A Century Later, Reagan’s “Rendevous with Destiny”
I was just four years old when he became president; a mere twelve when he gracefully left. He entered office in the midst of a financial crisis – double digit inflation, unemployment, and mortgage rates; and the threat of nuclear war around every corner. When he left office, all three economic indicators were in check, and those living in the oppressive Soviet empire were but a few years from a taste of freedom.
On February 6, 2011 Americans will mark the 100th birthday of president Ronald Reagan.
A B-list actor, a Democrat and a union president in his younger years, Reagan explained his political shift quite simply, “I didn’t leave the democratic party, the democratic party left me.”
Reagan’s sense of humor was second to none. He once quipped, “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’” While being wheeled into the operating room after a near fatal assassination attempt, Reagan quipped as he was being put under “I hope you’re all Republicans.”
That near death experience had a profound effect on his life. Though he didn’t publicly acknowledge a close relationship with the Almighty, from that day on, Reagan was convinced his life was spared for a purpose, and he dedicated it to that end.
Perhaps his most important legacy was his commitment to a constitutionally limited federal government. At his very core, Reagan knew what made America great was not its government, nor was it unique to its people or land. He understood what so many immigrants understand and so many born and raised here miss - a free land filled with opportunity is far better than a land of guaranteed mediocrity.
Reagan had an amazing ability to whittle away the enormous complexity of our problems and get right down to the heart of the matter, illustrated in one of his best speeches, “A Time for Choosing.” Mark Alexander’s summary of the speech captured the essence of what Reagan was saying:
In “The Speech,” Reagan said, “The Founding Fathers knew a government can’t control the economy without controlling people. And they knew when a government sets out to do that, it must use force and coercion to achieve its purpose. So we have come to a time for choosing. … You and I are told we must choose between a left or right, but I suggest there is no such thing as a left or right, there is only an up or down. Up to man’s age-old dream — the maximum of individual freedom consistent with order — or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism. … It’s time we asked ourselves if we still know the freedoms intended for us by the Founding Fathers. James Madison said, ‘We base all our experiments on the capacity of mankind for self government.’ This idea — that government was beholden to the people, that it had no other source of power — is still the newest, most unique idea in all the long history of man’s relation to man. This is the issue of this election: Whether we believe in our capacity for self-government or whether we abandon the American Revolution and confess that a little intellectual elite in a far-distant capital can plan our lives for us better than we can plan them ourselves.”
He concluded, “You and I have a rendezvous with destiny.”
That choice didn’t come easily for the country. Despite the failed results of FDR and Johnson’s expansive government policies, loud was the clamor for even more government involvement as a response to the economic malaise strangling the country in the late 70s. Reagan stood steadfastly against it. He worked tirelessly to get the government out of the economy, ultimately unleashing an economic boom that lingered for decades.
His desire for people to taste the opportunities of freedom didn’t stop at the waters edge. Reagan saw totalitarian regimes, whether communist, socialist, or dictatorships, for what they were and are, robbers of men’s souls and far too often of their very lives.
Reagan didn’t mince words, calling Soviet communism what it was – an “evil empire.” Despite speech writers multiple attempts to tone down the speech, he refused to give in, culminating in his challenge to Secretary Gorbachev: “If you seek peace, if you seek prosperity for the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, if you seek liberalization, come here to this gate! Mr. Gorbachev, open this gate! Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!” He was thoroughly convinced communism would be “left on the ash heap of history.”
He was right. Ultimately, centrally planned economies were no match for the creativity and motivation of free men and women pursuing their passions free of government interference. Four years after he left office, the Berlin wall fell and hundreds of millions gained a chance at freedom.
Though it’s been hard to hold on to as of late, what I treasure most from Reagan’s legacy is that great spirit of optimism. In a very dark time, when so many were convinced America was in an inevitable state of decline, he refused to accept it. Reagan gave us back an America we could take pride in. He loved this country, not only for what it was, but what it represented, and what it could be – a great “shining city upon a hill.”
In his farewell address to the nation Reagan put it this way: “I’ve spoken of the shining city all my political life, but I don’t know if I ever quite communicated what I saw when I said it. But in my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace… That’s how I saw it, and see it still. And how stands the city on this winter night? More prosperous, more secure and happier than it was eight years ago. But more than that: After two hundred years, two centuries, she still stands strong and true on the granite ridge, and her glow has held steady no matter what storm. And she’s still a beacon, still a magnet for all who must have freedom, for all the pilgrims from all the lost places who are hurtling through the darkness toward home… My friends: We did it. We weren’t just marking time. We made a difference. We made the city stronger, we made the city freer, and we left her in good hands. All in all, not bad, not bad at all.” (From his Farewell Address to the Nation, 1989.)
Faced with Alzheimer’s, in 1992 Reagan left us with this: “And whatever else history may say about me when I’m gone, I hope it will record that I appealed to your best hopes, not your worst fears, to your confidence rather than your doubts. My dream is that you will travel the road ahead with liberty’s lamp guiding your steps and opportunity’s arm steadying your way. My fondest hope for each one of you — and especially for young people — is that you will love your country, not for her power or wealth, but for her selflessness and her idealism. May each of you have the heart to conceive, the understanding to direct, and the hand to execute works that will make the world a little better for your having been here. May all of you as Americans never forget your heroic origins, never fail to seek divine guidance, and never lose your natural, God-given optimism. And finally, my fellow Americans, may every dawn be a great new beginning for America and every evening bring us closer to that shining city upon a hill.”
The federal government was closed in remembrance of Reagan upon his death. I had to chuckle at the very idea. I can not conceive of a more fitting tribute.
Thank you Ronald Reagan. You truly had a “Rendevous with Destiny” and we will never forget.
The Five Biggest ‘Tea Party’ Myths
It seems there’s still a vast amount of confusion out there about who or what the ‘Tea Party’ movement is and what it isn’t. Here are the five biggest myths:
(1) The Tea Party started with the election of President Obama.
While it is true the movement grew exponentially with the trillion-dollar budget deficits of the Obama administration, the first modern Tea Party event occurred in December 2007 in Texas, fueled in part by disgruntled conservatives unhappy with the governance of Republican leaders during the Bush administration. The movement gained steam as symbiotic organizations like FreedomWorks voiced a loud opposition to the bank bailout TARP program, initiated as well by President Bush.
(2) The Tea Party is a front group for the Republican Party.
If the ever piling losses for primary Republican establishment candidates in recent months doesn’t convince you this is not the case, what possibly would? In every corner of the nation, Republican leaders’ hand-picked candidates are falling victim to the Tea Party backlash.
