Words from the SoapBox

Every time the Obama Regime does something that does not make sense to Americans who believe in the Constitution and our free-market economy I always hear the question raised with a sense of disbelief, “How can he do that, I thought he was smarter than that”.

Using traditional objective standards, it would be easy to reach the conclusion that Obama is very smart:

- Harvard Law School graduate
- Editor of the Harvard Law Review
- Constitutional Law Professor at Harvard

It would be difficult to argue that his resume does not scream “smart”, maybe even brilliant. But, if we look at some real world events, a counter image begins to emerge.

- He apologizes for America on every trip abroad, and believes this will help to ‘repair’ our country’s image

o Now the Europeans and the Chinese are giving us economic advice because we look like fiscal fools

- He believes Iran is open and rational, with support now of an administration that has changed it posture on how it approaches dealing with Iran. He appears confident that “hope and change” will change Iran’s leadership

o Well, this is not working out too well

- He gives Russia all it wants in terms of missile defense, believing he will get Russia to give the US support in the United Nations against Iran

o Another failure to understand global scene

-His statements about the health care bill: “The bill forbids any federal funds to be used for abortion procedures”

-Some exchanges being set up will allow funds to go for abortions

o Children with pre-existing conditions will be covered immediately

- Not for several years

o It is not just a health care bill; it is also a jobs bill and will create many thousands of jobs.

- Already major companies are taking billions in write downs. Does that sound like a jobs growth strategy?

How can this be? So smart yet …

Occam’s Razor says the simplest answer is most often the right one.

Well, Obama is brilliant, he knows exactly what he is doing, but his real agenda is kept hidden from us.

The most recent battle over health care legislation is the third volley in a clandestine effort to transform America away from the principles of the Founding Fathers and towards the establishment of over-reaching government bureaucracies that by their very nature will move the country inextricably toward socialism.

We must all learn to see beyond the surface tension in legislative battles that are in progress, and those that will come in the near future (Cap and Tax/Immigration).

The country had been pushed to pass bailout legislation that has put our federal government in the banking, insurance and car businesses. This has resulted in the unlawful negation of legal contracts, the firing of corporate executives and the use of public funds to launch marketing programs for selected car manufactures.

We were also pushed to pass a job stimulus bill that had to pass quickly or unemployment would exceed 8.5%. Well almost a trillion dollars later unemployment is near 10%, and if you include people who have dropped out of the job market, but want to work, the effective unemployment rate is close to 17%.

The reality, the allocation of stimulus dollars helped state and local governments meet their growing debt, which resulted in virtually no job creation. So, what does an administration, whose real intent is to grow government, do in the face of this outrageous failure and deceit; they change the metrics of success from job creation (a measurable statistic) to jobs saved (a non-measurable statistic). Clearly, the real objective of these efforts and the stated objective have little in common.

When you peel back the outer layer of carefully crafted obfuscation, it is clear that the Obama administration’s real agenda is usurping the individual constitutional rights of Americans in favor of a collective view of equality and fairness. Mr. Obama (and the people he has chosen to surround himself with) has laid a consistent, publicly stated, foundation for this attack on the constitution. But the majority of voters were not ‘really’ listening during the campaign. To protect our way of life, based on the founding fathers principles, the constitution and the Bill of Rights we must review, with a clear eye, what was said in the past and actively listen to what is being said now:

“The constitution is a list of negative freedoms…” (Obama)
“The Constitution is an abstract legal document…” (Obama)
“Everybody is better off if we spread the wealth around…” (Obama)
“The benefits of the first amendment are overrated…” (Rohm Emanuel)
“The courts have not gone far enough in redistributing wealth…” (Obama)
“We are just a few days away from fundamentally changing America…” (Obama)

We must all be aware that the rhetoric that surrounds each battle that surfaces is not about the battle. All fights for changes in our laws and statutes are about the War against the U.S. Constitution. Do not be distracted by the socialists-leaning politicians who use the tool of “outrage” – how can the evil right be so cold hearted not to want to help people – to break our resolve to be true to our principles. We must never think, it (European Socialism) can’t happen here.

How smart is Obama? He is scary-smart.

Author Bio: A marketing/branding consultant was moved from a political couch potato to a patriotic activists by the actions of the Obama Regime and started a company to help American patriots go face-to-face with their politicians. check out http://www.commonsensewear.com and http://www.commonsensewear.wordpress.com

 

Two or three years ago, if I tried to tell people that the problems in the public schools should be blamed on the bosses at the top, that is, the Education Establishment, I didn’t get too far.

People would object, what about the unconcerned parents? The lazy kids? The unions? What about rock ‘n roll, drugs, the internet, cell phones, and teenage hormones? Surely, the elite educators mean well. They just get caught up in fads. You can’t suppose they let the schools get dumb on purpose. Well, that would mean a conspiracy; and that’s crazy.

All my research, however, was pointing in the direction of intention and conspiracy. The fascinating questions became: why did they do it and how did they get away with it for so long?

Throughout the last 100 years, the Education Establishment was (it seems to me) utterly brilliant at two things: A) creating an array of impressive-sounding methods that didn’t work very well; and B) creating an array of alibis, cover-ups and sophistries so that the top educators themselves are never blamed for poor performance. Never.

These people stand at the apex of a huge pyramid. But somehow they don’t actually have anything to do with the results. Odd. These top educators are surely one of history’s most successful PR machines. Teachers would rather blame themselves. Parents denigrate each other, and their own kids. Everybody is guilty EXCEPT the people making the decisions.

But all this is changing now. I simply say, imagine people exactly like Barack Obama and his 50 czars in charge of the public schools for the past century. What would you get?

