Facism or Corruption?

I saw this article posted with the comment:
 "THIS is the classic face and definition of FASCISM. BIG BUSINESS IN CONTROL OF AND IN CAHOOTS WITH, BIG GOVERNMENT!"
To which I say: "No it's not" Just to be thorough, here is the dictionary.com definition of "fascism":
"noun

1.

( sometimes initial capital letter ) a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.

2.

( sometimes initial capital letter ) the philosophy, principles, or methods of fascism.

3.

( initial capital letter ) a political movement that employs the principles and methods of fascism, especially the one established by Mussolini in Italy 1922–43. "

 

While it may look like fascism, what it really is, is an indicator of just how deadly the two party system mindset is to our thinking. This is America. If a citizen wants to open their wallet and give a donation the size of the national debt to any given candidate, they can.

 

The problem with that is not the size of the donation or the intentions of the donor, but the character of the candidate who receives that donation. If the candidate has sound character and shares my values, I should know it and vote for that candidate regardless of how much money he/she has for advertising or other promotional efforts. It is MY duty, as a citizen, to research all the candidates for a given office and vote for the BEST one.

 

A candidate who had this kind of financial backing would certainly be seen as a candidate who can win by any political party, but that doesn't mean they SHOULD win.

 

The implication in the article referenced above, is that if this donor doesn't get his way, then the candidates of one political party will not get his money and that the acting POTUS acted because he wants HIS party's candidates to have that money.

 

This illustrates who the acting POTUS serves and, if true, shows that he is not fit to serve in that capacity. No, the problem illustrated by this article is not fascism, but the corruption of the character of our legislators through the promotion of an easy button, two party system that insists that character and values are irrelevant when compared to the ability to win: aka the ability to raise money for the party.

 

Our elected officials serve, or are supposed to serve America. They are supposed to do what is right for the nation, regardless of offers of money, threats, influence or reputation. They are to be paragons of virtue, protecting the nation from the baser motivations that trouble mankind as well as from the sacrificial gallantry that can at times afflict us.

 

If you love your nation, vote character and values this fall, not party. Money doesn't matter if we are doing our duty as citizens. We can discover every candidate through our local elections boards and do our due diligence with regard to finding out their character and values. That's not convenient, but it is a good deal more convenient than becoming conversant with the plethora of laws, rules and regulations our current legislators allow to remain in place to burden us. It's time we step away from convenience and get back to doing quality work when it comes to the maintenance of the republic.

 

"Therefore I will judge you, O house of Israel, every one according to his ways, saith the Lord God. Repent, and turn yourselves from all your transgressions; so iniquity shall not be your ruin." ~ Eze 18:30

 

What Hurts the Most about Benghazi

This is what gets me too. How do I live with those people who didn't and still, by all appearances, don't care what happened here.

From the article:
"I'd like to understand.  Do Democrat voters truly think these actions by a President and Secretary of State are not important?  I know we are different on many questions of war and peace and diplomacy.  But this is a small, human story.  A handful of men, attacked by Islamists, fighting for their lives, abandoned for election politics.  We don't do that in America and pretend it's okay, do we?" 

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/05/what_hurts_the_most_about_benghazi.html#ixzz2UBd538Bg
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook
What Hurts the Most about Benghazi

Standing Down

 I am so deeply grieved by this villainous administration's treatment of American citizens at Benghazi that I find all the election nonsense to be too much for me. 

I keep thinking of the ramifications spreading ever outward from that epicenter and I am am overwhelmed by the perfidy, the treason and the out and out murderousness of these people. 

The harm this has done and continues to do to our military concerns me greatly. Our fellow citizens did not sign up to be ordered to sit on their hands when their fellow citizens are being killed. The harm it will do to those who may vote for him unawares, thanks to what appears to be a msm blackout. (Although they certainly had fair warning of his character from his votes on the born alive bills didn't they?)The rifts in families and communities between those who have an ounce of simple human decency and those who are so morally bankrupt that they will ascribe this all to politics and never you mind that someone died. Appalling.