But to say they’re not a front group for Republicans doesn’t go nearly far enough; many aren’t Republicans period. An April 2010 Gallup poll reports of those who affiliate with the Tea Party movement less than half are Republicans. A full 43% are independents, and 8% are Democrat. A Winston Group poll from about the same time reports 13% to be Democrat; that’s one in eight members. And of those who historically identified themselves as Republicans, you’ll find many with the attitude reflected in a borrowed, slightly altered phrase from Ronald Reagan, “I didn’t leave the Republican Party, the Republican Party left me.”
(3) Tea Party supporters are disproportionately white and largely racist.
Set aside for a moment the race question would be considered offensive to a movement that openly embraces Dr. King’s vision of a colorblind society, the numbers just don’t support this. In that same Gallup poll, 25% of the US population are members of a ‘non-white’ minority group, while Tea Party supporters are made up of 21% racial minorities. To put it another way, 75 and 79% white respectively; once again, not a significant variance.
Taking into account the “cherry picking” that occurs in the media who always look for the most interesting “characters” to highlight, there is scant little evidence of racist behavior. Among the millions of Tea Party supporters, taking part in thousands of events over several years, there are only a handful of pictures and video clips that could even be considered questionable. Were racism a factor, you’d expect to find thousands and thousands of examples. It’s just not an issue within the movement. In fact, a PJTV poll just released indicates “35 percent of likely voters who are African American support the Tea Party movement and 17 percent support the movement strongly.” How could that be if the movement was motivated by racism?
(4) Tea Party supporters are disproportionately older and uneducated.
On age, 50% of Tea Party supporters are 50 years old or older, while 47% of the US population fall into that same category; hardly a significant break from the population as a whole. As for education, once again, Gallup dispels the myth 31% of Tea Party supporters are a college graduate or hold postgraduate degree, right in line with the general population as a whole. Anecdotally, if you look at the obscure history books topping the best seller lists these days, it would appear their education isn’t stopping at graduation either.
(5) Tea Party supporters are extremist.
If Tea Party members are extreme, most Americans are extreme. Here’s the short list of commonly held Tea Party stances that the majority of Americans agree with: extremely concerned about the national debt (Gallup, June 2010), believe the size and power of the federal government is a threat to future well being (Gallup, June 2010), the need to vote out long standing politicians (Zogby International, June 2010), and favor repealing and replacing the recent federal healthcare takeover (Rassmussen, September 2010).
On virtually every major stance commonly held by Tea Party supporters, at least half to as much as seventy or eighty percent of the general population agree with the Tea Party. What’s more, CNN reports in a just released poll, “half of all likely voters now say they are likely to choose a candidate supported by the conservative Tea Party.”
While they may be a little more passionate, a little more vociferous, Tea Party supporters aren’t much different from a large segment of the American population in general. When asked about the differences, one supporter put it this way, “We’re just like you. We’re your neighbors, your friends, and your business associates. Many of us are reluctant to do what we’re doing. We’d rather not be marching in the streets and attending rallies. We don’t want to be reading about Keynesian economic theory. We’d just as soon not run for office.”
When asked why then do they do it, the supporter answers, “Because in thirty or forty years when our grandchildren ask, ‘what did you do?’ we want to be able to honestly answer ‘everything we possibly could.’”
The Biggest Story at this Weekend’s Glenn Beck Event was not Glenn Beck
The Michiana 9/12 Project hosted an event entitled “The Pursuit” in Angola, Indiana. It featured a number of candidates for federal offices, as well Indiana state treasurer Richard Mourdock, rising star 21 year old Matt Cook, Peter Heck, a Kokomo teacher and local talk show host and of course Glenn Beck.
But the biggest story of the event wasn’t Glenn. In fact, the applause for him was rivaled by a standing ovation for a man named Ed.
Who is Ed you ask? Ed was just one of thousands in attendance making his way through the venue when a BBC reporter recognized him from many months earlier. Shocked to see him there, cameras started rolling as he breathlessly interviewed the unassuming man.
Ed worked nearly 30 years for Monaco Coach, an RV manufacturer, before being laid off during the severe downturn. Ed had quite the story to tell, and apparently some of the president’s staff agreed when they asked him to introduce president Obama when he came to town.
That’s right, Ed was none other than Ed Neufeldt, a Wakarusa man who introduced Obama during the president’s February 2009 address at Concord High School in Elkhart, Indiana. At that time Ed was a Democrat, and a big Obama supporter. In fact, he took time during the introduction to plead with America to support the president’s stimulus plan.
But oh how times have changed. About 6-months ago, Ed began to question the wisdom of all the federal spending, the bailouts, the takeovers and the freedoms that by definition were being lost in the process. That metamorphosis came full circle, as Ed stood in the midst of the Tea Party movement, sporting a Glenn Beck t-shirt and a Marlin Stutzman sticker.
The BBC reporter’s excitement didn’t go unnoticed. Event organizers quickly picked up on the story, and just before bringing Glenn Beck on stage, event M.C. Peter Heck told Ed’s story and introduced him to the crowd. The response was nothing short of compelling, as the entire venue erupted in a long standing ovation.
Ed wasn’t the only eye opening attendee. It seems the smear campaign to paint the movement as racist or extremist isn’t sticking, as a new crop of ‘Reagan Democrats’ are experiencing for themselves what the movement is really about. Congressional candidate Jackie Walorski commented on the surprising number of Democrats who spoke to her during the event. Which begs the question, just how many ‘Eds’ are out there?
Just days from congressional midterms, it seems we will soon find out.
UPDATE: Ed was just interviewed on a local radio program and turns out there is even more to the story. After hearing the story, another gentleman from the audience approached him and insisted that Ed take his pass to meet Glenn and receive a signed book - truly living out the faith, hope and charity message.
My Michiana 912 Tax Day Tea Party 2010 Speech - Elkhart, Indiana
Well gang. Here’s this year’s rendention of my Tax Day Tea Party speech.
Transcript as follows:
You know, one year ago today the media wasn’t quite sure what to do with us. First they tried to ignore us. So, we took our little Tea Party to Washington… and filled the national mall.
Then, they tried to discredit us.
So thousands of our members went toe to toe with Congress men and women in town halls all across the land. They quickly realized we know what we’re talking about.
Now, our detractors are trying to demonize us.
They imply our movement is about race. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Recently, a left leaning friend of mine questioned why there weren’t more minorities at one of our meetings. What struck me about that question; at all the tea party events I have attended, all the conservatives I’ve ever met, and all the countless conversations I have had, the only person focused on the color of skin was a progressive liberal.