Vastly inflated bureaucracies and budgets? Check. Political and ideological meddling in what should be strictly educational decisions? Check. A relentless fondness for leveling, indoctrination, and political correctness? Check. More social engineering but less intellectual engineering? Of course!

People get it now, thanks to the Obama Administration.

Many people are becoming comfortable with the thought that Obama is among the most ideological presidents in our history. People have the sense that incompetence or accidents can explain only so much. At some point, you have to move to the thought that someone fully intends to do the very things he is, in fact, doing.

This verdict about Obama runs exactly parallel to my summary of American education for the 20th century, ever since John Dewey. He and his group plotted to use the public schools to transform the country. Education as commonly understood by nearly all citizens became a second priority. Dewey’s goal was to create cooperative children who would accept a transition to a socialist society. In short, ideology took charge.

The American people have rebelled against this sort of manipulation time and again. Indeed, when Dewey died in 1952, a full-fledged return to basics was beginning, in opposition to the “progressive” ideas promoted by Dewey’s group. I hope there will be more and better counterattacks. This can happen. People see leftists making bad decisions in devotion to their ideological agenda. People know that agenda isn’t inevitable, that it can be resisted. Everyone sees the competing forces more clearly now, thanks to Obama.

Today, the Education Establishment is pushing Race to the Top, Authentic Assessment, 21st-Century Skills, National Standards–a new slew of impressive-sounding but ultimately destructive methods. Over the decades, parents and community have forced some schools to be good, even excellent. But my sense is that the Education Establishment, to the degree these people can get away with it, will always finagle for mediocrity. Their collectivist ideology demands this. I’m afraid that’s what these new ideas are ultimately intended to accomplish: more mediocrity.

If we want to improve the public schools, we have to remove ideology from the system, and kick the ideologues from power. This should be one of the goals people vote for in every election. We don’t need more social engineering. We need intellectual engineering.

(Bruce Deitrick Price is an author, artist, and poet. He writes about education and culture on his site Improve-Education.org. See the related “38: Saving Public Schools.”)

Author Bio: Bruce Deitrick Price is the founder of Improve-Education.org, a high-level education and intellectual site. One focus is reading; see “42: Reading Resources.” Another focus is education reform; see “38: Saving Public Schools.” Price is an author, artist and poet. His fifth book is “THE EDUCATION ENIGMA–What Happened to American Education.”

 

This country has a bizarre and unprecedented problem. “The longer American children are in school, the worse they perform compared to their international peers,” according to McKinsey and Company, management consultants.

Columnists at the New York Times have realized that the education crisis is grave. Tom Friedman said we’re falling off a cliff. Paul Krugman noticed our dilemma but wants to blame it on a lack of money, which is nonsense. Education budgets are massive. Here’s a better theory: the people in charge are evidently not all that interested in excellence. Nicholas Kristof pointed out that “Democrats have…stood by as generations of disadvantaged children had been cemented into an underclass by third-rate schools.” Thank you, Mr. Kristof.

My guess is that the Education Establishment (i.e., the people in charge of creating those third-rate schools) are real proud. I’m not being ironic. Dumbing-down is, I conclude, their philosophy and their goal.

Are you wondering why? Simple. These guys, from John Dewey onward, were Socialists, obsessed with molding children to fit into a new socialist paradigm. Academic success was not essential; it might even be an obstacle to the collectivist plans these people had for us.

What about how? Again, simple. Favor the non-academic and the anti-academic. Let’s say you have two pedagogical methods. Option A works better than Z. Drum roll, please. Agonize but, in the end, select Z. Concoct some good marketing prose to sell this pathetic thing. But use what does not work.

So far as I can tell, every method and approach embraced by the Education Establishment, for the past 100 years, ends up somewhere between dumb and dumber. (One might ask: are these people incompetent or purposeful? It’s not likely that anybody can be that incompetent, so I’m seeing intent.)

In any event, our educators created schools so dysfunctional that they would make students worse with each passing year, as Mckinsey and Company has stated.

To recap the reason: all the main methods (and there are dozens) used in the public schools turn out to be surprisingly counter-productive. Here’s a quick look at some of the worst offenders:

Whole Word has the peculiar property of not teaching children to read. 50,000,000 functional illiterates is a lot of dumbing-down.

Reform Math has the peculiar property of making sure that children can’t do basic arithmetic, even by college.

Constructivism (which is popular in many different subjects) has the peculiar property of making sure that children learn less than they did the year before. (Constructivism requires that children invent their own new knowledge, which takes a lot of extra time.)

Cooperative Learning has the peculiar property of making kids less independent and less able to think for themselves. This technique is helpful if you’re trying to create a herd mentality.

Outcomes-Based Education has the peculiar property of directing students toward very trivial goals (i.e., outcomes), such as discussing a movie or preparing a scrapbook.

One of the more popular methods is called Self-Esteem. Doesn’t it sound good? In fact, this thing dismantles education in several different ways. First of all, it requires praising children who do a bad job. Children become accustomed to gold stars and compliments even if they haven’t cracked a book. Why should they bother with books? But Self-Esteem is more insidious than so far suggested. Suppose you want your class to know the 10 states nearest to where they live. Some students won’t get the whole list; they will feel badly about themselves. What to do? Cut the list to six. But next year, some children may not recall the shorter list. So the list will be cut to four. Then the teachers will decide that this is too demanding and “they can look it up.” So you see that Self-Esteem undercuts from every direction until there is nothing left standing.