How will I be able to sit at the same table over the holidays as people who voted for this festering sore on the face of America? I can't think of it. It pains me, and yet I must think of it if only to bear witness. 

My nation is a nation that values individual rights BECAUSE we recognize the intrinsic value of every life and this whited sepulcher has just demonstrated to the entire world that he cares no more for a single American life than what he thinks it can bring him politically and his minions scramble to do the same. 

I am devastated that the entire nation has not risen to demand his removal, as have I and as I will continue to do until he is gone...or until I am. 
And if it does that to me, what must it be doing to our military? Particularly those who were in a position to help but who were told to stand down for HOURS? 

For those who still have the good sense to be Christians, pray as you may never have prayed before because we are going into a darkness such as this nation, nor this world has ever seen and there are very few candles. 

May our military forgive us;

• for failing in our duty to keep this current "government" within it's Constitutional limits;
• for failing to elect people of good character to those positions of authority over them;
• for failing to see that their right to vote is respected;
• for failing to hold those same people accountable for the smallest of breaches of that venerable document and;
• for putting them in a place where they may neither defend themselves nor their fellow citizens, nor speak about it to anyone until they are retired. 

And that said, may the Lord forgive us as well for losing this nation, this gift of freedom, and, most of all for rejecting Him. This is the first election where neither of the two front running candidates are Christians, although both claim to be. How could we have lost our discernment in the short 230 + years since this nation's founding? 

" Shall the throne of iniquity have fellowship with thee, which frameth mischief by a law? They gather themselves together against the soul of the righteous, and condemn the innocent blood. But the Lord is my defence; and my God is the rock of my refuge. And he shall bring upon them their own iniquity, and shall cut them off in their own wickedness; yea, the Lord our God shall cut them off."~ Psalm 94:20-23

Duty, Honor, Sacrifice

This is more than a Memorial Day post. This is a call to duty. For over 200 years patriots have bled and died in the defense of this nation and the God given freedoms it has enshrined in it's Constitution. Our military has done their job-to protect us from threats abroad-and they have done it magnificently. They have done their duty by us and it is time to step up and do our part.

What is our part? Our part is to maintain the republic. To keep the nation as free as it was when it was founded and we have failed. We can put a stop to the tyrannical push of our current federal government, but we must do it now. We must reclaim our Constitution while we still may or suffer the loss of all that has been fought for over the past 200 years.

We owe this to those who shed their blood and gave their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor to found and protect this nation. We owe it to our posterity. There is no excuse good enough for our failure thus far. There will be no excuse we can offer if we do not reclaim our nation.

"I have children and a family to consider". - So did the founders. Many lost their families, their wives, their children and never heard from them again.

"I want to obey the law". Then do it. The U S Constitution is the supreme law of the land. Without the rule of law there is no safety or security to be had. It is our duty to uphold that Constitution and to refuse to cooperate with any federal laws that are made contrary to it. In addition, kindly remember that every single man who signed the declaration of Independence was a traitor to England and could have been shot on sight.

"I don't want to make trouble." Trouble is here with or without you. The only question is, will you bestir yourself to oppose it, or will you allow it to run roughshod over your and your family's God given and constitutionally affirmed rights?

" I think that congress will sort it all out with a little more time." How much time do you think they need? So far, this Congress has authorized the NDAA . They have failed to repeal obamacare with all of it's egregious mandates. They re-authorized the patriot act. They are not challenging any of mr. obama's executive orders nor his eligibility-which should have been the first thing they did upon their swearing in, were they to keep their oaths.

"I don't know enough about this stuff to know what is the truth."  Then learn. Learn fast, because you don't have much time anymore. Start with the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. Then move on to your own state's Constitution. then the Federalist and the Anti-Federalist Papers and other writings of our founders.

" But everyone will laugh at me and call me names." Then man/woman up, put on your big boy/girl pants and decide with whom you stand - the communists and followers of Islam that are currently attempting to conquer this nation or the patriots who want to restore it.  