Isn’t it ironic that the very same elitist progressives who claim a holier than thou enlightened attitude are the ones constantly dividing Americans by their race. What is worse, they have used race to foster a permanent dependency class solely for the purpose of securing votes. Highlighting the lack of political diversity among some minority groups does not speak ill of conservatives; it speaks ill of the progressive sudo-plantation owners who have used these groups as pawns in a political game.
Let’s be absolutely clear here. As conservatives, as tea party members, we’re not interested in your race, we interested in your principles. We’d like to focus on the content of character, not the color of skin. Wasn’t that Dr. King’s dream? We welcome ALL Americans who have a desire for limited government, and unlimited potential.
Our detractors label us anti-immigrant.
They are mistaken. We believe immigrants are some of the hardest working and most valuable members of our society and we whole-heartedly welcome them.
We are not anti-immigrant. we are against illegal immigration.
One of my dearest friends emigrated here from Brazil nearly 20 years ago. He came here with absolutely nothing. While other young people his age were busy wasting money on frivolous things, he worked hard, putting himself through college and pharmacy school. He’s now a successful pharmacist and it gives me great pride to say this past year he became a citizen of the United States.
To give those who breaks our immigration laws a free pass is a slap in the face to my Brazilian friend, and the millions of others who came to our shores the right way, through the front door. We live in a dangerous world and we must protect our borders. We cannot afford to ignore illegal immigration.
Our detractors call us haters.
We don’t hate people.
What we hate the disgusting, incomprehensible, irrational, unethical, immoral mountain of debt that is being piled on our children and grandchildren.
And yet, our detractors continue to call us names. Whenever I’m engaged in a debate and my opponent resorts to name calling, I know I’ve all but won. So when the big government nanny state supporters start calling us names, I say bring it on! Fellow Tea Party patriots, they are resorting to name calling because they know they can’t win the substantive argument.
Poll after poll is continuing to show what we know to be true… America is on our side.
When it’s a flat, fair tax vs. cap and tax, America is on our side.
When it’s the free market vs. oppressive regulation, America is on our side.
When it’s ever higher energy prices vs. drill baby drill, America is on our side.
When it’s liberty vs. tyranny, America is on our side.
When it’s Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid vs. the will of the American People, America is on our side.
Throughout American history, from the Revolutionary War to the World Wars and everything in between, many generations were forced to lay their lives on the line to save this precious gift of limited government. I would never make light of those sacrifices. But I truly believe this is our generation’s war; not a physical war, but a war of ideas… and the consequences are every bit as serious.
I have no doubt we will win this war of ideas. Because as conservatives, as Tea Party members, as patriots, we are armed with the most powerful weapon of all… The Truth.
The truth is, too much borrowing and spending cannot be fixed with more borrowing and spending. If Americans have to cut their budgets, so can Congress.
The truth is, every dollar that flows through Washington is less freedom for each and every one of us.
The truth is, the borrower is slave to the lender, and our children are being sold to China.
The truth is, we the people rule Washington, not the other way around.
The truth is, we’d like to see a few more job losses in America… Specifically, those in the halls of congress… And you can bet we’re going to start right here in Indiana with Joe Donnley!
Congress is scared… and they should be. You see, you can’t have a Tea Party without brewing something. What we’re brewing here is nothing short of a ballot box revolution.
For those that have yet to wake up the choice is clear and President Reagan put it best: “You and I are told we must choose between a left or right, but I suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There is only an up or down. Up to man’s age-old dream–the maximum of individual freedom consistent with order — or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism. Regardless of their sincerity, their humanitarian motives, those who would sacrifice freedom for security have embarked on this downward path.”
Take heart fellow patriots. The road is long and difficult, but by the grace of God we will win this battle. We will restore the principles that made this country great. We will ensure the future of a constitutionally limited government. We will make the tough choices and the sacrifices necessary so our children and grandchildren will never have to wonder what it was like to live in America when men were free.
Thank you, may God bless you, and let freedom ring.
Your health care overhaul questions answered
The United States spends 17% of its gross domestic product on health care - more than any other country in the world. Health insurance premiums, Medicare and Medicaid have nearly doubled in cost in the past 8 years. Millions of Americans go without health insurance. Employer based insurance is frequently lost or changed. Clearly, there is room for improvement.
WHY ARE HEALTH CARE COSTS SO HIGH?
• Americans demand the best care possible: When it comes to life and death medical care, American wealth enables us to demand the best care possible, but that care comes at a high price.
• There is no incentive by decision makers to curtail cost: Naturally, we wish for doctors and their patients to make decisions based on what’s best for the patient. With most medical costs being paid by third party insurance companies, the decision makers have little incentive to curtail costs, and insurance companies face significant pressure not to scrutinize and deny services.
• Government regulation limits competition and innovation: The federal government currently has over 132,000 pages of regulations on health care. While some regulations are necessary, every artificial government requirement not only adds direct cost to services, it inserts another barrier to businesses and individuals who wish to enter the health care market and compete. Regulations also favor standardized processes and discourage more efficient innovation.
• Mandates force higher costs: State and federal laws rarely allow patients to forgo specific coverages in exchange for lower rates (i.e. mental health treatment, diseases/injury resulting from high-risk behavior, etc.) Regulations also limit insurance companies’ ability to price health insurance based upon an individual’s behavior, similar to automotive insurance.
• Government programs artificially shift costs to private insurance: Medicare and Medicaid pay well below the going market rate for doctor visits and medical services; meaning many providers serve those patients at a loss. Those losses are shifted via higher rates to privately insured individuals.
• Excessive litigation raises costs and encourages unnecessary testing: Frivolous and questionable law suits require doctors to carry extremely expensive malpractice insurance – cost that is passed on to consumers. Doctors also feel pressure to practice “defensive medicine,” ordering tests and procedures they wouldn’t normally consider prudent, for fear of litigation if they are wrong.
WHAT CHANGES ARE BEING PROPOSED?
Most of what is being discussed within the current administration and congress involves what is called a single-payer system (the federal government) or some sort of public/private hybrid. Some have proposed more market-driven solutions that would require much less government intervention, but those plans are receiving little consideration.
