libertarian (19)

I copied this stunning selection below, from a larger post on AR-15.com; and I want to give full credit and attribution to the website and their writers. It boggles my mind, that highly experienced former elected officials and bureaucrats, who are currently running for President and Vice-President of the United States, can allow themselves to be so ignorant and clueless regarding one of their TOP AGENDA ISSUES ... Guns, Gun Control and Gun Confiscation. On occasion "Ignorance is Bliss"; BUT NOT HERE, NOT NOW gentlemen. Here YOUR IGNORANCE MEANS THE DEATH OF OUR NATION!

"August 2016

Another month closer to the presidential election, and the circus continues.

If we can set aside the media bias, the ever-increasing proof of lies and criminal activity that Hillary Clinton, the State Department, and the Clinton Foundation has been engaged in (and which has been ignored by the DOJ), and the rest of the racial and political issues that continue to surface every day for a minute, and enjoy this jewel.

A few days ago, Bill Weld (former Republican governor of Massachusetts and now Gary Johnson's running mate on the Libertarian ticket) summarized the anti-gun sentiment about as well as any of his peers could have:

“The five-shot rifle, that’s a standard military rifle; the problem is if you attach a clip to it so it can fire more shells and if you remove the pin so that it becomes an automatic weapon, and those are independent criminal offenses,” Weld said. “That is when they become, essentially, a weapon of mass destruction. The problem with handguns probably is even worse than the problem of the AR-15.”obiwan.jpg

WTF?!?! Once again, the anti-gun "experts" publicly show the world a level of ignorance about a topic they want to pass laws against that is downright embarrassing.

We're not talking about Joe Blow on the street- these are career politicians who are looking to run the country! Weld was a U.S. Attorney for Massachusetts, then headed the Justice Department’s criminal division under the Reagan administration, and later served two terms as governor in Massachusetts! Now he's running for Vice President of the United States.

How is it that these "experts" can come to a conclusion about a topic they know nothing about, and by nothing I mean not enough to put together a sentence, and feel they must force it down the throats of their citizens?

Wouldn't the first thing you do if you wanted to speak about a topic, especially one you know people have such strong feelings about, be to educate yourself as much as possible so you don't sound like a complete moron when you open your mouth?

Not for democrats who pander to people's emotions. The facts don't matter. Common sense doesn't matter. They talk to hear themselves talk and make everyone feel like they're doing something to help the world.

They don't need facts to back up their positions. They don't need tools, or even guns to help the world because in fact they don't ever accomplish anything. They just talk.

It is up to others to do the hard work. To fight the battles that actually make a difference in the world.

And once they do, these politicians sit back and take the credit while criticizing the manner in which the job was done.

So how is anyone supposed to take anything else Weld says seriously after showing such ignorance? You can't. Ignorance is easily written off and he will not be taken seriously. That's fine.

Back to Hillary though, and the lies upon lies she's told to the American people. The lies she's told Congress. The lies she's told to the families of fallen soldiers, and all in pursuit of money and power. That, unlike the moronic comments by Weld cannot be ignored. Those are not based on ignorance, but on downright selfishness and a lack of concern for the welfare of others.

I'm confident the FBI investigations into the Clinton Foundation will turn up a mountain of evidence of criminal activity like we've never seen before in our history.

The question is what will happen when it does? Will the DOJ ignore it? Will the Obama administration wipe the slate clean, or will justice finally prevail?

A chief aim of the Constitution as drafted by the Constitutional Convention was to create a government with enough power to act on a national level, but without so much power that fundamental rights would be at risk. It is quite obvious that limit has been overstepped, and electing Hillary would essentially re-create the same greedy, selfish, tyrannical government that the King of England and Parliament had back in the 18th century. Then she could begin dismantling the Constitution piece by piece.

I hope the FBI does their job, and that the DOJ does theirs. I hope that the evidence that was purposely deleted from the private email server makes its way to the American people, and that the establishment and its corrupt politics are eliminated. I still have hope that all is not lost in our federal government, but I have no confidence."

It is terrifying that these Libertarians want to pass restrictive gun laws to abolish the 2nd amendment and confiscate ALL weapons from civilian control. And the Hillary's Socialist Democrats are just more NWO talking-heads spewing the same mindless, fictional and treasonous 2a rhetoric.

ARE YOU READY TO RUMBLE? 

Read more…

Busted and Disgusted

We, in this present world, that are not in the public eye sometimes live by a different standard.

