Red State

"Gubbmint isn't the solution," Ronald Reagan famously said. "Gubbmint is the problem!" Well, until Al Gore invented our wonderful Internet world, there were darn few ways we common citizens could highlight just what the "problem" of government was. But, happily, we bloggers have become the modern version of our Founders plying the pamphleteer's trade. Now, via the incredible world of blogging, we can spy a government abuse and cast the harsh light of public scrutiny upon it. And we can do it in the blink of an eye. All we need is our computers and a little Internet access.

But, now gubbmint is trying to find ways to make it harder for us to highlight their evil, wasteful, illegal ways. For now comes the Democrat Party of the State of Washington trying to reinvent bloggers as "lobbyists" so that we can be regulated out of existence.

Or, if they don't exactly want bloggers regulated out of existence, Democrats at least want to put bloggers in such a position that there are fewer of them because of gubbmint's onerous regulations.

The Seattle Times is reporting that Washington state regulators are considering just that question. Are blogger "lobbyists"? Of course, the answer is no, no, a thousand times no. Even if we make money with our blogs, it does not amount to "lobbying."

But, beware, fellow bloggers. Whenever gubbmint eyes something, it is rarely long before it gets its grubby hands fully around it.

So, get ready to have gubbmint pry into your personal finances just so you might have the "privilege" of being "allowed" to blog about politics.

Or, you could just blog about sports, or movies. Just forget about all that gubbmint business. What is it of yours, anyway? Let the smarter, better, more refined folks in gubbmint take care of all that. Don't worry your little heads about it.

So says Big Brother. So shall it be.

Be sure and Visit my Home blog Publius' Forum. It's what's happening NOW!

Forgive me for posting this as a diary, but I don’t see an appropriate open thread for it.

Many are familiar with the tactics of the social-engineering shakedown artists. Jesse Jackson, among others, has made a career of it. There are numerous examples of lawsuits brought before sympathetic courts to force a bending of wills to Progressive agendas. We see it most often in the public arena, but when it happens in the private sector, the outcome is particularly despicable.

I offer for your consideration the eHarmony shakedown by a homosexual activist. I won’t cover the details; Michele Malkin does it far better.

When Conservatives bring up their opposition to issues related to homosexuality, we are quickly accused of forcing our views on others. That accusation never seems to apply in the other direction. In this instance, how can a rational person argue that the lawsuit is nothing less than imposing one’s view on another?

My intention is not to ‘gay-bash’; I don’t do that or condone it. Neither do I condone homosexuality. For those that do condone it, I will just have to respectfully disagree, with equal emphasis on ‘respectfully’ and ‘disagree’. I consider it a vice and leave it at that.

My view regarding the relationship between vice and government was stated in a post yesterday:

Just let me say that although our laws and Constitution have a basis in and depend on Christian morality, when we legislate against personal vice we put that controlling function in the wrong sphere. Government should neither promote nor prevent the exercise of personal vice. That is between an individual and his God (and to an extent; his priest, pastor, brother, sister, etc). Government intervention in this area creates too many unintended consequences. Don't put the duty of the individual Christian and the Church in the hands of the legislature.

For folks who either have no Holy Bible or are disinclined to read one (i.e.: Secular Humanists), my argument is this: Homosexual behavior between consenting adults is a decision they themselves bear responsibility for. Government sanction of said behavior sends the wrong message to society. I see little to recommend it. It is a genetic dead end. It does nothing to advance the species.

For the spiritually minded I say this: Although the Scriptures certainly teach against homosexuality, they also indicate that all sins save one are equally reprehensible in the eyes of God. The only sin of higher rank is blasphemy of the Holy Spirit. Thus we have the instruction to “love the sinner, hate the sin”. Any spiritual person who singles out homosexuality for special censure, or put it in higher category of sin is in error.

This lawsuit and its outcome makes me very sad, but angers the Libertarian part of me, as well. I detest coercion and blackmail. This is a limit on liberty that cannot be tolerated.