OTHER COMMON QUESTIONS:
Aren’t U.S. health care services and life expectancy rates ranked well below countries like Canada, the U.K. and France? Many factors figured into the often cited 2000 WHO study that had nothing to do with health care such as obesity, smoking and other lifestyle related factors. In categories directly related to health care service such as responsiveness, the U.S. ranks number one.[1]
Life expectancy rates are not that simple either. For instance, people in the Netherlands have a higher life expectancy at birth, but after reaching 65 (which minimizes differences in homicide rates, accidents, etc.) American life expectancy is actually longer, despite poorer lifestyles.[2] As for the often cited infant mortality rate: “[T]he rates of Canada and many European countries are artificially low, due to more restrictive definitions of live birth. There also are variations in the willingness of nations to save very low birth weight and gestation babies.”[1]
What about the ‘47 million uninsured’? While undoubtedly some Americans do fall through the patchwork of state safety nets, this figure is misleading. Some already qualify for help and don’t realize it. Between 5 and 10 million are in the country illegally. Of those that are American citizens, half are without insurance temporarily for four months or less. Over 14 million live in households earning $50,000 or more, half of those $75,000 or more, both of which could afford basic high-deductible catastrophic insurance.[3] A significant portion of the uninsured are young and prefer to ‘roll the dice’ and forgo insurance rather than pay premiums.
Don’t insurance companies waste money in administrative costs? It’s actually a little absurd to think they would; it is to their advantage to keep costs low. A 2006 PriceWaterhouseCoopers’ analysis states only 6 cents of every health care premium dollar is devoted to administrative costs – far less than government agency averages.
Doesn’t Medicare and Medicaid prove the government can provide less expensive care? “Savings” from those government programs are achieved by paying artificially low reimbursement rates, often below cost to the provider. Providers are then forced to pass that cost to private insurers who pay artificially high rates to make up the difference. That type of cost shift will be unsustainable if private insurers are further pushed out of the market.
When government intervention reduces expenditures, where do those savings come from? The overwhelming bulk of savings come from cutting reimbursement rates for doctors and other medical professionals, by limiting services (a.k.a. rationing) and by squeezing out profit margins. Cutting reimbursements discourage the best and brightest from entering the medical profession, diminishing the quality and quantity of professionals. Reduced profit margins leave providers with less capital for expansion of services, and less research and development for new treatments.
Aren’t the threats of ‘rationing’ and ‘waiting lists’ just scare tactics? Every major country around the world that has implemented some form of centralized public universal health care ultimately resorts to rationing. Waiting lists discourage patients from seeking services and in extreme cases, patients expire before receiving care. Care is limited based on age and behavior of the patients, or on cost of the procedures or medications. Patients miss out on the latest medical breakthroughs and bureaucratic central planning moves painfully slow when responding to changing needs. Consider this:
• Canada’s state run system has been plagued with shortages. “Between 2006 and 2008, Ontario sent more than 160 patients to New York and Michigan for emergency neurosurgery” [4]
• “[In Canada] only half of ER patients are treated in a timely manner by national and international standards… The physician shortage is so severe that some towns hold lotteries, with the winners gaining access to the local doc.”[4]
• According to a December 2006 Fraser Institute report , Canadians wait over four months to be seen by a specialist.[1]
• “[O]verall, about one out of every seven Canadian physicians sends someone to the United States every year for treatment.” [5]
But don’t government-run universal systems provide better access to care? While cost barriers are reduced, waiting lists and shortages limit access. Consider these facts:
• “Americans have greater access to preventive screening tests and have higher treatment rates for chronic illnesses… the poor under socialized medicine seem to be less healthy relative to the nonpoor than their American counterparts.”[4]
• Despite universal coverage “the number of middle-aged Canadian women who have never had mammography for cancer screening is nearly double that of the United States”[6]
• U. S. cancer survival rates are significantly better across the board. “Some uninsured cancer patients in the United States encounter problems with timely treatment and access, but a far larger proportion of cancer patients in Europe face these troubles. No country on the globe does as good a job overall as the United States.”[6]
Are uninsured people denied treatment in the U.S.? No. Though not ideal, if the uninsured fail to find treatment among the patchwork of state and federal health programs or charitable organizations, ultimately hospitals are required by law to treat individuals regardless of their ability to pay.
WHAT OTHER UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES RESULT FROM A GOVERNMENT SYSTEM?
Less medical advancements: As one of the last remaining large markets for profit-driven health care, the U.S. system provides financial incentives that birth many of the worlds cutting-edge medical advancements. If this last vestige of a significant profitable market is eliminated, the world will lose a key outlet for medical breakthroughs.
Reduction in state autonomy and experimentation: By leaving individual states to enact medical reform, states are free to experiment and compete with one another. States with poor results learn from those with better results and implement improvements, enabling a steady gradual experimentation and improvement in systems across the country.
But eliminating private insurance will put medical decisions back in the hands of doctors and their patients. Eliminating market-driven insurance would remove the gate keepers at the insurance companies who’s job it is to reduce costs. But costs still have to be controlled; government monopolies will just replace the insurance companies. Doctors won’t make the decisions, government bureaucrats will.
Waste, fraud and abuse: The G.A.O. estimates 10% of all government health spending is lost to waste, fraud and abuse. [7] A New York retired chief state investigator of medical fraud states his colleagues agree that 30 to 40% of their state’s Medicaid program expenses are either fraudulent or unnecessary spending.[7] Services seen as “free” are prone to abuse and governments don’t police it well. After all, they don’t have to pay the bill, you do.
Increased debt: Free health care isn’t free. The C.B.O., an organization with a track record of dramatically underestimating costs, just released a study that showed the Kennedy plan under consideration would add $1 trillion to the national debt over the next 10 years.
IF NOT NATIONALIZED CARE, WHAT WOULD BE THE PROBLEM WITH OPTIONAL PUBLIC INSURANCE?
This idea has been floated as a public/private hybrid. The problem is a public plan, backed by tax payer money, has no incentive to directly pass on its true cost, giving it an unfair advantage. The federal government, would serve as a ‘referee’ in the marketplace while at the same time owning one of the ‘teams.’ Free market companies will be driven from the market place until we arrive at a single payer system.
BUT OTHER COUNTRIES SEEM OK WITH SOCIALIZED HEALTH CARE.
Actually many are facing a real crisis. Ironically, as the U.S. moves toward more government control, Canada and Europe have experienced socialization failure and are moving away from it.
