.  Both Republicans and Dems have been actively violating the Constitution in this regard.  The Republicans are just not as far gone as the Dems.  Please tell me though, where in my thinking that Marxism and Socialism does exist?  You cannot make such a blanket statement.  If nothing else it undermines your argument.  It may be a reason some people have such a visceral reaction to your arguments.

As for fear, I believe Americans are gripped with fear, which
debilitates their thinking and decisions. Our Great Culture Clash with
Muslims is an excellent example where they and their Founding Father
are demonized.

Did you ever consider that their founders should be demonized?  There is no other religion (which is actually God centered political movement.) whose policy it is to put to the sword those that will not convert to their religion.

Another good example, right in our back yard, is our culture clash with Mexicans. Americans forget that half of America was under Spanish rule for a very long time. Is there something wrong with America becoming different? Perhaps a change is order…or perhaps that change will come by the virtue of mass immigration as it has with
other cultures on other continents.

 I think it is your thinking that is dangerous.  I have no animosity for Mexican who want to come over here and work.  If I lived in that 3^rd world country I would do the same.  The country was built on immigrants that wanted to come here to be part of OUR culture.  What you have over the past 30 years or so many immigrate to the US not just to work and go home, or play by the rules and become integrated into our way of life.  The Mexicans are leaving a failed system and importing that failed system here.  There is something wrong with this.  Though the US is not perfect, getting back to founding principles goes a long way toward bettering the lives of not just the people of the US but of the world. 

Yes, our way of life will change and will be different and there is no
way of stopping it. Certainly, no political party can stop it. Nor
should it be stopped.

Perhaps you are right that this cannot be stopped.  The dangerous thinking is that it shouldn’t be stopped; that the America I grew up in will no longer exist but will fall into some sort of dictatorship or will be broken up into various political factions and with that the death and misery it will bring to millions if not billions.  The bright light of freedom and prosperity that was made possible by the United States will cease to be.  When the United States falls there will be a dark age that will be worse than the original.  And those that advocate or fail to do nothing to stop it will, just before being killed or starved to death, scream…”I didn’t know…”  And I will say: “Why didn’t you?”

 The moral relativism you espouse is part of the problem. Communist/ Socialist governments killed 100 million people in the 20^th century.  I am sure all of these idealists had the same vision of utopia.  It is intentions that count not all of the bodies by the wayside is not just flawed thinking it is the most dangerous sort of thinking.

 How many people have died for the good intentions of others?  I have no doubt all of the Muslims are well intentioned in killing for their god.  I have no doubt Stalin was well intentioned in killing millions by starvation and worse.  And I have no doubt that the people that were violating the Constitution by taking lands that the native people had negotiated by treaty with the US government were well intentioned. 

I don’t want to live in the kind of world you seem to advocate, where the principals of individual rights and freedom to your own productive effort is dangerous thought and on the same moral plane as Socialism, Communism and Islamism all of which are philosophies of death and oppression.  That you think the freedom to act in your own best interest and expect that others do the same so long as they do not violate others rights is wrong and dangerous, is pretty abhorrent to me.

 In my experience freedom should be the default and is worth fighting for even if it is a losing battle.

//

 Several months ago I was sent a letter by the Libertarian Party asking for the disagreements I had with them because failed to renew my Libertarian Party membership. They said “go ahead let us know we can take it”. I wrote them the following letter I’m putting it in this form now to get out to a wider public why I am not supporting the Libertarian Party and in this election will be voting for Mitt Romney.

“You wanted to know what disagreements I have with the Libertarian Party.

I have been a libertarian since before I could vote.  I voted for John Hospers who was the first Libertarian candidate for President.

I never voted for any other party’s candidate for President and always voted for the Libertarian candidate…Until the 2004 elections.  It was apparent to me at that time we could not afford a Democrat in the White House.  I am doubly convinced of this with Obama now there.

September 11^th 2001 changed my mind about the Libertarian foreign policy.

Though I agree with withdrawing our troops from around the world where there is no strategic interest.  Limiting response to threats until after we have been attacked is, in today’s world, not a survival strategy.

Open borders, which many libertarians believe in, to me is a leftist policy meant to dilute American culture.  It will if left unchecked mean the breaking up of that culture and finally the dissolution of the country itself.

Finally, it is apparent to me that it is much more effective to change the Republican Party into the essence of libertarian philosophy than to watering down the Republican votes in contests with the Democrat party (which is now the essence of Communists and Socialist philosophy).