I wrote a brief little something about the appointment of former Senate Democratic Leader Tom Daschle as the next Health and Human Services Secretary. But I really wish that prior to writing what I wrote, I had the chance to read this article first. Evidently, Daschle comes replete with conflicts thanks to past lobbying efforts and puts the incoming Administration--with its jeremiads against the lobbying culture fresh in the minds of voters--in an awkward spot. What exactly is going to be the use of having an HHS Secretary whose past work in the health care industry is going to cause him to recuse himself from addressing a whole host of important health care related issues?

Oh, and Tom Daschle is yet another un-fresh face with close associations with the Clintons. I keep waiting for Change I Can Believe In to kick in at some point, but thus far, that hope appears to be forlorn.

One of the greatest tatics in forming public opinion is often used in a debate between two opponents. One of the best ways to be successful in a debate is to successful "Frame" the debate on your terms.

As I think back to Obama's acceptance speech, I am struck with some of the things he said. In a nut shell, many of the things he said, he did so as an attempt to "Frame" the days ahead on his terms.

I think one of the most striking comments he made was that of:

We are not a bunch of individuals...

This philosophy speaks to the collective ideals of socialism much in the same way Hillary Clinton did not so long ago when she made her speech.

"It takes a village to raise a child..."

It is also ironic that she said this in the same speech

"I know and you know that Chicago is my kind of town. And Chicago is my kind of village."

and this

And we have learned that to raise a happy, healthy and hopeful child, it takes a family, it takes teachers, it takes clergy, it takes business people, it takes community leaders, it takes those who protect our health and safety, it takes all of us.

The message under Obama has just been repacked, but essential it is the same.

By ‘we’, I mean the collective populace of the country. The term ‘collective’ has a certain irony as we become a more socialistic nation, by the way, but I digress. The germ of this thought came about from two of my readings this morning concerning the issue of the potential Detroit bailout. The first was the transcript of the Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) appearance on CNN Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer (Rep Charles Rangel (D-NY) was on as well.).

Part 1: Part 2:

The second was an article at NRO by Michael Barone.

The US automakers have allowed union demands to price them out of the market. Now we see the results of this blackmail. A free market that will allow a business to reach the heights of success must also allow it to fail. To do otherwise negates the concept of a free market and will ensure mediocrity. If the automakers fail and go into bankruptcy, so be it. Actions have consequences. GM, Ford, and Chrysler; the unions and their members, shareholders, enablers in government – all bear responsibility. Creative destruction demands that efficient entities will arise from the failed remnants. First, we must allow failure.

One way to frame the argument is to ask the question “Do we want to achieve short-term or long-term benefit from our actions?” To put it another way, do we want instant or delayed gratification? This is at the heart of the nation’s political choices, and our recent track record does not bode well for the outcome of the proposed bailout or any other weighty matter our elected leaders will choose to consider. Our tendencies are illustrated in our current financial crisis, brought about by individuals who borrowed money they could not afford to repay , institutions who gained short-term profits by making the irresponsible loans, and legislative enablers who made it possible – and then shifted blame when the consequences appeared.

The Republican Party has sometimes been termed the ‘adult party’, because of its reliance on principles. Mature and disciplined behavior is characterized by a focus on the long term, delays gratification for a more beneficial result later, and is no stranger to sacrifice. The Democratic Party, on the other hand, is a party of ‘right now’, ready to pander to man’s baser instincts. A focus on short-term benefits will cause us to lurch from crisis to crisis in an incoherent manner. Incoherent in terms of adhering to any principles other than instant gratification and pain avoidance, that is. The failure to accept the consequences of a course of action cannot be deferred indefinitely.

In the discussion between Blitzer, Rangel, and Blackburn, I could not discern any reliance on principle towards addressing the issue. I did find a lot of concern for pain avoidance, however. Barone brings up the demographics behind the Obama victory with the overwhelming support of the under 30 segment. We have done a poor job in raising that generation, eh? The Modern Liberal education system and our inattention have reaped its own consequences.

Do we have the ability to do the ‘adult thing’ with regard to current and coming issues? With Democratic control of government, I fear delayed gratification will be in abeyance for the next couple of years and pandering to the baser part of human nature will abound. I’m sure mine will not be a lone voice crying in the wilderness, but how many of the under-30 demographic can I get to join me?