“In 2005, Canada’s supreme court struck down key laws in Quebec that established a government monopoly of health services. Claude Castonguay, who headed the Quebec government commission that recommended the creation of its public health-care system… [has] declared the system in “crisis” and suggested a massive expansion of private services.” [4]
“In Canada… According to the New York Times, a private clinic opens at a rate of about one a week across the country… In the United Kingdom… the present Labour government has introduced a choice in surgeries by allowing patients to choose among facilities, often including private ones. Even in Sweden, the government has turned over services to the private sector.” [4]
SO WHAT’S THE ALTERNATIVE TO A NATIONALIZED SYSTEM?
Health care reform in the U.S. needs to focus on affordability, accessibility, portability, and quality; but it doesn’t have to abandon proven free market principles. Switzerland and the Netherlands have achieved universal coverage with private plans.[1] Any legislation must ensure the following:
• Allow insurers to offer incentives and discounts for healthier lifestyles. Current federal limits block reflecting true costs for unhealthy habits.
• Include curbs to reduce malpractice lawsuits including some form of ‘loser pays’ legislation.
• Require full reliance on free-market insurance, free of unfair competition from subsidized government plans that would quickly become monopolies.
• Use consumer-driven market incentives to minimize unnecessary costs and encourage consumers to be prudent with their expenses.
• Reduce and streamline regulation where possible and lift insurance mandates to allow more consumer choice and pricing competition.
Where do we go from here?
If history is any guide, the odds aren’t good. Citizens must pressure their representatives to create true health care reform that maximizes choice, competition, and market-driven cost reductions, not simply expand the broken Medicare/Medicaid system. Call your representatives and let your voice be heard.
Sources: [1] www.biggovhealth.org; [2] - WHO data for 2002. [3] “Moore’s ‘Sicko’ is Sickening” - townhall.com, July 12, 2007 [4] “Canada’s ObamaCare Precedent” - Wall Street Journal, June 9, 2009; [5] “Canada’s Expectant Moms Heading to U.S. to Deliver” - FoxNews.com, October 10, 2007 [6] National Center for Policy Analysis [7] “New York Medicaid Fraud May Reach Into Billions” - New York Times, July 18, 2005
What’s a Conservative?
‘Conservative’ political views are wide and diverse, but at their core, they hold some common fundamental truths and values:
Individual liberty and freedom is paramount. We the People place an extremely high value on individual liberty. Short of doing direct harm to their fellow citizens, individuals should be left free to live their lives as they wish.
“I would rather be exposed to the inconveniencies attending too much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it.” - Thomas Jefferson
We have a fundamental, God given right to life, liberty and property. No government has the right to take life, freedom, or legally acquired property, unless individuals voluntarily give up those rights or lose them through due process upon conviction of serious crimes.
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” - The Declaration of Independence
The People rule Washington; not the other way around. As is clearly stated in our founding documents, the authority to govern comes from God directly to the people who loan that power to elected representatives. That authority is not permanently transferred, and can be rescinded when any authority, elected or otherwise, becomes destructive to the above mentioned ends.
“Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.” - Thomas Paine; “Even after all the horrors of the past century, people still believe implicitly in the state; whereas, if they learned from experience, they would all talk about states in general the way Jews talk about Hitler.” - Joseph Sobran
For a people to remain free, government must be limited. Straight democratic rule is nothing more than mob rule, where minority groups of all types are subject to the whims of the majority. As such, We the People believe in the model of a republic or limited representative democracy as outlined in the Constitution, where state, local and individual rights are protected from the brute force of government and the majority.
“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive.” - C.S. Lewis; “It is the theory of all modern civilized governments that they protect and foster the liberty of the citizen; it is the practice of all of them to limit its exercise, and sometimes very narrowly.” - H.L. Mencken
Our Constitution is a miraculous document that should be revered, not taken lightly. The Constitution is not a living document open to the whims of whomever is in office. Its primary purpose is to protect state and individual liberty from an over-reaching government.
“A sacred respect for the Constitutional law is the vital principle, the sustaining energy of a free government.” - Alexander Hamilton
Free markets, with sufficient competition, always provide better, more efficient and less costly goods and services than government monopolies. Never has statistical data been more unequivocal than with this statement. Wherever possible, commerce should remain in private hands where it is conducted most efficiently. A nation filled with opportunity is far better than a nation of guaranteed mediocrity.
“If we can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people, under the pretence of taking care of them, they must become happy.” - Thomas Jefferson
A just and peaceful society requires moral restraint among its people. Our Constitution guarantees freedom of religion, not freedom from religion. While no government should give preferential treatment to any brand of religion, policies should also not be hostile to religious participation or belief. We are a nation of laws based on moral absolutes found in basic Judeo-Christian values. A society that drifts away from moral absolutes and societal pressure to be a moral people, requires more and more authoritarian control, destroying individual freedom and hampering economic activities.
“Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” - John Adams; “Among a people generally corrupt liberty cannot long exist.” - Edmund Burke; “The Constitution was never meant to prevent people from praying; its declared purpose was to protect their freedom to pray.” - Ronald Reagan
We the People value life and hold it sacred. While exactly when life begins may be a matter of philosophical debate, We the People prefer to err on the side of caution. All life, regardless of their perceived value to society, deserves protection.
We are governed by laws, not by men. When government power is limited, and laws are clear, everyone plays by the same set of rules. Justice should be blind, and politics have no place in the courtroom. The court’s ultimate responsibility is to apply the law equally and fairly, and to protect the people from an overzealous government by enforcing the limits on government found in the Constitution.
“…government is really nothing but a group of men, and usually they are very inferior men.” - H. L. Mencken
States’ rights must be protected. The closer power and authority lie to the people, the better. The more local the official, the better they will know their constituencies’ issues, and the easier it will be to hold them accountable. The further power drifts from the people, the more likely abuse will take place. What right do the people of one state have to govern over another?
“The Truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted.” - James Madison; “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” - 10th Amendment to the United States Constitution.
The simpler the laws, the better. Overly complex legal code stifles business, discourages investment, hampers freedom, and invites politically driven selective enforcement. All of society is better off when laws are kept simple.
“Laws are made for men of ordinary understanding and should, therefore, be construed by the ordinary rules of common sense.” - Thomas Jefferson
Economies are dynamic, not static. When an economy functions more efficiently, when goods and services are provided more effectively, everyone in that society is better off, in a sense, wealthier. One individual’s prosperity does not automatically come at the expense of another. While resources are limited, wealth is not.
“By virtue of exchange, one man’s prosperity is beneficial to all others.” - Frederic Bastiat
Failure is essential to a healthy economy. While failure is often painful, it is rarely fatal. Failing companies must be allowed to fail so resources and workers can be put to use where the market has determined they are more needed. Propping up failing companies only delays the inevitable, punishes success, discourages competition, and encourages the bad behavior and poor decisions which lead to the failure in the first place.