"From the day on which an accommodation takes place between England and America, on any other terms than as independent States, I shall date the ruin of this country. a politic minister will study to lull us into security by granting us the full extent of our petitions. The warm sunshine of influence would melt down the virtue which the violence of the storm rendered more firm and unyielding. In a state of tranquillity, wealth, and luxury, our descendants would forget the arts of war and the noble activity and zeal which made their ancestors invincible. Every art of corruption would be employed to loosen the bond of union which renders our resistance formidable. When the spirit of liberty, which now animates our hearts and gives success to our arms, is extinct, our numbers will accelerate our ruin and render us easier victims to tyranny. Ye abandoned minions of an infatuated ministry, if peradventure any should yet remain among us, remember that a Warren and Montgomery are numbered among the dead. Contemplate the mangled bodies of your countrymen, and then say, What should be the reward of such sacrifices? Bid us and our posterity bow the knee, supplicate the friendship, and plow, and sow, and reap, to glut the avarice of the men who have let loose on us the dogs of war to riot in our blood and hunt us from the face of the earth? If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquillity of servitude than the animating contest of freedom--go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen!" ~ Samuel Adams

Will we see the end of this republic or a new beginning?

The bottom line, on this Memorial Day is that, our fellow citizens have fought and bled and died to maintain and preserve our freedoms from enemies abroad. Now it is our turn to restore the freedoms that the Lord has given us here at home. If we had kept our wits about us, never would the federal government have been allowed such leeway, but we did not. Thus it now falls to us to make the painful and hard decisions that are  necessary to restrain or replace our federal government in order to save ourselves and our posterity from the tyranny that is daily imposed upon us in ever greater amounts. May we turn from the wickedness that has flourished under the philosophy of moral relativity and may the Lord be with us again or we shall surely fail.

" As for me, I will call upon God; and the LORD shall save me.

   Evening, and morning, and at noon, will I pray, and cry aloud: and he shall hear my voice.

   He hath delivered my soul in peace from the battle that was against me: for there were many with me.

   God shall hear, and afflict them, even he that abideth of old. Selah. Because they have no changes, therefore they fear not God.

   He hath put forth his hands against such as be at peace with him: he hath broken his covenant.

   The words of his mouth were smoother than butter, but war was in his heart: his words were softer than oil, yet were they drawn swords.

   Cast thy burden upon the LORD, and he shall sustain thee: he shall never suffer the righteous to be moved.

   But thou, O God, shalt bring them down into the pit of destruction: bloody and deceitful men shall not live out half their days; but I will trust in thee." ~ Psalm 55:16-23

Stand Like a Rock

RINOs, sellouts, big tent republicans. All names for those who have been elected by conservatives because we thought they shared our values, only to have them cave when they get into office. Why does this happen time and time again?

Is it that the party politics, team spirit of it all has corrupted our election process? That would seem to bear a large portion of the blame, but there is another component which bears examination. That component is the word and process of compromise.

Compromise, on it's face, seems like a good thing. It is a useful tool when negotiating in areas of disagreement. Often, in bitter negotiations, a compromise where no one is entirely happy is viewed as a proper solution.

Politicians are often encouraged to compromise in order to get "something" done. An alarming idea at best, since our system was designed to prevent our politicians from doing certain things unless they compromised their principles. Our founders have said over and over again what sort of people we ought to prefer in our elections. People of good character and Christian values. Trustworthy and high minded statesmen. In other words, people who will not compromise on matters of principle. And yet, here we are.

Why was it important to our founders that we elect the best among us to serve in Congress? I submit that it was to be sure that those who served would be those who understood the difference between principle and preference. Thomas Jefferson wrote "It matters of style, swim with the current, in matters of principle, stand like a rock."

Here's why it matters. Compromise in an area of principle is not a negotiation, it is a loss. Let me say that again, compromise in an area of principle equals a LOSS.

We are to elect Congressmen and women who know that matters of principle should never even be in the same room as the bargaining table, much less on the table itself. In our current culture of moral relativity, we seem to have lost the knack for differentiating between principle and preference.

This is one area where being a Christian is of service to a legislator. If he or she has an absolute against which to measure his/her actions and decisions, it is easier to tell which items are items of principle (Like our God given and Constitutionally affirmed rights) and which are matters of preference (like whether to spend allocated monies for one form of defense or another).