Infiltrate and take over the Republican party … our mutual philosophy within that structure is the only thing that will save the country.”

Ron Paul has the right idea.  It has taken years to get his ideas to take hold in the Republican Party.  The Tea Party has a LOT of libertarian philosophy in it especially in its stance on fiscal matters.  You see Ayn Rand posters at many of the Tea Party rallies.  He should immediately endorse Romney as superior to Obama and continue to work to the libertarian ideas accepted in with the Republicans.

I love Gary Johnson, the Libertarian Party’s presidential nominee.  I would vote for him in a minute.  I cannot in good conscience do this however as it will dilute the Republican vote and in my estimation the United States cannot survive another four years of Obama.

It took the Communists and Socialists 30 or so years to successfully infiltrate and take over the Democrat Party.  It is not only prudent that libertarian activist work within the Republican establishment and to take over that establishment, it is vital.  Libertarians must transform the Republican Party to a libertarian Party, or at least become the heart and mind of it.

The best thing that Gary Johnson could do to raise the profile of libertarian ideas and ideals is to withdraw from the Presidential race and direct all libertarians to vote for Mitt Romney.

Is Romney ideal?  No.  Is he a libertarian?  No.  But he is not a socialist or Marxist.  If Johnson withdraws, it will give him power within the Republican Party and with that a chance to weaken the progressive elements in this Party.  It is going to take time to transform this party.  But it will only be done from within, not from outside.

//

Recently I commented on some posts on Facebook that were made by two women who are friends of a family member.  They were disagreeing with this family member’s post   “Socialism is the distribution of poverty”.  Both were in agreement with Socialism and of the belief that government is an agent of compassion.

Glen Allport wrote an essay called “Government is Not Compassion”.  In the intro he says: “The single most damaging error of the modern age is the misperception of government as an agency of compassion.  As a replacement for the “divine right of kings,” this misperception has, for those in power, been an astonishing success.  For the rest of mankind, it has frequently been a disaster beyond imagining.”

I invite you to read this essay here:http://www.strike-the-root.com/columns/allport/allport1.html

 Below is my post in blue.  Their posts are in black with my rebuttal in blue.

The 13th Amendment to the Constitution declared that “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.” Formally abolishing slavery in the United States, the 13th Amendment was passed by the Congress on January 31, 1865, and ratified by the states on December 6, 1865. Socialism = the redistribution of wealth from those who earned it to those that did not. This is involuntary servitude and therefore the equivalent of slavery outlawed by the Constitution.

As far as Canada goes…Socialism works fine…until you run out of other peoples money. Canada as well as Europe has been able to afford their welfare states partially due to the military umbrella provided and financed by the United States and partially due to the international aid that has been provided by the U.S. Canada has gotten more prosperous due to the free market reforms they’ve recently instituted. Consider the statement : people have the RIGHT to basic needs (i.e. health care and proper education)” OK people have this right…who provides it? This means that the government has the right to TAKE the product of your labor to provide for those “rights”. That means there is no right to property. The Constitution provides negative rights — the freedom from. Positive rights as wanted by statists necessarily negates those negative rights and makes everyone a slave to every person who demands their right to health care and education. It is flawed in every sense.

First person’s comments:

Socialism is NOT COMMUNISM.  I don’t believe I mentioned communism but it is cut from the same cloth.

Everyone has the chance to prosper in a socialized country.  This is delusion.

I’ve lived in both socialist and capitalist countries, so I can speak from life experience.  It’s easy for outsiders to criticize something they know very little about.  I don’t know of any Capitalist countries. So which one have you lived in?  The United States for much of its history was the freest country in the world. Not now.

Canada’s prosperous economy has nothing to do with US military umbrella. That is completely false.  Afraid not, the US has protected the world with its Navy.  The shipping lanes are safe because of the US Navy not the Canadian Navy.  As much as Canada may have helped, the U.S. and Canada are not living under a Nazi government because of the United States, not Canada.  The United States is the economic engine that has pulled the world into the prosperity it has.

If Capitalism is survival of the fittest and tax dollars shouldn’t be spent back on the people, then WHY COLLECT OR PAY TAXES?  Really? Why collect or pay taxes?  You really have no idea what the function of government is do you? First of all capitalism is nothing more than two people agreeing on some sort of exchange.  You have an old couch to sell.  Someone wants to buy that couch.  You ask $500.00.  He counters with $100.00.  You finally agree on $250.00.  Mutual exchange for mutual benefit.  If you have ever done this or anything similar then you were at that point a capitalist.  It is the only system that has at its core, exchanging valuable for valuable.