Taxes should be simple, flat and fair, not a venue for social engineering. The current system of taxation whereby the federal government picks and chooses winners and losers is an outrage. The use of the tax code to encourage some behavior and to discourage other behavior is another avenue for limiting individual freedom and controlling peoples’ lives. It is none of a government’s business where individuals choose to spend their hard earned dollars.
“Would it not be better to simplify the system of taxation rather than to spread it over such a variety of subjects and pass through so many new hands.” - Thomas Jefferson
Good intentions are meaningless. Results are what matter. While any given policy may have good intentions, every step taken to fix a perceived problem has unintended consequences. We judge policy not on good intentions, but on the real concrete results.
“Rather than love, than money, than fame, give me truth.” - Henry David Thoreau
Lower taxes spur economic growth and keep more dollars flowing in more efficient free markets. Lower taxes often result in economic growth that actually increases tax revenues. Tax hikes designed to raise revenue often stifle markets enough to mitigate higher revenues or even decrease them.
“Everyone wants to live at the expense of the state. They forget that the state wants to live at the expense of everyone.” -Frederic Bastiat; “If duties are too high, they lessen the consumption; the collection is eluded; and the product to the treasury is not so great as when they are confined within proper and moderate bounds.” - Alexander Hamilton
Government charity is not efficient, nor is it charitable. It’s wrong to take hard-earned dollars from a person to whom it belongs in order to give it to someone to whom it does not belong. The moment people get the idea it does no good to work because somebody else is going to take what they work for, economies come to an end.
“To take from one, because it is thought his own industry and that of his fathers has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers, have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, the guarantee to everyone the free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it.” - Thomas Jefferson
We the People believe in a true abolition of racism and total equality regardless of race, creed or nation of origin. Paraphrasing Dr. King, one should be judged on the content of one’s character, not the color of one’s skin. But race, behavior or lot in life should never be used to confer upon someone special rights and privileges. We are not Asian-Americans, Hispanic-Americans and African-Americans; we are all simply Americans.
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal. . .” The Declaration of Independence
We the People demand secure borders, yet value legal immigration. We the People welcome and celebrate legal immigrants. But we live in a dangerous world and we can no more leave our borders open than individuals can leave their front doors open in the dark of night. Doing so only invites trouble. We must have secure borders and know who and what is entering and leaving our country. Illegal immigration is by definition illegal, and immigration laws must be enforced.
“The bosom of America is open to receive not only the Opulent and respectable Stranger, but the oppressed and persecuted of all Nations and Religions; whom we shall welcome to a participation of all our rights and privileges, if by decency and propriety of conduct they appear to merit the enjoyment.” - George Washington
We the People understand peace comes through strength. We detest violence and war, and must do everything we can to avoid it. Unfortunately, evil exists and ours is a world that is governed by the aggressive use of force, with few exceptions. The surest way to ensure lasting peace for our people is to be well prepared to defend ourselves from outside aggression. A strong military is essential to our freedom.
“Whatever enables us to go to war, secures our peace.” - Thomas Jefferson
Individuals have a right to protect themselves. The individual’s God given right to self defense and our right to bear arms are fundamental to a free society.
“…the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” - Article II, The Bill Of Rights; “I ask sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them.” - George Mason
Want to Learn More?
Online Resources
www.heritage.org
www.aei.org
www.townhall.com
www.americanthinker.com
www.nationalcenter.org
www.cato.org
Books
“The 5,000 Year Leap” by W. Cleon Skousen
“Basic Economics” by Thomas Sowell
“What’s so Great About America” by Dinesh D’Souza
“The Forgotten Man” by Amity Shlaes
“Give Me a Break” by John Stossel
“Liberty and Tyranny” by Mark R Levin
Five Years Ago Yesterday; A Heartfelt Tribute
I was just four years old when he became president; a mere twelve when he gracefully left. He entered office in the midst of a financial crisis – double digit inflation, unemployment, and mortgage rates; and the threat of nuclear war around every corner. When he left office, all three economic indicators were in check, and those living in the oppressive Soviet empire were but a few years from a taste of freedom.
Five years ago yesterday, Ronald Wilson Reagan “slipped the surly bonds of earth” to meet his Maker.
A B-list actor, a Democrat and a union president in his younger years, Reagan explained his political shift quite simply, “I didn’t leave the democratic party, the democratic party left me.”
Reagan’s sense of humor was second to none. One of my favorite quotes, he once said, “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’” While being wheeled into the operating room after a near fatal assassination attempt, Reagan quipped as he was being put under “I hope you’re all Republicans.”
That near death experience had a profound effect on his life. Though he didn’t publicly acknowledge a close relationship with the Almighty, from that day on, Reagan was convinced his life was spared for a purpose, and he dedicated it to that end.
Perhaps his most important legacy was his commitment to a constitutionally limited federal government. At his very core, Reagan knew what made America great was not its government, nor was it unique to its people or land. He understood what so many immigrants understand and so many born and raised here miss - a free land filled with opportunity is far better than a land of guaranteed mediocrity.
As he put it, “The Founding Fathers knew a government can’t control the economy without controlling people, and they knew that when a government sets out to do that, it must use force and coercion to achieve its purpose. So we have come to a time for choosing.”
That choice didn’t come easily for the country. Despite the failed results of FDR and Johnson’s expansive government policies, loud was the clamor for even more government involvement as a response to the economic malaise strangling the country in the late 70s. Reagan stood steadfastly against it. He worked tirelessly to get the government out of the economy, ultimately unleashing an economic boom that lingered for decades.
His desire for people to taste the opportunities of freedom didn’t stop at the waters edge. Reagan saw totalitarian regimes, whether communist, socialist, or dictatorships, for what they were and are, robbers of men’s souls and far too often of their very lives.
Reagan didn’t mince words, calling Soviet communism what it was – an “evil empire.” He was thoroughly convinced that system would be “left on the ash heap of history.” He was right. Ultimately, centrally planned economies were no match for the creativity and motivation of free men and women pursuing their passions free of government interference.
Four years after he left office, the Berlin wall fell and hundreds of millions gained a chance at freedom.
Though it’s been hard to hold on to as of late, what I treasure most from Reagan’s legacy is that great spirit of optimism. In a very dark time, when so many were convinced America was in an inevitable state of decline, he refused to accept it. Reagan gave us back an America we could take pride in. He loved this country, not only for what it was, but what it represented, and what it could be – a great “shining city upon a hill.”