The current state of not only Sports and Entertainment, but Politics has come to full light.

These Days, you only have to "SAY" that you have changed or that you are "sorry" AFTER being caught or exposed in Immoral/Illegal activities is supposed to give any and all a free pass on all you do.

Athletes, no matter their age are accounted to be Children, innocent of everything. Politicians just say "I'm Sorry and seeking Treatment" are to be completely forgiven, excused, retained, and exonerated for every Criminal or Immoral act ever done.

Is there any reason to believe that this New Norm is not the reason why the actions done by anyone these days are never really paid for by the individuals committing these deeds? There is truly no real regret or repentance by someone that only says they change just by getting Busted.

True change doesn't come by being exposed publicly, but by being truly repentant in your Heart while not being busted or exposed.

Politicians, unable to be Honorable in actions, word and deed, should be Banned from public service until they live without incident for YEARS before given a chance to cheat the People again.

Criminal activity should ban you indefinitely maybe totally from public service(disservice).

While athletes  serve only as entertainment, Public Sevants are to not be above the Law, but to uphold the Law. Public Servants that are Immoral or Criminal are just that, they serve only themselves not the Public.

 I'm not without Sin or any action not in need of regret and repentance, No, but I didn't need to be exposed or busted to come to that point of changing and doing the right things. I am no better than anyone else and others are no better than We the People.

Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Christian or not We must not give any place of public office to the Illegal or immoral any longer. Demand that our Leaders not be above the Law but FOLLOW the Laws of our land and the God of our Founding Fathers.

In my opinion.

Your Comments Appreciated.

Read more…

Republican students at Portland State University were invaded on May 30 by Islamist students who disrupted their meeting. Confused students wondered why “progressives” and Islamists have so much in common. Answer: The culture of death has two sides - "progressivism" with its complete disdain and disregard for life at all levels – even to White House operatives wanting to see world population reduced by 80% by any means.. Radical Islam embraces death while killing infidels worthy of reward for advancing Islam and Sharia Law. Ultimately they will clash just as the Communists and Nazis of the last century.

Since this is spiritual warfare, Republicans should know that Mohammed held the Blessed Virgin Mary as the most important woman in Islam. They also believe in Jesus' virgin birth. Ultimately it is the love of God that will overcome all this nonsense. Mary, appearing as Our Lady of Guadalupe in 1531 (Bing it yourself), fulfilled an ancient Aztec prophecy on the hill of Tepeyac and saved the forebears of the modern Latino from horrific human sacrifice practiced by the Aztecs, Incas and Mayans. Maybe when we’re ready to admit our own failing to defend our freedoms, she’ll appear at Mecca during Hajj and launch the completion of the mystery of God’s love for all humankind made in his image and likeness.

You've been fed dreck in your education and are ill-equipped to deal with the powers of evil - even those who may innocently serve it – like MoveOn.org or Emily’s List - even militant Muslims who have tasted freedom and have been taught to hate it.

The first step is for true Liberals to separate themselves from their "progressive" masters and join Conservatives and Libertarians in creating again the balance of Constitutional rapport that made this country great. Hell, if you're not a liberal in college, you are part of a rarefied atmosphere in academia. Everyone has the opportunity to grow up. - I'm only 78 and still trying to figure it out!

http://joemiller.us/2013/06/intolerant-oregon-muslims-bully-college-republicans-out-of-their-own-event-videos/?utm_source=JoeMiller.US+List&utm_campaign=4d02a1b253-Regular_Campaign_6_28_136_28_2013&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_065b6c381c-4d02a1b253-231024081

 

Read more…

Republican students at Portland State University were invaded on May 30 by Islamist students who disrupted their meeting. Confused students wondered why “progressives” and Islamists have so much in common. Answer: The culture of death has two sides - "progressivism" with its complete disdain and disregard for life at all levels – even to White House operatives wanting to see world population reduced by 80% by any means.. Radical Islam embraces death while killing infidels worthy of reward for advancing Islam and Sharia Law. Ultimately they will clash just as the Communists and Nazis of the last century.

Since this is spiritual warfare, Republicans should know that Mohammed held the Blessed Virgin Mary as the most important woman in Islam. They also believe in Jesus' virgin birth. Ultimately it is the love of God that will overcome all this nonsense. Mary, appearing as Our Lady of Guadalupe in 1531 (Bing it yourself), fulfilled an ancient Aztec prophecy on the hill of Tepeyac and saved the forebears of the modern Latino from horrific human sacrifice practiced by the Aztecs, Incas and Mayans. Maybe when we’re ready to admit our own failing to defend our freedoms, she’ll appear at Mecca during Hajj and launch the completion of the mystery of God’s love for all humankind made in his image and likeness.