In 1983 a huge government commission concluded that our public schools are so bad they may as well have been designed by a hostile foreign power. That’s the incompetence that Friedman and colleagues were talking about; but they just can’t come out and say the truth. Namely, people like themselves–other liberals–were the culprits in charge. But how do they admit this after so much damage has piled up?

Meanwhile, the Business Roundtable reports that managers are struggling to find trained workers. Businesses are “wrestling with an undertrained workforce: Half see a sizable gap between their needs and employees’ skills.”

Well, I can just imagine that our Education Establishment is tickled pink.

What do we do? Fire from the top. That’s what we would do in any other area of human activity. Colossal failure year after year? Fire the bosses. Second, dismantle the anti-intellectual infrastructure that is evident everywhere throughout the school system. Get rid of a mentality that dotes on social engineering, and replace it with a mindset that glorifies intellectual engineering.

More than anything else, however, we simply need to tell the truth. Schools don’t get so bad unless somebody wants them that way. The USA is afflicted with an Education Establishment that is anti-education.

(For more about effective education, see “47: Teach One Fact Each day” on Improve-Education.org.)

Author Bio: Bruce Deitrick Price is the founder of Improve-Education.org, a high-level education and intellectual site. One focus is reading; see “42: Reading Resources.” Another focus is education reform; see “38: Saving Public Schools.” Price is an author, artist and poet. His fifth book is “THE EDUCATION ENIGMA–What Happened to American Education.” whole

 

The only thing most Americans agree on is that the public schools are mediocre. As to why this happened and what we should do next, there is a total bedlam of beliefs and opinions.

People have a hundred theories to explain our ed problems. But here’s the bizarre thing: people don’t want to blame the obvious culprits, that is, the people in charge. In every other field of human endeavor, when things don’t work out, bosses are fired; then new people with new ideas are brought in. That’s a universal formula for dealing with failure. But in education, the public ties itself in knots to avoid blaming the top educators, the ones creating all the problems in the first place.

Has anyone in the Education Establishment ever been fired? For anything less than a major felony? No, they are permitted to drone arrogantly on, even as the country gets more ignorant by the year. These pretenders get promoted. They get grants. They get awards. They are hailed as Educators of the Year.

I should explain that by “Education Establishment” I mean only the people at the very top–500 people at most. The astonishing thing is how successfully this tiny clique dumbs us down, deflects blame, cons the media, and encourages people to fight among themselves over whether parents, kids, unions, drugs, television, computers, etc., etc. are the real villain.

Maybe each of these things causes some damage, but wouldn’t you always want to go to the very top and find the primary cause of large, systemic failure? The point of this little tirade is to say: stop blaming the victims (mainly, that’s kids and parents). Blame the guilty. They’re called educators, even though their main activity is social engineering. Here’s the new mantra: punish the perpetrators.

One comical aspect of this whole thing is that the Education Establishment seems to encourage kindergarten teachers to call themselves “educators.” In this way, there’s no word left over for the people actually in charge. So they become invisible. Who? It was a fad for a while to call these people educationists; we also saw the term educrats. Some people talk about educational establishment in lower case. I consistently use the term Education Establishment to mean specifically the top people. The bosses. The ruling elite. The commissars. The guilty.

Even then I run into the most obtuse comments as when a teacher insists, “I’ve been in the educational establishment for 15 years. I’ve taught at two public schools…” Absurd but when this school teacher hears me criticize the Education Establishment, he takes it personally and starts defending all the nonsense in the public schools.

Please, people, let’s not waste time criticizing 40+ million parents, 25+ million students, and 3+ million teachers. These are vast unwieldy groups. You can’t make any generalizations about them. You can’t change them or move them in any obvious simple way. Let’s talk about the real problem, i.e. the bosses giving the orders and dictating the world-view at the elite ed schools. If you could change their minds, or just replace them, you would see real change quickly. I would love that.

When a corporation is failing, you fire the chief operating officers. You fire the board. You fire the top five or ten people. That’s what we need to do here. Get rid of the top decision-makers at Teachers College, Harvard Graduate School of Education, University of Chicago School of Education and other similar dens of dumbing-down.

I’ve always thought that kids, parents, and teachers are equally victims of the social engineering that John Dewey and his bunch introduced. Reading, writing, arithmetic, geography, foundational knowledge–Dewey actually dismissed them all. His nonsense is now part of the DNA that guides the Education Establishment. Their souls reek of socialist theory and strange sophistries. They have a death-grip on everything that goes on in the public schools. When children are not learning, it’s obviously the fault of these people at the top. Let’s hold them accountable.

(For more on this theme, see “41: Educators, O. J. Simpson, and Guilt” on Improve-Education.org.)

Author Bio: Bruce Deitrick Price is the founder of Improve-Education.org, a high-level education and intellectual site. One focus is reading; see “42: Reading Resources.” Another focus is education reform; see “38: Saving Public Schools.” Price is an author, artist and poet. His fifth book is “THE EDUCATION ENIGMA–What Happened to American Education.”

 

Since September 11th the United States has made significant progress in the War on Terror. Counterterrorism efforts have led to the death or capture of hundreds of Al Qaida members. Arab governments are cooperating more than ever, and two of the most brutal regimes in the world have been destroyed (Saddam’s Iraq and Taliban’s Afghanistan). American troops are now helping to build two new democratic governments in the Middle East that reject terrorism. In the next few years the U.S. will be withdrawing from Iraq and Afghanistan, which some believe is a signal that we are giving up. In reality the Middle East region is more hostile than ever toward terrorist groups. However, we must remain on the offensive. Even after we leave Iraq and Afghanistan, the fight will not over.