In his farewell address to the nation Reagan put it this way: “I’ve spoken of the shining city all my political life, but I don’t know if I ever quite communicated what I saw when I said it. But in my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace… That’s how I saw it, and see it still. And how stands the city on this winter night? More prosperous, more secure and happier than it was eight years ago. But more than that: After two hundred years, two centuries, she still stands strong and true on the granite ridge, and her glow has held steady no matter what storm. And she’s still a beacon, still a magnet for all who must have freedom, for all the pilgrims from all the lost places who are hurtling through the darkness toward home… My friends: We did it. We weren’t just marking time. We made a difference. We made the city stronger, we made the city freer, and we left her in good hands. All in all, not bad, not bad at all.” (From his Farewell Address to the Nation, 1989.)
Faced with Alzheimer’s, in 1992 Reagan left us with this: “And whatever else history may say about me when I’m gone, I hope it will record that I appealed to your best hopes, not your worst fears, to your confidence rather than your doubts. My dream is that you will travel the road ahead with liberty’s lamp guiding your steps and opportunity’s arm steadying your way. My fondest hope for each one of you — and especially for young people — is that you will love your country, not for her power or wealth, but for her selflessness and her idealism. May each of you have the heart to conceive, the understanding to direct, and the hand to execute works that will make the world a little better for your having been here. May all of you as Americans never forget your heroic origins, never fail to seek divine guidance, and never lose your natural, God-given optimism. And finally, my fellow Americans, may every dawn be a great new beginning for America and every evening bring us closer to that shining city upon a hill.”
Nearly five years ago to the day, the federal government was closed in remembrance of Reagan upon his death. I had to chuckle at the very idea. I can not conceive of a more fitting tribute.
Thank you Ronald Reagan, God’s speed.
If the law is meaningless, why invest?
Chrysler and GM are getting away with paying pennies on the dollar for their debt, while Ford, despite reacting to the markets and preparing for the downturn, is now at a significant competitive disadvantage. They still have ALL their debt. Financial rewards based on politics rather than free markets does fundamental damage to economies. If investors can’t count on the protection of the rule of law, why invest?
Eight Reasons for Conservative Optimism
Yes, as a conservative, it’s been a tough road the last few years. But I’d like to offer some points we can be optimistic about in the next few years (provided we don’t suffer a total economic collapse).
Polling Data Says We’re Still a Right Leaning Country.
While polling data consistently shows a fairly even split between Republicans and Democrats, the bi-partisan Battleground Poll for many years has a peculiar stat on Question D3 which asks if you consider yourself a conservative, a moderate, or a liberal. Only 2% consider themselves moderate, and those that call themselves “conservative” out number those that consider themselves “liberal” by nearly a two-to-one margin year in and year out. Why else would the current leftist president feel the need while campaigning to portray himself as moderate and even conservative in some respects, constantly tossing out Regan-esk phrases in speech after speech.
Run a thoughtful, principled, articulate true conservative, and they will win every time.
If we Run Conservatives, Conservatives will be Back.
4.1 million fewer Republicans voted in 2008 than in 2004. It’s highly doubtful more than a tiny fraction abandoned conservative principles and switched teams. Many likely stayed home because they were principled conservatives and didn’t perceive a dimes worth of difference between the wishy-washy moderate RINO on the ticket, and president Obama. I would dare to bet most are now re-thinking that strategy.
RINOs are Out, DINOs are In.
While I can’t point to any specific stats, I get the feeling from a variety of anecdotal resources that RINOs (liberal Republicans) have been losing out while many of the new Democratic congress members in the last few years are more conservative (DINOs) than those in the Democratic leadership. This would lend support to the above Battleground Polling data.
History and Odds are on Our Side.
In midterms, the party in power in generally loses seats. By the very nature of the seats up in 2008, the cards were stacked against republicans and that trend will flip in 2010. According to Karl Rove “Right now, we know that there are at least 70 if not more Democrats who sit in red districts….there are only five Republicans in districts that John Kerry won in 2004.” What’s more, the 2010 census, barring any political shenanigans, should result in the addition of congressional seats in “red states”, and the loss of seats in “blue states.”
The Current Administration is Over-reaching.
While the president’s polling numbers appear high at first glance, historically speaking at this point in a president’s first term, they’re actually not that impressive. What’s more, when you poll individually issue by issue, the president and democrats stances are quite often on the losing side. The fast paced, hard-left agenda being driven here will increasingly be questioned as the celebrity appeal wears thin.
Conservatives in the GOP are Starting to Galvanize.
No Republican in the House and only three in the Senate voted for the Stimulus Bill while not a single Republican in Congress supported Obama’s extravagant budget.
There is No Bush or Obama on the Ticket.
Eight years of Bush bashing (some of it warranted) took its toll on the the Republican party in general. President Obama brought out a lot of first time voters who where caught up in the hipe (or should I say hope), but lack any depth in terms of core ideological principles. My money is that a significant chunk of those new voters won’t be nearly as likely to go to the polls in 2010 for people they’ve never heard of (except for those that ACORN “helped” of course).
Democrats own the Crisis Response.
Unfortunately, we know the results of the current spending and increase in government size and intervention in the market place, not to mention the dramatic inflation to come. While I’m as optimistic as anyone about the ability of American businesses to overcome adversity, it’s highly unlikely the economy will stage a spectacular rebound in the next 18 months. Democrats completely own the response to this crisis and will be on the defensive so long as conservatives present a clear alternative.
Justin Graber Speaks at 2009 Elkhart Tax Day Tea Party
Here’s the YouTube links, and transcript:
Part 1:
Part 2:
Transcript:
“Please forgive me for working from notes here; my experience in public speaking prior to today is, well, zero and apparently teleprompters are in short supply these days.
A while back, presidential candidate John Edwards often spoke about two Americas. I’m beginning to think he may have been right.
It seems to many in Washington, America is to blame for every wrong that has happened around the world. It is a dreadful, dismal place in inevitable decline, full of victims of every affliction known to man; helpless, hapless souls who are locked in poverty because of evil greedy people hoarding ill-gotten gains.
And we’re told bigger, more intrusive government, is the only thing that can save it.
That seems to be their America. But that’s not our America. It’s not the America of We the People.
Our America is what Thomas Sowell called “the greatest, freest and most decent society in existence. It is an oasis of goodness in a desert of cynicism and barbarism.” We say that not to boast, but in a humble, fervent awe of the blessing we’ve been given and a desire that all people can one day receive the bounties of liberty.