The government will do "whatever it takes" to revive the economy, Obama said. That means "we shouldn't worry about the deficit next year or even the year after," he said, adding that in the short term, "the most important thing is that we avoid a deepening recession."

"Whatever it takes"? "Whatever"? Biggest lie of the millennium right there, folks. (Biggest lie of the previous millennium? Satan convincing people he/it doesn't exist.)

Here's one thing the government will not do, which perhaps ironically is the one thing that will save the U.S. economy long-term: reduce its size dramatically.

Just to balance the standing budget, we'd need to lop 15% off the top. That's 15% from EACH and EVERY department. Add the questionable financial "bailout" package and that figure rises to 43%. JUST TO BALANCE THE BUDGET.

Imagine if you were 43% in the hole next year. How long would you last?

This doesn't even address the $11 TRILLION public debt we have amassed. That's $37,000 for every American. Not every household or taxpayer, every American.

I don't know about you, but I don't have that right now. In fact, my retirement assets have declined recently more than that figure, so how about we're now square, okay government? Seems only equitable, seeing as your fiscal policies fueled my losses. Want my $37,000? I'm referring you to Congressman Barney Frank and Senator Chris Dodd.

Oh, I almost forgot the unfunded entitlements, i.e. Social inSecurity and MediScare.
Some estimates place those around $50 trillion. That's another $170,000 on top of the $37,000 you owe. You can get yourself a pretty nice house in some parts for $207,000. That's what the Congress has either already spent or has promised to spend on behalf of each and every last one of us.

Back to this notion that the government will do "whatever it takes" to ensure a healthy economy, having the alcoholic design his recovery plan is a solution doomed to failure.

Americans have met “the battle of the bulge” and it isn't any fun! The “fat cats” in Washington just love to play monopoly with our tax dollars and we’re the ones who end up in jail without a free card.

Our government remains in the same robotic mode of same ole, same ole! We are shaking in our shoes and totally confused; should we remove what’s left of our savings and bury our money in the back yard or should we change our portfolio before Washington makes another blunder?

Don Young (R – from Alaska) voted “NO” on the bailout bill calling it a mere slippery slope to Socialism. Keep your eye on Don, he’s the kind of man we need leading our country. Here’s another Maverick who isn’t afraid to stand toe to toe with either party.

Chuck Norris reminded us that the House of Representatives and Senate don’t have a clue what’s in the 500 page bailout bill and mentions that Republicans and Democrats fell for the bull - - - - of the bad boys and girls, Pelosi, Paulsen, Frank and Dodd.

Let’s remember McCain and Obama gave the bill a big “Yes” as they merrily went on their way campaigning. Neither one objected loudly or with any real sincerity!

In order to get this bill passed by the majority, Pelosi and gang tossed more than their share of carrots into the bill. Here’s but a few of the earmarks that are snuggled deep within the confines of this bill: (1) $192 million in tax breaks for rum producers in Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands, $128 million in tax breaks for the manufacturers of car-racing tracks, $148 million in tax breaks for wool-producing companies. and these almighty carrots just keep growing.

They just don’t get it – we want a government without their hands in the “Piggy Bank.” Government isn’t changing, even though they’ve jeopardize our country and our families!

Pelosi remains the same stoic Speaker of the House and every time she dips in our till – she has someone else to blame.

Now get this Nancy and Reid appointed an Oversight Panel to report to them, the panel will deliver a report January 20th, 2009 after she’s spent all of our bail out money. Technically, she’s covering her - - - so neither Republicans or Democrats can accuse her of negligence.

Look at the free market and ask yourself why the taxpayers’ were voted responsible for the bailout Freddie and Fannie. Why are we the ones to pick up the slack for a government that has acted irresponsibly; no one seems to be held accountable at this time!? It’s like letting a bunch of lions loose at a smorgasbord – they come with a ravenous appetite and just keep gorging and gorging.

Jay Leno as usual gives us a dose of truth embellished by his uncanny wit; when talking about the bail out, he said our economic crisis has now affected our children. Jay said, “Like, when kids play monopoly, the dumbest kid can be the banker.” He expresses his concern about our predicament via a dash of humor. Jay Leno, New York Times, September 30, 2008, 12:08 pm.