You've been fed dreck in your education and are ill-equipped to deal with the powers of evil - even those who may innocently serve it – like MoveOn.org or Emily’s List - even militant Muslims who have tasted freedom and have been taught to hate it.

The first step is for true Liberals to separate themselves from their "progressive" masters and join Conservatives and Libertarians in creating again the balance of Constitutional rapport that made this country great. Hell, if you're not a liberal in college, you are part of a rarefied atmosphere in academia. Everyone has the opportunity to grow up. - I'm only 78 and still trying to figure it out!

http://joemiller.us/2013/06/intolerant-oregon-muslims-bully-college-republicans-out-of-their-own-event-videos/?utm_source=JoeMiller.US+List&utm_campaign=4d02a1b253-Regular_Campaign_6_28_136_28_2013&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_065b6c381c-4d02a1b253-231024081

 

Read more…

A Letter to Working Class Democrats

 

                        I wrote an article a few days ago in which I appealed to conservative leaders in many fields to come together and form a 3rd political party to represent those of us not being represented In Congress. http://www.conservativedailynews.com/2013/02/help-wanted-new-generation-of-founding-fathers/   To look at it on the surface one might think I was talking to Republicans and Independents primarily, but they are only a portion of the audience I want to reach.  I am truly perplexed by people who will vote for Democrat candidates when the party stands against everything you say you believe in and value.

Read More:

http://www.conservativedailynews.com/2013/02/a-letter-to-working-class-democrats/

Read more…

Ron Paul

Ron Paul is still in the running (kind of).

His supporters love him, there's no doubting that. He's got a bunch of people excited about his 'We are the Future Rally' set to take place in Tampa in tandem with the RNC. His main goal seems to be to try to set party platforms with the delegates he collected and support he's garnered across the country. 

You can see details about his rally here: http://www.ronpaul2012.com/2012/07/06/ron-paul-tampa-rally/

I don't know that he'll have a large impact on what Romney and Ryan set out to do. Whether he runs as a Libertarian or a Republican, he does have some strong ideals that he's consistently clung to over his career, and for that consistency he has many people's respect, including my own (this does not mean I think I will vote for him instead of Romney).

Some people think he'll try to wedge in a speaking spot for his son Rand, as they try to gain favor with party leaders so that they can further their national goals in the coming elections. I guess we'll see. 

Whatever the outcome is for Paul post-convention I think he's an interesting and noteworthy political figure to keep track of. If he does not go on the ballot officially for the national election in November, which I think is unlikely, it will also be interesting to see how many people write him in in order to spite the establishment political parties and candidates. 

2892881687-3.jpg?width=583

I don't know that voting for Ron Paul is a productive vote, but is is a way to signal the establishment parties of your discontent. 

Read more…

Libertarian Alternatives

This morning, Mitt Romney announced his selection of Paul Ryan to be his running mate for the Republican Party's presidential run in 2012. It was one of the final moves left to Romney in his presentation of his campaign to the American public. Following that decision, now it is left to the American people to examine and ponder their coming decision vote in less than 90 days. The choice is now laid out before them: Barack Obama and Joe Biden, or Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan, each set of candidates coming with their own party baggage and history, each coming with their own political histories and policies. 

Which ever of the two political parties you closer adhere to, although I don't think its wrong to assume most of you reading this are probably not Democrats, people always seem to want a third option. Maybe it's because they're tired of the establishment (who isn't?) or maybe they don't feel represented well by polarized partisan debates, people yearn for an alternative, something to latch onto. Perhaps the establishment seems controlled or influenced by the same sources, so people want something fresh and unspoiled.

bs-logo.jpg?width=164One of the more widely known third parties is the Libertarian Party, which calls for small government. If you remember, Ron Paul was their candidate in 1988. This year, their candidate is former Republican Gov. Gary Johnson of New Mexico.

I don't know that any of the things people look for in third parties are really true about the Libertarian Party, but certainly they would like to be that alternative for people. The main line of their political philosophy is anti-big government. They do not want the government prying into or disturbing their lives in any way. While this is certainly a view many can grab onto, their ideals are not entirely attractive to everyone.