Government has a specific function.  It is NOT to decide who is to be extorted in order to give it to someone they deem to deserve a hand out.  Its function is to protect its citizens from force and fraud.  That is the proper function of government, nothing more.

In that’s the case, dissolve the government so we don’t have to pay politicians and let everyone fend for themselves like the animal kingdom.  This is typical statist talking point.  Seems you’ve been well indoctrinated.  The United States became the most prosperous, the most benevolent, and the world stabilizing force it is, precisely because it has for the most part stuck to the philosophy of not interfering into the market place but only protected the parties from force or fraud.

You mention “fend for themselves like the animal kingdom”.  I understand that it is hard to imagine anyone but government can do the things they do. The lie that everyone will be left to “fend for themselves” is pervasive in the circles you run in.  You hear it so often that “it has to be the truth”. I get it.

I am telling you now that without government interference, the innovation that would be unleashed would be staggering.  I know this is true because this is what happened.  The upward spiral of affluence of a free society is overwhelming.  It is that philosophy and freedom that is responsible for the wealth that has been produced in the past hundred years.

Poverty and misery has been the normal state of man for millennia.  It is only since the rise of the United States and ITS limited government that made possible the innovation of the industrial revolution and more recently the information age.  It is not government that made that possible.  Government cannot produce anything…except security of a person or group and that is impossible if they are trying to favor one group over another.  Suggested reading for you to educate yourself is “Free to Chose” by Milton Freedman

Second person’s Comments

Who is the “we” you are speaking about surviving in our early years, Greg?  Huh? Sorry, this makes no sense to me.

The slaves may have a bone to pick with you on how great this country was at that time. Hmmm I thought I quoted the 13^th Amendment.

Capitalism would argue that slavery is perfectly ok because the cheaper the labor the better the profit.  You, as with most statist have a perverted view of history and especially of Capitalism.  I would argue that slavery was not a help to the profitability of South but a hindrance to it. It has been demonstrated time and again that it is free people that are the most productive.  Slaves will only do as much as they are whipped to do.  Slave will sabotage production by either deliberate action or just not doing what is required.  Freedom was not tried by the plantation owners to their own, not to mention, the countries detriment.  It is you that wants to start this back up, with the productive being slaves to the non-productive.

It is our humanity that causes us to pause and reflect on how important personal wealth really is.  I agree.

Welfare is not giving everything to some lazy people (to paraphrase you), it is realizing that anyone of us could fall into that hole at any moment through no fault of our own and that a helping hand out of the hole is a basic decency we should expect from the greatest country in the world.  This is another platitude of the indoctrinated. The government cannot force people to be compassionate.  That is the function of each individual to be that. I do not admire the “humanity” you have.  Your humanity puts a gun in your hand and points it at my head ordering me to give it to someone YOU deem to be deserving.  Yours is a philosophy of extortion and denigrates both the receiver and the extorted.  It is no longer a “hand up” it is an “entitlement”.  It isn’t “charity”, how can it be?  It is an entitlement, meaning you are entitled to it.

Charity is the responsibility of the individual and is wholly moral.  It benefits the giver as he or she feels they have benefited someone less fortunate.  It benefits the receiver as well.  It gives them a hand up.  Knowing it is charity they try not to be burden to those that are giving of themselves.  They then try hard to be deserving of that charity.

The people of the US are the most generous in the world.  Not because they are forced to be, it is because they are (relatively) free and affluent enough to be able help those in need.  The rest of the world’s charity pales by comparison.

Not everyone has a family structure that can help if the worst befalls them. Not everyone can rely on their friends to be able to pick them up in the toughest times. And not everyone who has ever benefited from a welfare program is a horrible drain on all the “good, worthy” Americans. Some of those people are children escaping abusive homes.  and needing food. Some of those people are law abiding citizens who have been hit by a drunk driver with no insurance. Some of those people are elderly and can no longer work enough to pay their medical bills. Some of those people are veterans that have made larger sacrifices than most can imagine and now need to be helped to find a job and return to a non-combat life. What gives you or anyone else the right to tell these people that they deserve their circumstances because they are not “the fittest”?