The patience of the American people has been tested in both Iraq and Afghanistan. We found no significant weapons programs in Iraq and we failed to execute an effective post-war strategy. In Afghanistan we achieved a quick victory over the Taliban but struggled for years to build a stable government and keep the Taliban out. In recent years the Taliban have regained some of their strength.

However, setbacks should not be confused with inevitable defeat. The success of the surge strategy under General David Petraeus demonstrates that we should not become discouraged so easily. Wars require patience and resilience.

Since Vietnam, Americans are constantly worried of foreign conflicts transforming into quagmires. The mainstream media and liberals contribute by drawing parallels between Vietnam and our current operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Unfortunately these comparisons don’t stand up to scrutiny. Young Americans were not around during the Vietnam War (I was born ten years after) and therefore can’t really compare the conflicts.

First, Iraq and Afghanistan are much smaller conflicts in comparison to Vietnam. Over 58,000 Americans were killed in Vietnam while less than 8,000 have been killed in Iraq and Afghanistan combined. Less than a third of the entire U.S. ground forces are currently deployed in both countries. Second, the two wars eat up a mere 5% of the federal budget. The costs of these two conflicts are nowhere near the relative costs of the Vietnam War. Finally, the U.S. did not institute a draft for Iraq and Afghanistan, which forces thousands of Americans to serve in the military. Throughout both recent conflicts, we have maintained an all-volunteer fighting force.

There are many Young Americans opposed to our use of force in Iraq on moral grounds, which is a perfectly reasonable assertion. However, the argument that the United States has worn itself down militarily and financially is not accurate. These two wars are not responsible for the economic downturn or the large national debt we now face. In 2009, the federal government had a deficit of $1.2 trillion, while the two wars cost roughly $160 billion. A significant portion of the deficit is due to increased domestic spending and a decline in tax revenue. In short, our economic troubles have very little to do with Iraq and Afghanistan.

Young Americans are also increasingly concerned as to our reputation in the world as a result of the unpopular Iraq War. This is also a reasonable concern but one must consider that the actual damage to American diplomatic relations has been small. It is true that our popularity has declined among the people in Europe and other parts of the World. However, no alliances have been broken, no trade deals cancelled, or sanctions imposed as a result of the Iraq War. In fact, most Arab countries are cooperating more than ever in U.S. counterterrorism efforts.

It is also dangerous for the U.S., or any country, to pull out from a conflict so quickly and dramatically. If the United States pulled out in 2006-2007 as some demanded, Iraq would have fallen into chaos and would likely become a new headquarters for Al Qaida. Although Saddam did not have weapons of mass destruction, our withdrawal would have the unintended consequence of leaving a country in the hands of another enemy, Al Qaida.

Fortunately for Americans and Iraqis, the war has been a success. Al Qaida in Iraq is all but destroyed, Saddam’s regime is gone, and the new democratic government is slowly gaining strength and credibility. Currently the U.S. has 50,000 troops in Iraq but most expect them to be withdrawn in the next two years.

Afghanistan is a very different situation. It was the staging area for the September 11th attacks and the headquarters of Osama Bin Laden. The Taliban refused to hand him over, which resulted in our invasion in 2001-2002. Although we were initially successful, Afghanistan has widespread social, economic, and political problems which have yet to be resolved. The new government is still weak and lacks legitimacy in certain parts of the country. The U.S. and its allies have also failed to provide adequate security until recently. President Obama’s Surge of 2009 was the right move and with Gen. Petraeus now in command, we have our best general implementing a proven strategy.

There are likely more tough years ahead in Afghanistan, but we absolutely CANNOT pull out. The Taliban is gaining strength and could regain power. It is likely Afghanistan will never be the kind of free and prosperous democracy that some envision. Whatever form the Afghan government takes, the U.S. must make sure it is strong enough to defend the people from the Taliban and Al Qaida. They must never be allowed to regain power in that country.

There are many lessons we have learned in the last nine years of conflict. The U.S. intelligence community must be independent of the political branches of government, and not be used to help the President “make his case” to the people. We must also be more careful in our post-war planning, which was seriously lacking in Iraq. The U.S. must also avoid the temptation to fight wars “on the cheap” or with insufficient manpower in order to avoid casualties or political resistance back home. Finally, Americans must realize that once we commit to the use of force, we cannot walk away simply because the war is unpopular or not going well initially. Quick withdrawal can have devastating consequences.

The U.S. must finish the job in Iraq and Afghanistan. It is necessary for our own national security as well as security in the Middle East region. It is reckless and dangerous to invade a foreign country and then withdraw a couple years later due to political pressure back home. We lose credibility, and it also shows our enemies that they can defeat us by simply holding out for a while or killing as many American soldiers as possible on television. We cannot allow our enemies to be so emboldened. The reason for a strong defense and assertive foreign policy is to deter enemies and would-be aggressors from using force against us or our allies. By holding to our commitments in Iraq and Afghanistan, we will have defeated two major enemies, demoralized terrorists around the world, and maintained our deterrence. The American people must support the mission in both countries and remain patient, giving our soldiers time to succeed.

Author Bio: J. Wesley Fox is the Chairman of Restore America’s Legacy PAC. He is a recent graduate of DePaul University College of Law and has been active in local and national politics for several years. He currently lives in New Jersey after growing up in the Chicago suburbs. www.restoreamericaslegacy.com

 

For the last few decades, the Democratic Party has promoted itself as the party of young, idealistic, and energetic Americans wanting to change the world for the better. Unfortunately, there is not a bit of truth to this image. Recently the Democratic Agenda has been a recycling of the same liberal ideas that have been around for decades. These ideals have been twisted into a Statist agenda promoted by President Obama, Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senator Harry Reid. The Democratic Party is not the party of the young or the “next generation”. In reality, the Democratic Agenda seriously harms the interests of Young Americans and is almost guaranteed to result in a country that is weaker, poorer, less safe, and less free.