Their policies are well outlined in this video:

You-Are-Libertarian-Video.png?width=497

Whatever you think of Gov. Johnson and the Libertarian Party, but it is an alternative to the main political parties. If you views toward the establishment GOP have soured as of late, or over the past 20 years, then maybe Gary is your man.

Maybe not, but there you go. I don't necessarily agree with a lot of what he says, but then again I disagree with Romney too. At least I've still got 87 days to decide. Maybe Ron Paul will stick around until then. 

gary-johnson-live-free.jpg?width=339

I should say that I do not think Libertarians are very Tea Party-esque, but I wanted to share the option that will be on the ballot. 

Read more…

4063426289?profile=original

This post consists of a series of responses I posted to Jack Hunter's OPINION piece in the Daily Caller regarding Ron Paul's foreign policy. The piece is full of inaccuracies, fabrications, and paranoia. I countered Mr. Hunter on points of defense spending, and the attempt by the Ron Paul movement to redefine Conservatism into something that resembles anti-war Libertarianism.

ReaganGirl: 

First of all, the concept of limited government does not belong to Ron Paul. Conservative Republicans have always embraced the limitations placed on the government via Constitutional principles. The Ron Paul movement is deceptive and people need to pay attention to what is underneath those superficial layers of constitutionalism and smaller government and federalism. Ron Paul and his followers have a deep contempt for the United States Military. They call us "murderous," "conquerors," "terrorists," and "nation builders." Their defining belief is that it is our foreign "interventionism" in Middle Eastern countries that brought about the attacks of 9/11. Ron Paul himself has intimated that 9/11 was an inside job, and that the Bush Administration was "gleeful" that it occurred. Paul has accused Michele Bachmann of "hating Muslims." His refusal to consider the defense of Israel an important foreign policy matter smacks of Antisemitism. His followers accuse the United States of targeting Arabs, of murdering millions of civilians in unjust wars, and of an ineptness that makes the rest of the world hate us. Ron Paul also appeals to young, anti-war, legalize marijuana Occupy Wall Street types. The recent hysteria from his camp about the Defense Authorization Bill had him and his followers teaming up with the ACLU, Democrats in Congress, and citing the Huffington Post as a credible news source. It all looks suspiciously like an infiltration by the Left into the Conservative wing of American politics. Many Ron Paul supporters lack the basic Patriotism and love for country that defines Tea Party Conservatives. I have compiled comments from several Ron Paul supporters regarding our military actions overseas. They are truly shocking and can be read at http://reagangirl.com/?p=23633


Please refer to the following visual from the conservative Heritage Foundation to see that our defense spending in not "unlimited." http://www.heritage.org/budgetchartbook/defense-entitlement-spending. The reality that the total defense budget is only about 1/5 of the entire federal budget. Hardly unlimited. Mr. Hunter is not a reporter, but a hack who incites hysteria through his use of hyperbole and inflammatory rhetoric. Call it "isolationism," call it "non-interventionism," a pig with lipstick is still a pig. Ron Paul's foreign policies are naive, ill-informed, and extremely dangerous. You cannot simply ignore an ideology which represents an existential threat to Israel and the United States. Pulling out of foreign wars will not make Islamic Terrorists go away, it will invite more of them here. Mr. Hunter's statistics regarding the opinions of veterans are fallacious. But the Ron Paul movement has adopted strategies that used to be exclusive to the Left. Calling our Military "murderous," and "nation builders," lying about issues, fabricating information, and making the Ron Paul movement look as if it is larger than it is in actuality through a concerted and obsessive strategy of overwhelming polls and concentrating their numbers in places like Iowa. Watch out for this movement. It is deceptive and dangerous.


Ron Paul and his followers are trying to redefine Conservatism into something that resembles the anti-war, pro-marijuana protesters of the 60s and 70s. Ron Paul is a Libertarian who adopted the Republican label simply to gain traction in his campaign, so don't tell me he is a principled man. He holds fast to Libertarianism. Conservatism holds many Libertarian viewpoints such as a constitutionally limited government, Federalism, individual liberty, etc. But Conservatism is strengthened by the component of morality. We do not believe that government should legislate virtue at the national level, but we do believe that government, especially state and local government, has a role in protecting its citizens from the greater evils of the world. Conservatives believe that the government should protect the helpless, such as the unborn and the disabled. Conservatives believe that the law should exemplify virtue through placing limitations on harmful influences such as pornography and drugs. Libertarians tend to eschew the moral boundaries that Conservatives believe are essential to a healthy and free society. Ron Paul appeals to young anti-war, pro marijuana Occupy Wall Street types because they feel comfortable with an ideology which omits moral restraints. They have replaced traditional morality with their "anti-war" morality which defines any act of aggression (or self-defense for that matter) on the part of the United States as "immoral." It is time for thinking Conservatives to step back from the deceptive Ron Paul phenomenon and remember that it is reason, morality, patriotism, and a strong national defense that makes us a great nation.