Here’s several sites that offer up to the minute news on the bailout discussing the repercussions and hardships placed on Americans. The first one is http://loudobbs.tv.cnn.com/ Lou Dobs, although from CNN speaks honestly about the lack of oversight by our government and Paulson (Treasury Secretary.)

Lou doesn’t waste words, nor will he take up much of your time; he’s a bottom line man and irate that two trillion dollars of our bail out money has been disbursed without proper supervision or restrictions.

Another informative man is Brit Hume | Special Report - FOXNews.com – Brits has the highest rated political program on cable TV. Brit doesn’t pull any punches and brings up all sides of the story.

FOX is yet another that site keeps up to date and unlike many news media, FOX tries to present all of the facts. The World Newser: November 2008 or try FOX.com.
The latest rumors around town whisper that several trillion dollars of our money has disappeared without any real oversight or restrictions. Consequently some of the lending institutions are doing a little personal investing with our money and have plumb forgotten that we, the consumer are sitting here with legs crossed waiting for some credit lines to be freed up.

“May God Bless America.” If you’re mad – call or email your government representatives. Get your voice back, America; it’s your money and your dime so have your say!

As Always, Annie Catch me @ http://www.yourannie.com

Obviously, I suppose, my first marriage was doomed. We had a world view incompatibilty situation. As my signature line indiactes, I do believe that none of us are without sin. I think that in any relationship there are sins of commission, ommission, and acquiescense. Sometimes we commit the wrong, sometimes we ignore, often without realizing it, the other party or our responsibilities, and sometimes we just give in to their demands because we get tired of fighting.

It is the tendency to acquiesce that I think is inherent in all of us that I fear means any form of democracy may be doomed.

We who desire to live in a state of freedom tend to not desire to have power over others. Those who desire power tend to run for office. Adverse selection?

If we were to get to some point of Constitutional freedom, most of us would say ok -- let's get to work on our lives. But then the power seekers would start the process of incrementalizing the power grab of the governing types. We being peaceable types would argue for freedom, but compromise a little, then later more compromise, then ...

The Constitution is a depressing read these days, but more depressing is to read the Ant-Federalist papers. Patrick Henry et.al predicted much of what we have today.

Is there any hope? Do we just accept the fact that the Constitution is irrelevant? There is no New World to which to emigrate.

Clearly. Clearly the expanse of government is not doing this economy any good. Obama plans to expand government dramatically which also equates to more government spending. More government spending must be covered by the taxpayer. I sincerely believe in limited government. I think that smaller government benefits all. Less regulation, less taxation and less stress in general. Smaller government requires less money to run and therefore the savings are passed on to the tax payer. Please, will someone explain to me why and how people can possibly think that big government and expansion of government will be good for us? This is a sincere question, because I cannot logically, intellectually think of a way this can work.

The words of John McCain stirred my heart this election season, and I have not forgotten them. Fellow Christians there is still many battles to fight, and a war to win over the heart of American. We can not go quietly into the wilderness in a time that our nation so desperately needs us the most. Now is the time to put your armor on and stand, stand up and fight!

I believe there is a strong movement among Christians to turn the heart of this country back to the Judeo-Christian values that it was founded upon. We will not accomplish this solely through some political means, while we must not waver to hold the political fronts that we are currently engaged in, we must also engage the real enemy that has lead our country astray. He is a powerful enemy, not one of flesh & blood, with powerful lies, that has turned the hearts of many away from the truth, and has weakened our personal testimony to the world by getting us focused on the things of this world instead of heavenly things. We can not win this war by engaging him in our own power & might, we must engage him in the power of the Holy Spirit & take back the ground that we have allowed him to take: first in our own hearts, then our homes, then our churches, then our local communities, and then our greater governments. So my friends meditate upon the words of this great hymn, the Word of God, which is quick & powerful, sharper than any two edged sword, hold fast your faith, pray, and engage the enemy for our Commander in Chief, the Lord Jesus Christ, has not quit the fight & will lead us to victory!

Sound the battle cry! See, the foe is nigh; Raise the standard high For the Lord; Gird your armor on, Stand firm, ev'ry one; Rest your cause upon His holy Word.