Most Young Americans are just beginning their careers and are anxious to prove themselves. They are young idealistic and dying for their opportunity to contribute, start a business, or bring their new idea or invention into reality. However, the policies of President Obama and the Democratic Congress make it impossible for Young Americans to pursue these goals.

To begin building a foundation for the future, to develop an idea or to start a business, Young Americans need income. They need jobs. In the last two years, President Obama and the Democratic Congress have pushed policy after policy that kills jobs. In fact the unemployment rate among Young Americans is double that of the national average. It is common sense: no job, no income. Without income, Young Americans cannot pursue their goals. They must wait at the back of the line, remaining dependent on government handouts or worse, their parents.

In the recent economic recession, over 8 million jobs have been lost. In order to recover the U.S. economy must create 8 million new jobs. Democrats are more concerned with “saving jobs”. Saving jobs does nothing for those of us that are unemployed or underemployed. To save a job means to protect an existing worker from being laid off. The Stimulus Package spent $1 trillion to protect the jobs of government employees and union workers. It is no coincidence that both of these groups overwhelmingly vote democrat.

Where does that leave Young Americans? Well unless you are already a government employee or union worker, the Stimulus Package did not help you at all. Even worse, some of that $1 trillion was borrowed from China, Saudi Arabia, and Russia.

Government spending has exploded under President Obama and led to record-shattering deficits. Deficits mean one thing: future taxes. In other words, $1 trillion was spent to protect a small group of pro-Democratic workers and that $1 trillion will have to be paid back by Young Americans.

The government always hopes that as long as the economy grows they will be able to collect more taxes in the future and pay off our debt without raising taxes. However, this only works if you control spending. Politicians in Washington just don’t know how to do that. Whatever “extra” taxes the government collects, they spend rather than paying down the debt.

Future taxes means higher costs to American companies and small businesses, but the Democrats have not stopped there. With the new Healthcare Reform and Cap and Trade – they now seek to increase regulatory rules and costs on American businesses. It is bad enough they want to increase taxes they also want to increase overhead costs. Reports show that American companies are producing some profits but they are not spending it to expand. Instead American companies are sitting on an estimated $1 trillion in cash because they have no idea if they will be able to make a profit once the new taxes and regulations take effect.

To sum up, the federal government cannot create jobs and their policies are discouraging the private sector from creating jobs.

Young Americans are also very concerned with international conflict and national security. War impacts Young Americans more than any other age group. The average age of an active duty soldier is 21 years old. It has been a well known truth throughout history: the young fight wars. When the U.S. Government decides to go to war, it is Young Americans that actually fight and die in the war. As a result, Young Americans view national security not as a political issue, but something that could throw them into a war zone in the near future.

Under President Obama, the U.S. has become less secure. Iran has not stopped its nuclear program, North Korea continues to threaten war, and our rivals, China and Russia, grow stronger. Despite these threats, President Obama proposes cutting spending on an already underfunded and steadily weakening U.S. military. As our rivals grow stronger, President Obama is more worried about offending them than protecting Americans.

China recently developed a new anti-satellite missile that can shoot down American satellites. In recent days, China announced it is also developing a new missile that can penetrate the defenses of an aircraft carrier and sink it at a range of 900 miles. Russia is developing a new fighter that will rival the F-22 Raptor. Does it sound like they are planning for a new age of peace and cooperation with the United States?

History has taught us that appeasement and complacency have tragic consequences. It failed in the 1930s and it will fail now. It emboldens aggressive leaders that dream of their own empire. It is in these situations that new conflicts can erupt and Young Americans will be asked (or drafted) to fight and die for their country.

Many believe the Democrats are advocates for individual freedom. Nothing could be further form the truth. Democrats have proposed numerous new policies that suppress speech, religion, economic choice, and other freedoms. The media would have you ignore these policies because Democrats tend to favor gay marriage and abortion rights for women. But promoting liberty in one area does not balance oppression in another.

Democrats proposed the “fairness doctrine” which would give the government greater control over the content of political programming on radio and television. Government control of speech on any medium violates the First Amendment. Speaker Pelosi stated that Americans speaking out at town halls against politicians is “un-American”. Tea Partiers have been attacked during peaceful protests by operatives of pro-Democrat groups.

It becomes clear. The Democratic Party is in favor of free speech as long as you agree with their position. If not, you need to shut up.

Freedom of religion is also under threat. Liberal groups have tried very hard to eliminate all expressions of Christianity from government buildings, schools, public parks, in public speeches, and other areas. They have manufactured a fear that the U.S. Government is on the verge of establishing a state religion with these symbols. The United States has never established a state religion. If anything, expression of Christian ideology has generally declined in the last fifty to sixty years as the country has become more religiously diverse.

It is well known many Christian groups strongly support the Republican Party. Some Democrats have decided the proper means of dealing with this political disagreement is through suppressing these groups as much as possible. By suppressing Christian groups in public spaces, one is better able to dominate the conversation with your own secular beliefs.

The right to bear arms has been a cherished right of Americans for over two hundred years. Yet, many Democrats argue that the individual right to bear arms has suddenly become a grave threat to public safety. Despite the lack of statistical evidence, some Democrats have tried to persuade Americans that individuals can’t be trusted with guns any more. The fact that this position flatly contradicts the Constitution does not appear to be a problem to them.