In little more than 200 years our America rose to become the lone super power in the world; not because of our government, but because of the limits on our government.
In our America, We the People rule Washington; not the other way around.
In our America, the constitution is a sacred contract that has out lasted all others for good reason. It is not a living document open to the whims of whoever is currently in office. There is a process to change it, but it doesn’t involve a judge with an agenda.
We’ve grown tired of self-serving bureaucrats telling us what we can and can’t drive, where we can and can’t live, and what we can and cannot think. We’re sick of the tax code, endless regulations, and earmarks being used to pick winners and losers and control peoples’ lives. It’s none of Washington’s business where we choose to spend our hard earned dollars!
In our America, we already pay too many taxes. We pay Federal Income Tax, Corporate Income Tax, Capital Gains Tax, State Income Tax, Local Income Tax, Property Tax, Sales Tax, Federal Unemployment Tax, Gasoline Tax, Inheritance Tax, Medicare Tax, Social Security Tax, State Unemployment Tax, Workers’ Compensation Tax and on and on and on and on.
Memo to congress: we’ve had enough.
And speaking of taxes, in our America, tax cheats are prosecuted, not given high level government positions.
In our America, we can add and subtract. We have sense enough to know you can’t possibly balance a trillion dollar deficit on the backs of 5% of Americans. And you certainly can’t borrow and spend your way out of problem caused in part by too much borrowing and spending.
In our America, sometimes budgets and jobs have to be cut. We’d prefer those cuts be in the bloated, inefficient government bureaucracies, and many in the halls of congress.
In our America, a government sponsored crisis is not an opportunity for a big government power grab. We expect officials to admit their mistakes and fix the bad policy that contributed to this mess; then deregulate, quit spending, get out of the way, and let us go to work.
In our America, socialism is no virtue and freedom is no vice.
We don’t care about Washington’s good intentions, we care about results. Government doesn’t create jobs; it steals them from the private sector. Every dollar that flows through Washington is less freedom for We the People. The dollars they spend must be ripped from the hands of the people who earned it and more accurately, from those yet to be born.
In our America, we love people and want the best for them.
We believe every person has unlimited potential and promise. We believe that all are created equal. But, no government can guarantee equality of outcome. For to do so, they must enslave fellow citizens. We didn’t fight so long and so hard for so many years to rid ourselves of slavery only to return to it. This is not a plantation and we will not submit to government masters.
In our America, achievement isn’t something to be punished and poverty isn’t something to be encouraged. We don’t demonize profitable business. We don’t hate the rich. Most earned it by hard honest work and innovation; providing valuable goods and services that have improved all our lives. We’d like to keep that motivation in place for those who right now are perfecting the next technological revolution.
In our America, whether you do it yourself or by proxy via elected officials, stealing is wrong. It’s wrong to take hard earned dollars from a person to whom it belongs in order to give it to someone to whom it does not belong. The moment people get the idea it does no good to work because somebody else is going to take what they work for, that my dear friend is the end of an economy.
Our America is overwhelmingly made up of hardworking responsible citizens who live within their means and save for the rainy days that always come. We don’t believe in paying the mortgages of those who were reckless and spent beyond their means. Doing so only encourages bad behavior. There’s nothing wrong with renting, and learning a valuable lesson in the process.
That being said, we know in Elkhart County better than anywhere, that good people do sometimes fall on hard times. In our America, our citizens are the most charitable people on earth and will bend over backwards to help a neighbor in need. We prefer to do so by freely choosing from among the thousands of effective private organizations and skip the bloated bureaucracy.
After all, government coercion robs the giver of a cheerful heart, and the receiver of thankful humbleness.
In our America we believe in common sense. We believe, as the Rev. William [Boat-ticker] did that:
You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift.
You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong
You cannot help the poor man by destroying the rich.
You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred.
You cannot build character and courage by taking away man’s initiative and independence.
You cannot help small men by tearing down big men.
You cannot lift the wage earner by pulling down the wage payer.
You cannot keep out of trouble by spending more than your income.
You cannot establish security on borrowed money.
In our America, we’re no where close to giving up or giving in. But let there be no doubt, we believe in these words: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it.”
I often wonder what it must have been like for those living in the crutial points in American history – the struggle for independence from the British Crown, the fight to end slavery, the beginnings of the industrial revolution, the Great Depression, the war to end all wars. Did those individuals truly understand the momentous times they were living in?
I cannot shake the feeling that we are once again facing one of those pivotal moments. You obviously feel the same or you wouldn’t be here. For freedom loving patriots, it’s been hard to remain optimistic as of late. A recent Rasmussen poll suggests only 53% of Americans believe capitalism is better than socialism. For adults under 30, those numbers look even more bleak. Roughly one-third prefer capitalism, one-third socialism, and the last third are undecided or ambivalent.
Sounds pretty bad doesn’t it?
And yet ironically, a historian friend of mine recently passed along this tidbit about the political state of our country during the revolution. “As late as the spring and early summer of 1776, long after protests had given way to warfare, roughly one third of those living in the American colonies were for independence, one third remained loyal to the Crown, and the other third were sitting on the fence….waiting to be inspired one way or another.”
Sounds familiar doesn’t it?
We often have an idealized notion of those great moments in history - that the country was wholely united in this cause or that one. But in terms of political will, we face nothing today that our founders didn’t face all those years ago. Samuel Adams put it best, “It does not take a majority to prevail … but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men.”
Look around you. You are that tireless minority. You are here at this time and this place for a reason, a purpose.
As for that other America; we welcome with open arms the people that leave that dreadful, dismal place so many in Washington see, and join us in ours. Our America survived the disasterous policies of FDR, Johnson and Carter; and by the grace of God we’ll make it through this. It will be “morning again” in America someday. America will be once again be that shining city on the hill, a beacon of light and freedom in a world of oppressive darkness.
In closing, when you go home this evening, and in the coming weeks, months and years, I ask four things of you:
One; when freedom is under assault, when government is expanding and liberty is contracting, do something about. Make a phone call. Write a letter. Form a protest. Be that vocal minority of the silent majority.
Two; educate yourself, your children and those around you. If the vast majority of Americans knew more about the America’s founding principles than American Idol, we wouldn’t be in this mess.
Three; get involved with a grass roots organizations like the Michiana 9/12 Project; groups whose central purpose is to protect and defend liberty, the Constitution and the limited government on which our freedom depends.
Four; pray for your country. Pray that we are not the generation to let this precious gift of limited government and unlimited potential slip through our fingers.
Thank you. May God bless you. And let freedom ring!