Core Conservatives need to pay heed to the nature and purpose of the Ron Paul phenomenon. Their positions are often contrary to those principles and qualities we hold dear as Conservatives, especially the portrayal by some Ron Paul supporters of our Military as "murderous," "conquerors," and "terrorists." 


Read more…

   

        “Besides Rasmussen, the often interesting Quinnipiac University polling a few months back showed that only 19% of the voting populace generally trust government to do the right thing “almost all of the time” or “most of the time; but among TEA Party members that number drops to only 4%. 

 

 

 

Rasmussen Poll Underlines

Conservative Voter Skepticism, Distrust

 

 

        The term bandied around most by the progressives and other left-wingers over the last 110 years of American history is their Marxist interpretation of the word “revolution.”  Those revolting people with the aim of bringing totalitarianism to our shores have ceaselessly talked about “the revolution” and derided the system created by America’s Founding Fathers, the system that has made America a shining beacon of hope around the planet for over 225 years. 

        However, throughout real American history it’s been the radical center that has led the way, who’ve brought great change to these shores . . . and right now, according to a recent Rasmussen Reports it is that same radical-center group that is most likely to “kick the bast_rds out” of the Oval Office and Congress until they get a government that truly represents their interests and highest standards. According to a recent Rasmussen Reports poll of likely Republican voters, if you talk to 64% of them, they now see "the divide between the public and their government is the biggest since the American Revolution" began in 1775.

        In the Rasmussen survey of likely G.O.P. primary voters, 64% of them agree with that sentiment; only 16% disagree and 20% say they aren’t sure. In related questioning, 84% of Republican voters trust the judgment of the American people more than that of the nation’s political leaders and only 4% trust the political leaders more with 12% “undecided.” When Democrats and Independents are added in, overall 76% of the people today trust the people more than the politicians. The likely Republican voters deeply distrust their government:  87% say the federal government has become a special interest group with the power to advance its own interests to the public’s detriment. Only 6% of Republicans disagree with that view.  67% of G.O.P. voters think big business and the government often work together in ways that hurt consumers and investors; with only 13% disagreeing and 20% unsure.

       Rasmussen Reports founder Scott Rasmussen (who’s run the most accurate and trustworthy polling service in the country for the last dozen years; authored the book In Search of Self-Governance; and co-authored Mad as Hell: How the TEA Party is Fundamentally Remaking our Two-Party System with ex-Clinton aide Doug Schoen) said this in In Search of Self Governance: 

                                    “Throughout American History, voters tend to be a few decades ahead of the political leadership. Voters gradually adapt to changes in the real world while politicians defend the status quo.” 
 
        If he’s right, it explains why “Revolution” as it’s seen by the left hasn’t caught on. The dynamic in America is, according to Rasmussen, significantly different than it is in European, Asian or Latin American countries where Marxism has played out its hand.  Obviously, the status quo today is an unresponsive, big spending, ever-expanding federal government and gradually diminished freedoms -- all of which the larger part of the voters oppose.

       Rasmussen revealed that 43% of the G.O.P. considers themselves part of the TEA (Taxed Enough Already) Party movement and 22% of all voters align themselves with the TEA Party.  The TEA Party reports that its makeup includes 9% Democrats; 18% Independents and 72% Libertarians and Republicans who are, of course, most likely to vote in the upcoming Republican primaries. The stereotype that the group belongs to “angry old men” is incorrect: 56% of TEA Party members are women and the average age is 44. 

       Polls by other groups have highlighted some of the problems that the recent Rasmussen’s poll shows Republicans excited about. For example, the often interesting Quinnipiac University polling a few months back showed that only 19% of the voting populace generally trusts government to do the right thing “almost all of the time” or “most of the time; but among TEA Party members that number drops to only 4% compared to 24% among non-TEA Party citizens. All this ties in to another Rasmussen poll showing that only 23% of the likely voting public now says the government has the consent of the governed in America.