In America, a poor African-American from Hawaii can go to Harvard, become a successful lawyer, teach at the University of Chicago, and become President of the United States. Yet the system that makes this possible is being demonized by that very same man.

In America we have no set classes or castes. A person can begin their life on the bottom and reach the top. There are no social or institutional barriers to success. Anyone who works hard can succeed and prosper. They succeed because they are given opportunity, given choices. They succeed because they know best how to pursue their own happiness.

The Democratic Party ignores this tradition and argues that Americans succeed and fail due to unfair rules and barriers in our society. They argue the lower class struggles because the rules biased against them somehow. They argue the upper class play by different rules allowing them to stay rich. Yet when asked what rules and barriers are responsible for this situation, Democrats fail to provide a single concrete example. The entire argument is hollow and baseless. The argument is meant only as a superficial justification for expanded government power and creating a sense of entitlement among Democratic constituencies.

Their solution is to limit opportunity and choice to prevent the rich from benefiting from these fictional, unfair rules. The problem is these new limitations affect everyone: higher taxes, greater regulation of the marketplace, limitation of consumer choices, and now the required purchase of health insurance. When these policies are enacted the people they are designed to help are often hurt the most. Today, minorities are still struggling, the unemployed remain unemployed, and Young Americans are still waiting their turn.

Most Young Americans are entering this system from the bottom. They are not in a position to take advantage of the new rules but are the first to suffer the costs. The squeeze on the “cheating upper class” and “Wall Street fat cats” does not benefit Young Americans. Instead, it is choking the job market.

The Democratic Party has nothing to offer Young Americans except a horrible job market, less opportunity, less safety, less freedom, and less choice. Not a single part of the Democratic agenda benefits Young Americans. In 2008, the U.S. was struggling economically and had fiscal problems – but these problems were manageable. That is no longer the case. In two years, a troubled country has spiraled downward into a country in deep crisis. Young Americans cannot afford another two years of a Democratic Congress. It is time Young Americans wake up to the fact that we were deceived by this “young, idealistic, and energetic” Party in 2008. It is a mistake we can fix in 2010 and 2012.

Author Bio: J. Wesley Fox is the Chairman of Restore America’s Legacy PAC. He is a recent graduate of DePaul University College of Law and has been active in local and national politics for several years. He currently lives in New Jersey after growing up in the Chicago suburbs.www.restoreamericaslegacy.com

 

For Young Americans, this is the worst job market in decades. Despite politicians claiming we are on the road to recovery, unemployment among Young Americans remains at its highest point in over thirty years. To make matters worse, the leadership in Washington plans to raise taxes and add new regulatory costs making it more difficult for companies to hire new workers. Without new job creation, Young Americans will continue to suffer during this “recovery”.

I graduated law school in the summer of 2009, in the midst of the recession. My law school had once boasted that an average 75% of graduates get quality jobs lined up by the time they graduate. After my graduation, I struggled to find a single classmate that had a job lined up. Government agencies and law firms had been laying off attorneys since late 2008. I sent resumes to over 400 law firms, government agencies, and private businesses but could not find a job. As time passed some firms started to hire here and there but they only wanted experienced attorneys. It occurred to me that I was in a job market competing with recently laid off attorneys with far more experience than me.

My experience is similar to the experience of many Young Americans in other career fields. Young Americans are usually recent graduates of college or professional schools. They have little or no experience but are eager to get started. Unfortunately it is nearly impossible for them in this economy.

Young Americans need the economy to create new jobs otherwise they will be constantly competing for a very small pool of entry level positions. Every year there are more people entering the workforce than leaving. Without new jobs, the unemployment rate will continue to rise. The U.S. economy must create new jobs constantly in order to create opportunity for young workers and keep unemployment down.

The national unemployment rate is 9.9% but the unemployment rate among Young Americans is much higher:

Here are the unemployment rates over the past two years:

-Age Group April 2008 April 2009 April 2010

-Ages 18-19 (high school grads)13.4%21.7%24.1%

-Ages 20-24 (college grads)8.8%14.6%17.2%

-Ages 25-34 5.1%9.8%10.2%

Source: U.S. Department of Labor

Government: If you think the problems we create are bad, just wait until you see our solutions!

In 2009, President Obama and the Democratic Congress passed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, also known as the Stimulus Package. It cost taxpayers $800 billion but they claimed it would create millions of jobs and keep the unemployment rate below 8%. It failed miserably. When the Stimulus was passed, there were 134.5 million total jobs in the United States. Fourteen months later, there are a little over 130 million jobs, a loss of four million positions. Not only did it fail to create jobs, the Stimulus Package failed to save enough jobs to stop unemployment from rising to 10%!

Most of the spending went to government programs in healthcare, education, housing, unemployment benefits, and to state governments. None of these programs create jobs but only hand out money to various agencies, corporations, and individuals that claim they need it. In most cases the money was spent to save the jobs of government employees that might otherwise be laid off due to budget cuts. For example, $45 billion of the Stimulus went to prevent layoff and cutbacks in school districts and $8.8 billion to prevent general state budget cuts. In short, it saved government jobs.

The infamous bailouts of various banks, investment companies, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, as well as GM and Chrysler were intended to do the same thing, save jobs from cutbacks. The jobs that were saved were mostly the more senior positions, which meant that those with the least experience with the company or agency were let go first, i.e. the youngest. In other words, Government policy over the past two years has been to protect older workers at the expense of younger ones.