The above is one of the more ignorant statements I’ve seen in some time. (Note I did not say stupid).  I would ask:  What gives you or anyone else the right to extort or steal money from me or any one else in order to help these people you believe need to be helped?  If you believe they need to be helped, then help them.   If I came into your house and took your things in order to sell to help people I believe need to be helped, I am sure you would call the police and have me arrested.  Your philosophy is no different except you want the police to come and take my things to give to people you believe are deserving.

Suggested reading:  Who Really Cares by Arthur C Brooks.

Thomas Sowell reviewed this book. “People who identify themselves as conservatives donate money to charity more often than people who identify themselves as liberals. They donate more money and a higher percentage of their incomes.

It is not that conservatives have more money. Liberal families average 6 percent higher incomes than conservative families.”

So, who really cares, the person who wants government to take money from those who earn it or the person who takes his own money in order to give a person a hand up ?

See also my piece “Liberal Questions”
//

 

The Federal Reserve is said to be set to act to stimulate the economy in September.  What that means to every voter/taxpayer/purchaser of goods is you will be spending devalued dollars.  So, if the Fed moves, it will buy U.S. Bonds by printing more worthless paper money.  It’s the equivalent to taking the dollars you have in your pocket and cutting 10% off and letting you spend the remaining for 90% of the value.  The 10% taken off is distributed to those who the government has decided needs it more than you do.  All the rhetoric is about being fair and having the rich pay more but this is not a penalty on the rich, it is action that places the greatest burden on those who have less.  They will be paying more for the goods they purchase and the politicians will have more money to give to those who support them.  So, while the price of the stocks in your 401(k) might go up in value it won’t be because their worth more, It’s because the dollars you must now pay for them are worth less and more dollars are needed to buy the same things.  The main problem for most of us is that our wages and income are not going up as fast as the cost of goods and services we must buy with these less valuable dollars.  It’s another example of our government saying they are looking out for us and helping us, doing so by their misguided understanding of economics or thinking we are just too stupid to realize what they are doing.

“Actions Speak Louder than Words”: If you had a good German mother like I did, you’ve heard those words time and time again.  It wasn’t about what came out of your mouth, it was what actions, both current and past, that supported the situation that got the reaction.  Words are cheap and cheap people use them to spin things to their best advantage, lying is a tool to get what they want.  So if you can find someone whose actions and words are in sync, you’ve met someone worthy of your trust and support.

As I look at the current political environment I find it hard to believe the words of our current President.  Mr. Obama tells us he has our best interests at heart but fails to make decisions that support the free enterprise system, adherence to his oath of office and has failed to deliver on the promises he made in his last election.  This same person has used unproven statements to cast doubt on his competition but fails to bring any facts to the table.  Mr. Obama is not worthy of the trust and support of the American people and not worthy of being re-elected to his lofty position.

This essay was originally posted at the previous Politically Empowered website in April 2009.  I am re-posting this now to make it available.  I believe it is still relevant, in fact it is now more important than ever to press what ever advantage and momentum freedom loving people have against the ideology of death that is progressivism and it’s siblings.

I watched with interest the Tea Parties across the nation. I was pleasantly surprised by the numbers of people that came out to peacefully protest the gigantic upward leap of government spending, the lack of care about protecting our borders and a host of other grievances that have served to alienate ordinary people from both political parties.

I also watched without surprise the reaction of those on the far left who denigrated those participating as far right zealots or that this tax day protest was not a “grassroots” effort but an “Astroturf” movement. Nancy “Botox” Pelosi theorized the protests were being organized by deep pockets on the right; thus “Astroturf” movement.

There was as well, a lot of poo-pooing the protests and justification as “just right-wingers” or “just a GOP rally” by the [take your pick] “drive-by”, “main scream”, or “dinosaur” media.

What did surprise me about this however, is the naked bias and bigotry of the media on display without any (even transparent) veil.

Jainine Garafalo, vitriolic hater that she is, accused the crowd of just one thing: being racists, protesting the blackness of the President. I was surprised how off base she was in her analysis but then I stopped being surprised realizing that this sort of hateful statement by an odious person, can only analyze what filters the through curtains of her chronically low emotional quotient, false data and fixed ideas (in other words her ideology).

In listening to some of the conservative talk shows, I was also surprised to learn of a word meaning that I was not aware of before. Most shows did not repeat the word but just made general references to it and I only learned of the term when I heard it used by Garafalo in her rant with Keith Oberman. I had to go and look up the term which was not in a regular dictionary.

