Perspective affects perception. The way we look at things, the angle at which we see it or the side of it that we see makes a huge difference in how we perceive it. For example, most people have a “good side” they prefer for pictures.

Government programs are sold to the American people as one thing but a different view will often wipe away the glamour and show it for the sow’s ear that it is. One such program is “Cash for Clunkers.” It is interesting that the new owners of GM—Joe and June Taxpayer—are now forced to shell out for old cars to bait consumers onto the car lot. This stinker of a program has successfully drawn thousands to trade their old rusty gas guzzler for a bright shiny new payment book. Of course, in a recession that is what the American people need, more buying on debt—after all it worked so well for the Democrat controlled Congress.

Over the last few weeks people traded 600,000 vehicles. Now that it is over what has truly happened? Your government purchased 600,000 cars with the stated goals of destroying them. They spent your hard earned money on cars to crush. That is $2.8 Billion of your hard earned money for scrap metal. But this is not all they accomplished. Good manageable used cars with years of life have been gobbled up by a government monstrosity and are gone from the market. Many, whose only chance of a reliable car to get to work or school, face higher prices and fewer choices because of a shortage artificially created by a government that claims to care about them.

Calls from the left ring throughout the land, “We must be civil in discussing healthcare.” People are going to town halls to protest and harangue condescending officials defending this takeover of the American healthcare system. Constituents shout, plead and debate the candidate in a way that can be very uncomfortable, but does this lack proper civility?

Efforts of this administration and the Hip-pocket Congress prove that the current elected assemblies in Washington are representing a failed ideology at the expense of the American people. Many of us fear having an imperfect system that works replaced by a system destined for failure. The Democrats in Congress (with the help of their moderate to liberal Republican sycophants) are so set on building their leftist Utopia that they are ignoring the voices of the people.

This congress and administration has done far more to undermine the confidence of the American people in their own government than all previous ones combined. Over the last few months we have become aware that those elected to represent us are voting on bills they have never read, and that many times are not even off the presses. This happened before, but pair it with record spending and you have a government run amuck. Add to this their hatred for dissent with efforts to reinstate the failed “Fairness Doctrine,” special email addresses to report those who would dare to speak out against healthcare, labeling those who served their country with honor as potential terrorists and accusations by Speaker Pelosi that those who are now speaking out are un-American.”

Then there’s the blatant hypocrisy of a Congress that rails against corporate executives flying in private jets, only to turn around and request new business jets from the Pentagon to ferry Congressmen around. According to a story in Market Watch this money will have to be cut out of other areas of the defense budget. Congress is willing to cut the amount of money being spent to support our troops in war so they can get a cushy flight. Of course this ignores the old news request of Speaker Pelosi for a larger jet for her private coast to coast flights. Their hypocrisy doesn’t stop there though. What about Card Check? This plan, also known as the Employee “Free Choice” Act, claimed to be for the support of workers. This claim was possible because leftists still long for the days of the great Revolution and calls of “Workers of the World, Unite!” They overlook the facts about unions—driving up costs, making American manufacturing uncompetitive, and unwillingness to see companies as anything other than cash-cows to be milked at every opportunity. Do you want to know why manufacturing jobs are fleeing the United States? “Look for Union Label.” This nice little bill would have stripped away a worker’s right to a secret ballot in a union vote.

So what are good hard-working Americans to do when faced with these issues? Are we to wait for the media to get the word out? Considering they have still not dropped their love affair with Barack Obama, I don’t think this will happen anytime soon.

Of course we should not be surprised they still fawn over Barack. They should have known that once they sold their souls in the election they would have to keep up the charade for the rest of his presidency. Liberals do not care what you did for them yesterday. Any anchor in the MSM that comes out with any negative press about Barack Obama will find himself labeled a bigot and tarred and feathered by the left. We can hope the media will wake up and resume their post as defenders of liberty and clarions of the truth, but that kind of media is rare.

“If you do not read the newspaper you are uninformed; if you read the newspaper you are misinformed.” —-Mark Twain.