Refrain: Rouse, then, soldiers, rally 'round the banner! Ready, steady, pass the word along; Onward, forward, shout aloud "Hosanna!" Christ is Captain of the mighty throng.

Strong to meet the foe, Marching on we go, While our cause, we know, Must prevail; Shield and banner bright, Gleaming in the light; Battling for the right We ne'er can fail.

O Thou God of all, Hear us when we call, Help us one and all By Thy grace; When the battle's done, And the vict'ry's won, May we wear the crown Before Thy face.

The Mormons did it. Blame them.

When the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints came openly encouraged members to support Proposition 8 in California, I expected there would be some anger at the Church for doing so. But I didn't expect this.

Mormons steal civil rights.

Or this.

LDS LAPD officer describes protests at the LA Temple.

The homosexual community is acting as if Mormons did something illegal, and as if we are solely responsible for the passage of Proposition 8.

In truth, the Mormon electorate in California consists of about 250,000 individuals, while Proposition 8 passed by a margin of about 500,000. So, basically, even if every Mormon in California had stayed home, Proposition 8 still would have passed. Why, then, are Mormons specifically being targeted?

Well, the first reason is that, as the video I posted states, Mormons are responsible for raising about $20 million for the Proposition 8 campaign. This is largely because leaders of the Church specifically asked members to vote for Proposition 8 and donate money to the cause. However, contrary to what opponents are implying, the Church itself did not donate any money.

Liberals are insisting that the Church broke the non-existent "separation of church and state" clause of the Constitution, and there are initiatives in motion trying to bereave the Church of its tax-exempt status. However, the Church did not lobby for any political platform; the Church merely took a stand on a social issue. If you tell a church that it cannot take a stand on a controversial moral issue, you are telling it that it cannot be a church. And where are the people trying to annul the tax-exempt status of the Jews and Episcopalians who officially opposed Proposition 8?

When you look at the exit polls, it is clear that, if you were to credit one particular group with the passage of Proposition 8, that would have to be the black Protestants, and not the Mormons. But why are there no picketers in front of black Protestant churches? It's because blacks are now off-limits...but Mormons are not.

Mormons are the very embodiment of everything liberal America hates. They are only happy to have an excuse to attack us.

Most of the remarks made by homosexual activist groups consist of, "How could Mormons, having such a history of persecution, be so hypocritical as to turn around and persecute gays and lesbians?"

Well, people, blaming a minority group for all of your problems when their actual influence is marginal constitutes the very heart and soul of bigotry. Well done, homosexual America: You have proven that you are just as capable as everyone else of being shallow, vindictive, intellectually lazy, and, yes, hypocritical. And here we were starting to think of you as downtrodden martyrs.

When the fundie Baptists come (as they always do) to picket the LDS General Conference and tell all the Mormon women they are whores, I wonder how they will react when the crazy homosexual groups show up to do the same thing. That will certainly be interesting.

But, all of this said, if the homosexual community wants to continue blaming the Mormons for the passage of Proposition 8, they can go right ahead. Supporting Proposition 8 was the right thing to do, and if they want to give us all the credit, we're not complaining.

The Last Best Hope

After reading and seeing how the election of TheOne was received and cheered around the globe, how he's been hailed as the first President of the World and idolized past all sensible comprehension, this piece by Hitchens gave me a small lift. There actually are others in the world who see this election without rose colored glasses. There really are people in the world who don't want to see America become France... or England... or Germany.

There actually are non-Americans who are lamenting the future of this "last best hope on Earth" under this very liberal and inexperienced young leader. Hitchens speaks of America in lofty, if pasttense terms: Suspicious of welfare addiction, feeble justice and high taxes, totally committed to preserving its own national sovereignty, unabashedly Christian in a world part secular and part Muslim, suspicious of the Great Global Warming panic, it [America] was unique.

Now we hear the drum beat of moral relativists, or as Hitchens calls it the march of political correctness. Don't be mistaken, political correctness is a symptom of a larger disease called moral relativism. Moral relativism will be the bullet that kills America. And our politicians and entertainers will be the gunmen.