      The main difference, of course between the progressive-radicals and the mainstream radicals is, of course, the question of bullets or ballots.  Many on the left such as Frances Fox Piven of Cloward-Piven** Strategy infamy have long advocated “bloody revolution.” The quiet revolution via the ballot box is the preferred method of the angry Republicans and TEA Party folk. Surveys of all Americans over the last four decades has shown that the breakdown of self-identification has remained very steady at or around: 44% calling themselves “conservative”; 42% self-labeling as “moderate”; and just 12% “liberal" or "progresssive.” 

      The area crippling conservatism’s power in Rajjpuut’s opinion is “social-conservativism^^” which includes items like strict anti-abortion stands; and desire for creationism and other religious beliefs being taught in public schools; singing religious Christmas carols in public schools, etc.  For example:  62% of all Americans are against the strictest anti-abortion views (absolutely no abortion under any circumstances) while only 37% support them.  When slightly softer anti-abortion views are expressed 55% oppose them and 44% support them.  Separation of Church and State doctrines, of course, are also very popular among voters who instinctively wish to confine religious utterances to churches and private religious schools.  On the other hand, “combined Constitutional conservativism and fiscal-conservativism” as advocated by the TEA Party seems to be an area that at least half of the Independent voters and about 15% of the Democrats can enthusiastically support.

 

Ya’all live long, strong and ornery,

Rajjpuut

**

http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/09/barack_obama_and_the_strategy.html

http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/02/the_clowardpiven_strategy_of_e.html

 

^^ The demographic breakdown is that on social issues Americans say they are “conservative” 36%; moderate 31%; and liberal 30%. This indicates that the most tenable political area lies within the Libertarian’s fiscal- and Constitutional-conservativism; and social-moderatism to social-liberalism. The reason that Libertarianism has never caught on, in Rajjpuut’s opinion is that Libertarian leaders have been genuinely impractical and also inclined to shoot their mouths off about ALL their views instead of confining their politics to fiscal- and Constitutional-conservativism only. Just get into office and dramatically shrink the size of the government and put the fiscal house in order . . . that’s what we need!

 

Read more…

by: Trent Derr - American Exceptionalism

 

When you examine Obamacare in detail, you find that the facts of the legislation contradict most of the selling points that the Liberals used as their basis for voting for the bill.

 

#1 – 18 Million People Added to Medicare while Cutting $500 Billion from the Program

Obamacare claims to cover 34 million new individuals with insurance.  The primary approach that the legislation uses to cover the uninsured is to expand the number of people under Medicare.   Yes, Medicare.  The same Medicare that was already scheduled to go bankrupt by 2017 before Obamacare passed.   The new legislation will add 18 million people to Medicare while reducing funding for Medicare by $500 billion.  Thus there is no choice but to reduce benefits to the existing Medicare recipients.  Given that more than half of the doctors in the United States do not accept Medicare, the further constraint of doctor availability will be another form of institutionalized rationing.

 

#2 – 17.1 Million Individuals with Private Insurance Will Lose Their Existing Coverage

Although more people are covered under Obamacare, the plan also causes a major redistribution of how individuals are covered for health care.  1.4 million citizens will lose their employer sponsored coverage and 15.7 will lose their other private coverage while they are shifted to either Medicare, “exchanges” under the plan, or will become uninsured.  Yes about 1 million individuals with insurance today will become uninsured and have no coverage under Obamacare.   So the economics of Obamacare will cause at least 17.1 million Americans to lose their existing coverage under Obamacare although the President assured us all that we would be able to keep our existing plans.  Continue...
Read more…

by: Trent Derr - American Exceptionalism

 

As part of their dogma, the Left believes society only operates “fairly” when more power is concentrated in the Federal Government and fewer rights are exercised independently by individuals. In their view, one of the major purposes of the Government is to equalize outcomes across society (try to find that in the Constitution). Note that it’s the equality of outcomes, not equality of opportunities, that is their definition of fairness. To achieve that goal, Liberals need an excuse to take rights and responsibilities from individuals and shift that power to the Government. Then that Governmental power can be used to institutionalize fairness by passing laws and regulations that provide for the equality of outcomes across society. However in spite of these plans, the Left has a major cultural roadblock in their way. One of our traditional American values is to treasure and defend our individual rights. When Americans are thinking rationally, we rarely, if ever, voluntarily give up any of our rights.