The answer is what we see happening today. Protests and demonstrations are one of the few ways left to get the word to congressmen. The first amendment was not meant to protect only the news industry but all Americans who want to express themselves. Solutions will not be found in quiet discourse and polite debate, but in high volume vitriol. Politician’s calls for niceness and quiet are a veiled attempt to silence and to muzzle. The left has used this tactic for decades. There is a huge difference between what the left did before and what is going on now. When the left would demonstrate, the ranks were filled with the unemployed, the professional protestors and people unlikely to pay for what they demanded. Those protesting now are the very people who write the check and mail it to the IRS to pay the bills of this country. They are the productive in our society. When those who create the wealth in this land feel the need to take time away from work and family to come to a townhall meeting and make their opinions known it is the Congressmen or other official that should sit down and be quiet because those who pay them are speaking.

In the debate on healthcare one of the chief arguments being given by the Obama administration is that the government option will be voluntary and those who currently have coverage will be able to keep it. It is also claimed that this is not an effort to do away with private coverage, but to care for those who cannot currently afford coverage. A few days ago I downloaded a copy of the bill (all 1000+ pages). I did this because whenever someone tells me that the bill says this or that, in this section or that, I like to go directly to the source and find out what it says or does not say.

In perusing the bill I found section 102: Protecting the Choice to Keep Current Coverage. This section must not be missed by anyone who considers this issue. In this bill those who have current coverage will be allowed to keep it. However, 102(a)(1)(A) forbids those offering coverage from enrolling any new clients on or after the first day the law goes into effect. This means that you can keep your coverage, but anyone who does not have coverage will be put into the government system with no option for private insurance.

When this happens the insurance companies will find that they have all the customers they will ever have. They cannot expand their businesses and according to 102(a)(3) they can never raise rates on those who are covered or according to 102(a)(2) can never change what they do or do not cover. This last one also prevents them from entering into any new cost-sharing arrangements to reduce costs. The companies can never expand, or raise rates to offset inflation or higher expenses. The only time a new policy could be written is when someone with private insurance, before hand, changes policies.

Understand what this means, if this bill passes those who are not covered by private insurance will have no choice but the government system—none other can be sold. Those who have coverage can keep it until the company goes out of business or they lose or drop the coverage another way—job change or economic downturn. Once this happens they too will be on the government system, for life, and the government that has proved its inefficiency and incompetence in so many areas will be able to let us down where it matters most. Higher prices, rationing, lower quality and early death for millions will be the legacy of this president. How’s that for Change!

From time to time we hear of some terrible scourge to civilized society that the government must do something about. Of course the government in question is always the federal government. The media doesn’t seem to even realize that this country has multiple layers of government so everything gets made into a federal issue. Beyond the problem of always looking for a federal solution, there are difficulties with the problems to be fixed. Many times things need a solution, but is legislation the only solution?

Every time a law is passed it chips away freedom. If the law forbids some action then you are no longer free to take certain actions. If the law requires an action then you are no longer free to refrain from acting. For this reason, I often point out that the freest time in America is when Congress is in recess. This nation has, on the federal level, 535 people paid full time to do nothing more than make laws and seek reelection. I know some will point out that the job of our Senators and Representatives includes meeting with constituents, but these meetings are primarily for three reasons: reelection, build support for legislation and get ideas for other legislation. With the majority of their time consumed with keeping their job and enacting laws the greatest threat to the freedoms we so love is Congress.

So what is the solution? Is it to be found in making Congress part time, similar to many state legislatures? This will actually change little. The best thing is to elect officials who understand the Constitution and honor their pledge to uphold it. For example, earmarks would not be a problem if constituents stopped electing people who shell out federal dollars to get reelected. Of course this is hard when many who balk at earmarks attack their own representative for not bringing home enough project money. Most Americans oppose earmarks, except for the ones that come home to line their own pockets. We need elected officials who are statesmen first and foremost. Such people do the right thing, even if the next election means a job hunt.

We also need passion on the floor of the Senate and House where those who believe strongly for and against any legislation are encouraged to fight it out tooth and nail—verbally of course. Instead of pandering to the CSPAN cameras, let’s have heated debates with partisans (yes, I said partisans) fighting to the point of exhaustion to prevent anything unconstitutional from leaving either floor. Breaking a sweat in defense of one’s beliefs has been replaced with looking good for the cameras.