Moral relativists call us bigots and tell us we are intolerant for not accepting gay marriage. They call us stupid and outdated for not agreeing with socialism's ideal of spreading the wealth. We were called racist for not voting for TheOne. We are intolerant, exclusive and bigotted for not following the left's Marxist political philosophies.

To the moral relativists or the left, everything is grey. There are no black and white issues, no good or bad, no right or wrong. Everything is relative and everyone's opinion is right. And if you dare say that abortion is bad or that gay marriage is wrong, you will be stoned into silence.

And I believe that is part of the reason we lost this battle and why we are losing the war. We have been intimidated into silence, which is passive approval or at the least, not any kind of opposition, to speak of. The media and political attacks on Joe the plumber are good examples of silence intimidation. Be silent, be agreeable, don't ask the obvious or hard questions. Be like us, the moral relativists. Otherwise, we will audit your tax returns for the next 10 years and publicize your divorce arrangements

But thankfully, Joe stood tall against it and made us all prouder and louder. His is an example we need to follow. We have lost our moral compass or maybe more accurately, we gave it up to the left. If we don't get it back, if we don't find our direction again, we will become the lost best hope on Earth.

I find that I have swung 2 to 3 levels to the right on the political spectrum. I have passed beyond the "Libertarian" point of view. I have not yet reached the "Nationalism" level. I suppose I am right smack dab on the "Reactionary" line. Obviously this is of great concern to me. I do not desire to swing any further right.

I am compelled to fight (as all reactionaries will do) against the attack on our governing system. In a negative way most reactionaries of the past fought to hold on to a monarchy or aristocracy. Today I stand to fight for the survival of the American democratic republic,and the constitution.

I take a stand that, the United States is the best governing country in the world. I delight in the Lord that our founding Fathers sought and believed in the divine providence that ushered their venture to the new world. I delight that God in his glory established the new country to be a beacon of light unto the world, a city upon a hill.

It is a sad time now that communism has made an internal attack against the U.S. We should not forget that the Black Panther Party(new and old) is in fact a communist party. We should not forget that the Black Panther Party sent their members over to Vietnam to fight against our troops during the war. We should not take lightly, that Black Panther members hold seats in congress. That Bobby Rush can be a congressman to me is shameful.

Khalid Al Mansour helped fund Obama's (adult) Harvard education and he also mentored the leaders of the Black Panther Party of the 60's. Should not the Black Panther Party members and their affiliates be disqualified from public office for their previous acts of treason. It should not stand for an enemy or friend of the enemy of the U.S. to be commander in chief of the U.S. military or hold a position in public office.

The quest of a reactionary is to ignite a spark. A spark to fight in order to hold onto what we have been granted. To fight at all costs. I solicit the aid of those to my right side and to those on my left. I do not solicit aid unto myself. As King David could not wear Saul's armor neither can anyone suppose to know another individuals destiny. God knows, he formed you in your mothers womb. This we can know:

Are you a warrior? A mighty man of valour? - Fight with determination to win and be prepared to die.

Are you a writer? Write with a purpose and with persuasion. Keep the line of communication open.

Are you a judge? Judge righteously.

Are you a capitalist? Remember the afflicted and the poor and stretch your hand out to the needy.

Are you a Christian? Preach the truth. Preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Are you a watchman? Blow the trumpet. Sound the alarm when danger is near. Warn the people.

These are truths for all to bear, however, your unique position empowers you with unique persuasion and ability. Let God be glorified in all things.

The American church lies on it's porch like a neutered dog without passion. While Christians around the world are dying for Christ the American church is content to appease a civil society. It does not the speak the outrageous or radical ideas that Christ taught. Christ taught to render unto Caesar the things that are Caesars,and unto God the things which belong to God. It seems as though most things are rendered unto Caesar and we forget what belongs to God.

Unfortunately America is feverishly adopting communism (anti-Christianity). I find as I become a reactionary Christian I can not contain an uncontrollable fire which burns within. I can not stop from speaking truths even if it incites war. Jesus did not change his message that he came to lead captivity captive and set the captives free. Jesus was indeed tried as an agitator against authorities because of messages such as this.

Did the apostles succumb to the civil societies desire for non-disruption of sinful woes? Or, did they go about the business of speaking truth in the face of lies, and everything that exalted itself above God and Christ his resurrected son?