Now I am no prude and I have some pretty young friends but I was not only surprise by use of the term but that I had not ever heard it before.

Susan Roesgen of CNN was another surprise. She is of course the “reporter” that pretended to do an interview at one of the Tea Parties and then attacked the poor guy holding a child and did not allow him to answer her question or finish his statement.

I was surprised not that she displayed bias and bigotry but that it was again done in such a naked manner.

The tolerance of the left was on display for all to see the day after the Tea Parties.

Then there was the “coincidental” release from DHS that you might be terrorist if you are concerned about illegal immigration, increasing federal power, restrictions on firearms, abortion and the loss of U.S. sovereignty. That describes most of you radicals out there that participated in these “Astroturf” actions. Who knew there were so many terrorist? It seems terrorism has gone “mainstream” in this country.

All of the above actions by the left and their toadies in the media and on Capitol Hill is an effort to discourage all of those good people exercising their right to peacefully protest from continuing to do so. The people engaging in these LAWFUL protests do not want to be associated with terrorist, or racists or bigots. Therefore, efforts to link law-abiding people with these things, is a transparent attempt to disengage them from the movement.

This means they are concerned about this effort. I won’t say they are scared or panicked…yet, but it is obvious from the vitriol and dismissive attitude they do not want you to continue.

Now this may discourage some of the more timid among us from participating in the next Tea Party. All I have to say is: You got a reaction and that is what was meant to happen. It means you have touched a live area that the left wants to remain hidden. You have them wondering if you are aware of the secret they are withholding. You have now started down this road and have to take it to the end if you want the result.

The left has been moving the ball down the field for too long with no real opposition other than the inertia of the culture. They will not go quietly when actively opposed. They hoped government control would be a fait accompli before the home team got out on the field. Before this contest is over both will be bloodied probably literally as well as figuratively. You dare not stop now or you lose by default. With it goes the greatest country that ever has been and the dooming of the entire world to a dark age more savage than the original.

This team (to continue the sports metaphor) is kind of sorry lot in reality. Devious and cunning but with no real substance other than lies and sucker punches. If you want to win this fight you have to attack.

I’ve said it before don’t defend. Always meet every attack with a counter attack. The public will follow the line of attack. Don’t say: “I’m not a racist” when accused of it, attack the accuser of being a race baiter, because that is what they are. When accused of being a homophobe counter attack that the accuser is a heterophobic and their accusation is silly and without merit. You know your heart. You don’t want to be associated with this sort of indictment, so don’t play their game. Turn that motion to your advantage and attack them with it.

Look how far this tactic has gotten the left, when they have no principles and no workable policy to offer.

Do you want smaller and limited government? Then always, always look for the government action or inaction that lead to ANY political problem and attack that. Read the Constitution and become familiar with it. Counter the emotional arguments of “do it for the children” with “Where does it say in the Constitution that the Federal Government has that power?”

Government has specific functions and all actions by the Federal Government not specifically given to it by the Constitution is UN-Constitutional despite what the Supreme Court has said.

Make the next Tea Party even bigger and you will really have the left apoplectic.

//

 

What Obama fails to recognize is that this country threw off the burden of an over intrusive government to come into being.  It was not the government that made this countries prosperity possible, except for it being less invasive and less mixed up in our lives.  It was the prosperity of the individuals who started businesses and employed workers who made the government’s role in our lives possible.  By building a class of people who had the means to pay taxes, businesses gave government the vehicle to grow.  If you don’t believe that, then look at where we are today. With businesses suffering and wages shrinking, the government loses its income and it’s only way to prosper is to print more money.  By printing more money it weakens the value of the dollars we spend and therefore, must attempt to raise taxes to get more and more of our less valuable dollars.

Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., top Republican on the Senate Budget Committee, raised concerns about the program in a letter to Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack.  “It has become increasingly clear that the mission of the food stamp program has moved from targeted welfare assistance for those in need into an aggressive drive to expand enrollment regardless of need,” he wrote. 

Shouldn’t we be encouraging people to be self-sufficient as opposed to promoting people to sign up for government assistance.  Isn’t that what has made this country great, as opposed to the socialist programs our government now guides people toward?

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/07/19/senator-says-food-stamp-partnership-with-mexico-pressuring-immigrants-to-enroll/?test=latestnews#ixzz219npw82q