Most private sector employers have spent the last fourteen months laying off workers or just waiting for economic conditions to improve. However, the future does not look promising. First, the cost of doing business is rising and will continue to rise for the next several years. President Obama and the Democratic Congress have raised taxes beginning 2011 and will raise them again 2013. American companies already pay a 35% corporate income tax, which is the second highest corporate tax rate in the world. By comparison, China has a corporate tax rate of 15%. The U.S. Government also has a massive debt that needs to be paid back somehow, which means there will probably be tax increases in the future. As a result, employers are “bracing for impact” rather than expanding or hiring new workers.

American companies also face strict and complicated regulations that make it difficult to operate in the United States. In the last year, the Federal Government has only made it worse. The new Healthcare Reform and the Climate Change Bill currently under consideration in the Senate will increase the cost of doing business with new health insurance and pollution regulations. AT&T has already announced the new Healthcare Reform will cost them as much as $100 million a year. With higher taxes and new regulatory costs, it is easy to understand why businesses are not hiring more workers. In a time when we should be making it easier for companies to hire, the government is making it harder.

The Solution

We must accept the fact that government cannot create jobs, only the private sector can. So, how can the government encourage the private sector to grow and create new jobs? For the answer all we need to do is look back fifteen years. In the 1990s a Democratic President and Republican Congress worked together to cut taxes, keep government regulation reasonable, and balanced the budget. These were free market solutions that had worked in the past. There were no expensive government stimulus projects or bailouts. These efforts helped spur the largest economic expansion in U.S. history.

The American people have shown incredible resilience during economic downturns. We possess the most productive and innovative workforce in the world and it is time we give it an opportunity to succeed rather than adding more hurdles. The U.S. Government must do what it can to lower the cost of doing business in the United States. The tax increases put in place by President Obama and the Democratic Congress must be eliminated. The destructive new government regulations enacted over the past couple years must be repealed. Finally, we must balance the federal budget and begin paying down the national debt.

Our situation is dire. Unemployment remains high, economic growth is low, taxes are increasing, and our national debt is $13 trillion and rising. The free market solutions that worked so well in the 1990s must be implemented as soon as possible. Until then, Young Americans will continue to suffer in this economy, struggling to begin their career and become financially independent. The current leadership in Washington will not implement these solutions, new leadership is needed. Restore America’s Legacy PAC supports new Republican candidates for Congress in 2010 that will promote free market solutions and defeat the misguided policies of President Obama and the Democratic Congress. The goal is to end the Democratic majority in the House of Representatives and shrink the Democratic majority in Senate. By eliminating their majority in the House, a new Republican leadership can block the destructive Obama agenda and begin pressuring him to implement common sense solutions or face defeat in 2012.

Author Bio: J. Wesley Fox is the Chairman of Restore America’s Legacy PAC. He is a recent graduate of DePaul University College of Law and has been active in local and national politics for several years. He currently lives in New Jersey after growing up in the Chicago suburbs.www.restoreamericaslegacy.com

 

What are We Doing?

Each and every day, I find myself questioning my government. Not in a “I’m writing Congress” sort of way. More of a “I can’t believe they just did that”, type of thing.

I speak without regard for either party. It matters not to me whether they are a Republican or Democrat, or bless these poor souls, a lone libertarian or independent. It really does not matter, because I believe they have failed the people of these United States.

It’s sad to watch your representatives vote against (or for) something you explicitly asked them to vote for (or against), all the the while, disregarding your express wishes. You know that you emailed them. You received a letter in which they thanked you for your opinion, and kindly told you to mind your own business.

My frustration has become more apparent with the election of our current President. Barack Obama frustrates me. I don’t get angry with him, because obviously, not enough people showed up at the polls to keep him from being elected.

No, I get frustrated, because I watch him on a daily basis, do the express things that he said he would do, that I did not care for. Then, I watch the few things that I disliked in President Bush’s platform be upheld. These were the things Obama said he would get rid of: Gitmo, The Patriot Act, etc.

Oh, yeah….what about the 5 day cooling off period, so people can review bills before they are signed? I just don’t get it. This was supposed to be a transparent administration. Where’s the transparency? Not that Bush II wasn’t less than transparent, it’s just that he was kind of good at diplomacy…basic hospitality and such.

Diplomacy. This is what has really got my dander up. This week, Britain and Israel aren’t showing up at the nuclear summit that President Obama is throwing. That’s right. Our two oldest, democratic allies are AWOL from a conference only held every two years.

Israel is afraid that we are going to throw them like a piece of meat to some hungry, Middle Eastern nations. Britain is upset, and rightfully so, that we have treated them like the backwoods, less sophisticated cousin.

Relations with Russia have devolved substantially from what they were under the Bush administration, and now, they are taking full advantage of moving in cozy with our critics, one by one. So far, they have cozied up to Fidel Castro, sold weapons to Iran, and exchanged congratulations and strategic alliances with Venezuela’s Bolivarian President, Hugo Chavez.

That’s a far cry from Bush looking into Putin’s eyes, and seeing a friend, or his pleasant joking with Tony Blair.

All in all, we have issues here, and there are too many to even mention. The populace is completely divided over the direction of the country, unless they are acknowledging the state of America in general, which seems to be declining, regardless of which party you claim to back.

Again I ask, “What are they doing?” The answer seems to be “All the wrong things.” I’m not looking for what the Republicans say we need (Ronald Reagan II), or what the Democrats are looking for (FDR II). I just want a government that is responsible to the people that elected them, and to constituents who didn’t.

That, perhaps, we can all agree on.

Author Bio: Kurt Hartman wishes that he claimed no political affiliation. That would be untruthful. Instead of mentioning that, he will merely say that he works for a company that sells otr tires here at http://www.otrtiresupply.com . If you want to know more, you can read his blog, The Tire Pile.