In past years most of the gospel conversations I've had in the streets were a call to return to God, for many have fallen away. The swing of the political spectrum has prompted me now to proclaim the the message of hell, fire, and brimstone. Jesus Christ will return with a sword in his hand, and with great vengeance upon them that dwell upon the earth. Therefore, repent for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. God forbid that we remain silent!

Our social contract ,The Constitution, is clear in absolute restraint of the Federal Governments authority. There are specific powers enumerated to Congress and the Executive. Everything else is retained by the States and the Citizens of the States.

The 9th and 10th Amendments to the Constitution are the "Forgotten Men" if you will. They are completely absent in our political discourse. These two amendments are the Firewall against and an Activist Federal government. Since the middle of the 19th Century assaults on these two Bulwarks of Liberty have been steadily and progressively more expansive. The end result is "We the People" are never more than an electoral college vote away from tyranny.

Decentralized power IS the key. If Congress and the Executive had only their Constitutionally mandated powers to play with Obama would be a charismatic and relatively powerless President with odd opinions and very little authority to impose them.

When scoping out the next generation of leaders I would humbly suggest searching out those who wish NOT so much to halt the expansion of the Federal Government but roll it back. Send tax dollars back to the States not in the form of block grants but through the elimination of Executive Branch Departments like the Dept. of Education, the Dept. of Transportation etc. With their dissolution their regulatory authority would also be returned to the states where the Citizens have more direct influence over their elected representatives.

It's just an idea albeit not mine. It was Madisons, Hamiltons, Jeffersons etc...when they wrote and ratified the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

Presidential debates about energy policy though quite stimulating miss the point entirely. If people in western Pennsylvania want to fire their boilers with coal, Great! Let them be free to. Let Governor Rendell and the Pennsylvania legislature regulate them. It has no bearing on my life here in MA. If people in Alabama want to put up a plaque listing the 10 commandments on the edifice of EVERY courthouse in the State, excellent. It is their right to. It has no bearing on my life here in MA, although I would be more apt to consider living there if they did.

Let us find that person who will return America to her Constitution and let "We The People" get back to self Governance.

In an earlier post titled "We have not yet begun to fight". I meant to say; 57 million American fighters out number 3 million, million man marchers by 54 million.

Join the forces of 57 million Americans and counting.Capitalists won't surrender their capital, Militias won't surrender their guns, Christians won't surrender their faith, Speakers won't surrender their speech. A "rebel yell" or "a call to action" will not come from the command of a leader. It will come from the sound of the 1st attack made against any of these freedoms. Freedom wants you! 57 million american fighters out number 3 million - million man marchers by 54,000. Our fight is more fierce than a crowd of Acorn sign wavers.

Having been born and raised a Southerner, the worst insult you could have hurled at my family would have been to call us white trash. By strictly Southern definitions, we were anything but "trash." We were old family, old land, old position Southerners; that ain't trash. That said, we didn't have a pot to pee in or a window to throw it out of; most of the trash and even lots of the Blacks, though we didn't refer to them that way at the time, lived better. It was all a matter of perceived social position, how you ranked with the people who annointed themselves to do the ranking.

It isn't a uniquely Southern thing either. Ben Stevens, Senator Ted's illustrious son, once referred to people from the Matanuska Valley, Sarah's stomping grounds, as Valley Trash. Which brings me to the point of this thing.

Boston, New Yawk, DC, and LA are the only civilized places in America. If you live anywhere else, you're trash. Sarah got criticized because she didn't have an Ivy League education, but it really wouldn't have mattered if she'd gone to Hahvud; since she lived in Wasilla, Alaska, she's trash. Almost all of you are trash. Learn it, live it, love it; you're trash.

Somebody posted something a few days ago from some English prick carrying on about Sarah being anti-intellectual and hating city-dwellers and how bad that was. Well, I think the English are generally a bunch of degenerates, but be that as it may. I think Southern white trash like me and Valley Trash like Sarah Palin do share some things. We're not anti-intellectual; we're anti self-annointed, self-righteous, arrogant pricks who consider themselves superior to the rest of us. We're not anti- city dwellers; we're anti- the people who think that the only civilized life in America is in the big cities.