The next thing we need is an informed electorate that will hold its representatives responsible by demanding for each vote the constitutional grounds upon which that person voted. If a politician is unable to give good constitutional reasons for a vote he or she should look for other work. Until the American people realize that this is our government that has been allowed to rob us of wealth and chip away at our freedoms there will be no meaningful change. I hear complaints all the time about how bad politicians are. Can you imagine any business owner having nothing but complaints about an employee continuing to employ that person? We must realize that the politicians are our employees and if they are not performing up to standards (the Constitution) then we must fire them.

Bill Clinton recently went to North Korea to negotiate for the release of two journalists. Those on the left and the right naturally have differing views about this. The reaction of the right seems to be more based on throwing mud at Bill Clinton before he gets more good press—like there is anything we can ever do to keep the press from fawning over Bubba. Many are saying that this is tantamount to negotiating with terrorists. I would disagree because, though we do not negotiate with terrorists, we have a long standing policy of negotiating with sovereign nations, even terrorist supporting ones. Many on the right are even attacking the two journalists, saying they were foolish and caused their own problems. This also is not a reason to leave them in North Korean custody. One of the things about the US that makes us better than many other countries is that while their government is imprisoning and killing their people we take great strides to protect ours, even at times going to war to protect them.

While the reaction of the right seems churlish, the reaction of the left is naïve. The North very successfully used this and we should admit it. Yes Bill Clinton helped these two women, but that is small in comparison to the world’s condition. The left is using this as a bludgeon against Bush, though he hasn’t been in office for months. They say this shows that diplomacy works, leaving one to assume that diplomacy should have been tried with Iraq and one can only assume with Afghanistan. First of all, we tried diplomacy for years with Iraq. With Afghanistan we acted quickly because they were supporting those who had killed so many of our citizens on 911. Since the Russians had lost to them in the 80’s they assumed we would lose as well. Of course they forgot that we were on their side in the 80’s. Now, while I have always maintained that we should not have entered Iraq when we did, that part of the discussion is over and we have been much more successful in Iraq than the left will ever admit. So let’s look at the scorecard of freed people. Bill Clinton freed two young women who stuck their necks out too far. George Bush freed two nations with populations of millions. While I am no fan of George Bush, you have to give him credit for some things.

Americans for the most part are polite, at least conservatives are. For years we’ve seen conservative speakers shouted down by unwashed and unproductive liberal professional protesters. On college campuses you can usually tell the speakers political views by the volume of the audience. It is good to finally see conservatives getting in their verbal shots at liberals. During a town hall meeting in Philadelphia with HHS Secretary Sebelius and Senator Arlen Specter, brotherly love quickly fled the room. The issue at hand was healthcare and the people of this country are finally recognizing the liberal agenda for what it is—an effort to seize as much of the economy as possible and control the lives of the American.

(more…)

To see someone struggling with Alzheimer’s is heartbreaking. For the person suffering the disease can make life a terror as they forget those who love them and familiar locations. Actions taken in the morning can be a total mystery by afternoon. What makes it saddest is the inability to control when it will hit, or what memories it will effect. This terrible disease is one of many nightmares that inspire fear about healthcare and bring on demands for reform. Unfortunately in American politics we see a form of political Alzheimer’s as office holders forget not only campaign promises, but also the arguments they once made as their position changes with the political winds.

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner is saying that we must take action to bring down the deficit if we want the economy to grow. In saying this, the call is on for higher taxes to pay for the misdirected stimulus spending. So deficit spending has gone from the answer to the problem in less than eight months. What about the harm that higher taxes would do to our economy. When you raise taxes you reduce the amount of money available for investment and business expansion. It was argued during the debate on stimulus that it would be paid for through an expanded tax base once we recover, but no new taxes would be needed. Of course anyone with half an understanding of economics knew this was half-baked at best and a blatant lie at worst. The opposition pointed out over and over that record spending matched with our current conditions would necessitate higher taxes.

It would be helpful if the Treasury Secretary would do some reading on economics and while he is at it perhaps a perusal of the Constitution.