 

When the Liberals want to influence American opinion on an issue, they need to overcome that obstacle. To do so, they use a consistent formula to warp the public perception in their favor. Their approach does not involve an in-depth analysis of the facts with the subsequent generation of possible alternatives to be evaluated. Frankly facts get in their way. Their strategy is simply based on manipulating the public’s emotions. Liberals want to generate guilty feelings or stir up hate or trigger rage. Their tactic is to generate strong emotions in the public and with those emotions shut down rational thought. Create a crisis. Create an injustice. Pretend there is no time to think about, discuss, or even read the bill. We have to act now! Sound familiar?  Continue...
Read more…

by: Trent Derr - American Exceptionalism Blog

 

President Reagan is probably best known for three major accomplishments: rekindling the American spirit of entrepreneurship, defeating the Soviets in the Cold War leading to the eventual collapse of the USSR, and creating the most robust peacetime economic expansion in American history. In this posting, we’ll focus on topics more applicable to Reagan’s economic accomplishments. Reagan’s economic philosophy has been referred to by many names including Reaganomics and Supply Side Economics.

 

Arguably Reagan was dealing with a much more complex economic environment in 1980 than we have today. Reagan was faced with high unemployment, high inflation, high interest rates, a slow-growing economy and a high government deficit as a percentage of GDP. Today we primarily have high unemployment, a slow-growing economy and a high government deficit. However over the last two years the policies implemented by the Obama administration have not significantly reduced unemployment, have dramatically increased the government debt and have started to increase both inflation and interest rates. Note that inflation and interest rates were not a problem when Obama entered office. Continue...
Read more…

by: Trent Derr - American Exceptionalism Blog

 

My wife was seated in the airport waiting to catch her flight back home. So far so good. She was already past security waiting in the gate area. As usual, she was reading a book trying to pass the minutes until it was time to board. My wife can be as entertained by people watching as anyone. However if she has a good book, she would rather tune out the world and slip into a well written story, but not today. On this day, she along with everyone else in the gate area were going to have their concentration shattered by a guy on his cell phone. For sake of discussion, let’s call him Barry. Barry had a pretty deep voice, and he was talking loud.

 

It didn’t matter if you had on headphones, wore hearing aids or were half-deaf, you could hear Barry. His baritone voice blasted through the atmosphere at the gate such that everyone could hear every word he was saying. It became very clear, very quickly he was trying his best to get out of the dog house. It was obvious from his side of the conversation that Barry was in deep TROUBLE. He was in trouble with his girlfriend Liberty, and she was really ticked off. You couldn’t hear her side of the conversation, but it definitely was NOT PG-13. Barry was doing his best to convince his girlfriend over the phone that he wasn’t doing anything wrong. She wasn’t buying it.

 

That’s part of the reason why he was talking so loud. Continue...
Read more…

Trent Derr - American Exceptionalism

 

President Reagan was a strong advocate of Peace through Strength. Essentially he believed that foreign powers were less likely to engage with the United States militarily if they were certain that they would receive immediate, disproportionate punishment from our armed forces. It’s the same philosophy that most of us were smart enough to learn in grade school: Bullies don’t pick on the strong kids. They pick on the weak kids. If a bully picks on you, punch them really hard in the nose. Not only will they go away, they will probably not pick on you again. They will slink off and look for a weaker target.

 

Along with Peace through Strength, Reagan had several other beliefs that guided his thinking regarding protecting America from foreign enemies. First: there is good and evil. Second, in facing evil, it is justified to use military force. Third, if we are going to use force, use overwhelming force. Fourth, nation building works if you have a nation to begin with. Fifth, technology and innovative tactics both help overcome manpower or military imbalances. Finally, always leave your enemies guessing how extreme your military response might be.

 

There is good and evil. There is right and wrong. Reagan clearly would have seen both Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda as evil and threats to the citizens of the United States.  Continue...
Read more…

by: Trent Derr - American Exceptionalism

 

As a continuing part of our series What Would Reagan Do, we’re going to discuss what Reagan would do to address our current immigration problems. Clearly Reagan would have been shocked by our current situation related to rampant illegal immigration, the violence across our southern border in Mexico, and the crime being brought into American cities by illegal aliens.

 

Addressing Reagan’s views regarding immigration is complex because he had two seemingly conflicting views. For one, Reagan believed in the integrity of the borders of the United States. This view would have been only reinforced by our current international terrorism risks in a post 9-11 world. In fact one of Reagan’s most well-known quotes is: “A nation that cannot control its borders is not a nation.”