Get yourself one of those electoral maps with the Red and Blue states. If you live in the Red "L," you're trash. Intermountain West, Great Plains, The South, our fellow Americans are superior to us. We're the trash from flyover country. Embrace it!

Monday, March 4, 1861. President Abraham Lincoln makes his First Inaugural Address

With civil war on the horizon, Lincoln addresses a divided nation. He tries to reassure the population and invokes the wisdom of the Almighty in the determination of whether the North or the South will prevail. He speaks of the rights of the states and of the people to hold the federal government in check, assuring the people that, in the brief period of four years, little significant damage can be done.

President Lincoln said:

"By the frame of the Government under which we live this same people have wisely given their public servants but little power for mischief, and have with equal wisdom provided for the return of that little to their own hands at very short intervals. While the people retain their virtue and vigilance no Administration by any extreme of wickedness or folly can very seriously injure the Government in the short space of four years."

Perhaps politics moved much more slowly then. Maybe, lacking the influence of Chris Matthews and Keith Olbermann, the people made wiser, more measured decisions. Regardless, I only hope that Lincoln's words hold promise for today. That the Almighty will, in the end, decide the issues that divide us, and that the control of the government will remain, as it must, with the people.

Why are they throwing Palin under the bus?

Its very simple why they are doing this. Palin has stood up to her own party and has called them out on monopolistic practices in big oil industries and dare challenge the good ol boy network. There may be many reasons why democrats do not like Palin, but they should at least admire her for the strength of her character to stand up against the practice of coruption and greed behind the curtain.

The republicans moderates are throwing her under the bus as payback.

People often wonder, how are we ever going to bring about real change to washington? It will only happen when people like Palin are willing to call out their own party in an atempt to keep people honest. It will only happen when the people in the republican party are willing to be open and transparent.

The GOP lost this race because it has become as gutless as the democrats, because politics has become a matter of convenience and expediency, rather than one of principled service.

A lack of knowledge and experience is something that can be corrected, but lack of character and integrity cannot.

I keep hearing, let's not fight or point fingers, we need to keep moving forward and get back to business as usual. I say no. We need to stop. We have a serious rift within our party that is an infected sore that is turning gangrene. I know it sound confrontational, because it is. I know it sounds devisive, because it is. I know it sounds like I am being uncooperative, because I am. What is happening to Palin is symbolic to what happens all the time in the republican party. The republican fiscal conservatives that lean liberal socialy use Social conservatives collectively so as to achieve their goals and objectives politically but then throw them under the bus at the first drop of a hat. They use social issues as bi-partisanship currency whenever conveinent.

I would rather cutoff a limb than have the gangrene spread. I would rather limp on one foot, than stand on two feet without my integrity in tact.

We have been told that Palin was choosen to run on the ticket in order to entice votes from those who supported Hillary Clinton, and when that didn't happen, they are saying she hurt the campaign. The real truth is, McCain didn't have the ability to excite the conservative base of the party. Palin was added to the ticket because they knew her values and character were what the McCain ticket lacked in authenticity to ignite the social conservatives of the party, and that is exactly what she did. It was McCain's job to reach across and try to pull in the independants and secure the moderate vote based on his bi-partisan record. He failed, or rather he wasn't able to do that.

I have nothing but respect for McCain and all that he has done for this country, but the fact of the matter is, the only reason why McCain did as good as he did, was because of Palin. She held up her end and cause many of conservative base to come out and vote.

If you think I am being too radical or too extreme, then throw me under the bus too. At least then I will know I am in good company with Palin.

http://www.redstate.com/diaries/erick/2008/nov/05/operation-leper/

Is it not true that you guys live in this country and fight within to make your case? Why is that? Why don't you 'nuts' admit that your stupid ideology only works whenever you guys gather in some form of 'fun time'. Come on, be honest at least once a day. It's true, we still have nuts like Bill Ayers, global warming wackos, anti-war groups, code pink wackos, leftist socialists, etc. If or when the suicide bombers start their work here, then only, if at all, will these wackos realize (for the sake of national security) that we are engaged in anti-terrorist wars overseas. - jt