 

by Gene Lalor

In a forthright and unsettling piece on CNS.com, Ben Shapiro writes of “Obama’s Plan to Humble America” in which he compares the president’s machinations with “gargantuan” domestic expenditures coupled with equally expensive wars to LBJ’s vain efforts to provide America with “Guns and Butter.”

The guns were intended to win the war in Viet Nam, or at least not lose that war, the guns. At the same time Johnson wanted to effect his Great Society programs, the butter. The end result of that juggling was that we kept the welfare and other domestic programs and ignominiously lost the war due to half-hearted commitment.

With hard economic times a continuing outlook learn how you can make your home energy self-sufficient!

According to Shapiro, our current president is on the same social welfare/wars path with one notable twist: Obama knows where he and the country are headed and is planning for failure: “First, Obama wants to weaken us on the home front by ‘spreading the wealth around’ in the name of equality. Second, Obama wants to use that aggravated economic weakness to undermine America’s foreign policy standing around the world.”

That’s a strong charge to make and it’s what makes Shapiro’s article unsettling.

As big and as boorish an oaf that LBJ was, no one to my knowledge has ever suggested that he anticipated much less planned the loss in ‘Nam; it was an unintended consequence of America’s finite resources. The nation simply couldn’t afford both the butter and the guns without huge tax increases which Johnson proposed and in the end there weren’t enough guns, nor much Democrat desire to provide them.

Essentially, Shapiro is saying that Barack Hussein Obama doesn’t like our country, even despises the inequities he sees on the homefront and the “brutishness” of our foreign policy stances and he’s striving to cut us down to the size he envisions for the United States.

That would explain his maniacal tax and spend schemes at home and his penchant for traversing the planet and apologizing for the nation at every stop he makes. Antagonizing proven allies, Israel and Britain, and a necessary ally, Afghanistan, are other surefire techniques to undercut America’s supremacy and influence.

His intended domestic consequence is not only to spread the wealth but to create class warfare of some sort with his constant badmouthing of businesses and industry. At the same time, he’s creating an image of weakness and indecision overseas.

Both policies can only have negative outcomes for the people of the United States.

Despite its many glaring flaws, capitalism is the financial and social foundation not only of our success and wealth as a nation but of the character of the American people: confident, brash, industrious combined with generosity, religious faith, and courage, all former hallmarks of the collective American psyche.

To undermine the capitalistic foundation of our society is to undermine the very bases that made America great and enabled it to fight and help win what were basically European wars in the twentieth century at very high human and economic costs.

If Obama is allowed to continue on this deadend road to perdition and financial ruin, if Obama gets his way and converts America into a second rate power, the international perception of our weakness and indecisiveness combined with a crippled and bankrupt economy can only mean the next time we’re needed somewhere on the globe, we’ll be too weak and broke to help anyone.

As Shapiro concludes his article, “Unlike LBJ, Obama acts not out of ignorance, but insidiousness. Like LBJ in 1968, he must be made to pay the price:” http://bit.ly/bnQ946

The only problem with that truth is that America will already have paid a steeper price. We will have been humbled beyond redemption.

Some Other Ideas

• Livin' the Good Life: More Random Background Events for PCs
• Home & Commercial Energy Audit
• Raptors Digest » Blog Archive » Cavs rest LBJ, Bulls pull even …
• IPL 3 goes live to US, Middle East theatres – Economic Times …
• Butter and health beat guns, for now – Health Populi
• Commentary » Blog Archive » Obama's Perfect Record of Foreign …
• Economics for the twenty-first century
• Balloon Juice » Blog Archive » Someone Has a Book To Sell…
• Re: End Result of Alcoholism (College Health Guru) | Drug Rehab …
• Read His Lips: No DC Tax Increases « Poverty & Policy
• neo-neocon » Blog Archive » Health care reform machinations: it …
• In these tough economic times, do you save money by eating one …
• Why Not Construct A Wind Turbine For Free Electricity? | Efficient …
• Let Us Tackle About Solar Power Inverters | Efficient Home Energy …
• Modern Ways Green Energy Is Developing | Efficient Home Energy Saving
• Guns and Butter: Two Bull Markets Worth Watching
• Is The Low Road Back to Athens on the Horizon? « Transformations …
• operation homefront | non-profit military assistance …
• SideTalk » Blog Archive » Many male deaths result from overstrain
• Who is Trying to Save Money in These Hard Economic Times? | Strive …

I just wanted to share something that I noticed about Obama’s speech.  I didn’t feel that much of what he was talking about was the best idea for our future, and I didn’t feel that he was following through with his promises to unite and rebuild the integrity of our government.  But the one thing I noticed more than anything else is that I think he didn’t believe in what he was saying.

If you watch his speech, you will notice that he never looked into the camera, to speak to the public directly.  He consistently directed his gaze to the press, the people he knows support him and his ideas 100%. He only looked into the camera once, and he looked somewhat terrified, and quickly looked away.

Speech diagnosis experts will tell you that his failure to look into the camera shows that he either does not believe that what he is saying will really work, or he is lying. Obama is a professional speaker, he knows that it is important to look at the people you are speaking to, to let them know that you have confidence in what you are saying, and his failure to do so, as a professional speaker, convinces me that something is wrong, and he knows it.

His ability to speak made me listen to his speech and, maybe, began to make me think about what he was suggesting but, his failure to show that he believed what he was saying, proved to me that he knows that there is simply a political game going on.

Sent to me by Michael Kilgus