 

On the other side of the coin, Reagan believed the United States was the last great hope for the world. Reagan lived the American Dream and saw that dream as a gift from God for all free people. He fully understood the desire of the masses to come to America and to assimilate into the melting pot as Americans.  Continue...
Read more…

by: Trent Derr - Morning in America

 

Are you better off than you were two years ago? For most people, the answer is no. Compared to two years ago, more people are unemployed, the credit markets are still a mess, businesses are still being stymied by further federal regulation, and the global community has no idea what we stand for with our foreign policy.

 

What if we could roll the clock back? Roll it back a little more than two years to September 2008. At that time, the United States was at one of our more critical inflection points. We had military actions in both Iraq and Afghanistan, our southern border states were seeing a serious uptick in crime being committed by illegal aliens, the economy was starting to stagnate, and we had a looming credit crisis. Over a series of postings, we’ll address how Reagan would have addressed each of these issues. What Would Reagan Do?

 

The Credit Crisis

 

Reagan was a true believer in the free market. He believed in capitalism, American businesses, and most importantly the American people. Reagan knew that one of the key mechanisms of the free market is to correct imbalances that occur in the exchange of goods and currency. If you ever had any doubt about Reagan’s belief in free markets, look at how he handled the stock crash on “Black Monday”, stock market collapse of October 19, 1987.  Continue...
Read more…

by: Trent Derr - Morning in America

 

Hey Soul Sister

 

“What’s the difference between a hockey mom and a pitbull? Lipstick!” And with that shot over the bow at the Republican National Convention, Sarah Palin announced her arrival on to the national political stage. From her position as a relatively unknown Governor of Alaska, Palin launched one of the most exciting Vice Presidential candidacies in U.S. history.

 

From the completion of that speech, even before McCain lost to Obama, there was the question about her aspirations regarding the Presidency. Will Sarah Run? And that question is still outstanding today. Although she hasn’t announced, she’s made several moves to improve her position if she does decide to run. She’s now a frequent commentator on Fox News, has written several books, has had a brief series on cable television on TLC, formed her own Political Action Committee, and most importantly threw her support behind many individuals in their respective state level candidacies. Yes, Sarah is collecting “chips”.    Continue...
Read more…

by: Trent Derr - Morning in America

 

I swore I heard that right.  Did the President say this is our “Sputter and Nicked Up” moment?  Was this the first time that he decided to finally come clean with the American people?   I thought to myself, well at least he was being honest in his State of the Union speech.  He’s finally breaking it to everyone that after his first two years in office he’s set the economy up for another dip… and a bad one.  Yes I know that the stock market has been going up for the last couple months and other economic indicators have had minor upticks.  This temporary uptick has been due to the FED pumping liquidity into the financial markets at a level nearly matching 90% of our current GDP.

 

But Obama has decided to come clean.  He’s telling us when the FED’s stimulus runs out again, the economy is going to sputter, fall back into recession, and we’re all going to get nicked up.  The latest stimulus by the FED is known as QE2 (Quantitative Easing 2).  Why is it called QE2?  Because QE1 didn’t work.   Yes Obama was able to leverage QE1 to trigger a rebound in the stock market but that happens when the FED pours cash into the financial market.    The impact of Quantitative Easing 1 stopped working in late April 2010, and the stock market swooned. continued...

Read more…

by: Trent Derr - Morning in America

 

As I mentioned to some friends, due to the amount of money the President is borrowing from the Chinese, Obama is no longer able to refer to the Chinese leader as Hu Jintao. Now Obama is required to call him Hu JaDaddy.  To paraphrase Jay Leno, the bad news is the Chinese Leader came to the White House this week.  The good news is he said we could keep it.

 

However I’m not picking on the Chinese.  I’m opposed to the United States owing that amount of money to anyone.  Let alone a country that crushes dissent in their citizens, imprisons their Noble Prize winners, thinks that America is a temporary aberration in history, and has nuclear weapons pointed at us.    In any debtor relationship, you lose authority and the ability to negotiate from a level playing field.  Anyone who doesn’t think it matters where you borrow money is a fool.   Just ask a person who has ended up in “cement shoes” in the waters off of New Jersey whether it matters. But I digress…

 

Personally, I’m not as concerned about what our debt to China says about them as what is says about us.  The reckless increased spending by the Obama Administration is not primarily being driven by building infrastructure, fighting a war, or funding social security.  Continue...
Read more…