We need to elect people based on character and values, not party. Because anyone who is willing to compromise on principle just to keep their party in power is someone who is willing to lose all that makes this nation what it was intended by our founders to be. The freest, most independent nation on Earth. A nation of principled individuals whose understanding of personal responsibility and self determination would set them a cut above those of any nation that allowed their government to do their thinking for them. For too long we have seen our legislators lose, step by incremental step, the principles upon which this nation was founded. This is the battle we are fighting and every individual in this nation of voting age has a duty to vote accordingly.

To those who protest that by abandoning the "two party system" we will give the election to "the other side", so what? If we do not elect people of good character who will not compromise on principles, we are lost anyway. Because those "good, party members" will compromise again and again, until we stop electing them. The choice you offer is between an immediate loss and an incremental one. Again, a vote for the lesser of two evils is still a vote for evil.

"Ye that love the LORD, hate evil: he preserveth the souls of his saints; he delivereth them out of the hand of the wicked." ~ Psalm 97:10

A Vote of No Confidence

Election day and the dutiful voter is faced again with making a decision which will affect their own future as well as that of their children. For whom should a vote be cast? The choices have been merrily chopping up each other's character and reputation for weeks, aided and abetted by special interests on both sides.

Mr. Prosser is painted as a man of bad temper for calling another judge names a year ago. The response of another justice to this outburst was to write an e-mail stating: "You are a very active participant in the dysfunctional way we carry-on. (As am I.) You often goad other justices by pushing and pushing in conference in a way that is simply rude and completely nonproductive. That is what happened when David lost his cool. He is not a man who attacks others without provocation." to yet a third justice who leaked the blow-up. (in violation of the law) His past as a D.A. is brought up and his integrity questioned over a case from 20 years ago that was handled in what was regarded as a reasonable fashion, with regard for the victims at that time.

Ms. Kloppenburg is painted as a raging liberal with no sense of ethics or decency because she used an abuse case in commercials to denigrate her opponent and refused to stop the ads even when requested to do so by the victims. Her supporters have the appalling slogan, "A vote for Kloppenburg is a vote against Walker", for a post which is supposed to be about the rule of law rather than partisan politics. She has also been described as: "Joanne Kloppenburg, a die-hard lefty with zero judicial experience who has all but promised the state’s thuggish public unions that she will be their firewall in stopping Governor Walker’s reforms via judicial fiat."

It is important to note that the ads were run by a third party. However, if I were the candidate in question here, I would have done everything and anything in my power, including dropping out of the race, to stop those ads and to avoid being characterized as unethical and biased. Any judicial candidate who would be satisfied to be elected with such commercials, (whether they were put out by the candidate or a third party), or to be portrayed as so very partisan is not fit to sit on the bench.

The hard, cold facts are that Mr. Prosser has served for years as a judge as well as holding several other posts. He is generally well respected and liked and regarded as an impartial judge who rules according to what the state constitution says.

Ms. Kloppenburg has served as a lawyer and, while in college, and assistant to Judge Abrahamson and Judge Crab. she has been passed over for judgicial appointments by governors conservative and liberal. (I would like to see a supreme court justice candidate with some actual time on the bench as a judge, but that is my personal opinion.)

For those who seek a test of character to decide for whom to cast their vote, let me say that Ms. Kloppenburg is supported by the unions who have been behaving so very badly over these past weeks and she is supported by Planned Parenthood. Mr. Prosser is not. Draw from those facts what conclusions you will as to the character of these two candidates.

The bigger questions to me, that this race has brought to light, are: 1.) The appalling behavior at and within the WI supreme court. Perhaps I am a bit of an idealist, but I always thought that judges were above that sort of petty squabbling and certainly above catering to any sort of partisan politics. That's their job, to sort out what the law says, not to create new law. (That's the job of the legislature, not the judiciary.)and; 2.)The appalling assertion of Ms. Kloppenburg's supporters (You know, those same folks who actually WANT a democracy-why anyone would prefer such an unstable and unfair form of government over the wonderful republic our founders gave us is beyond me. It must be sheerest ignorance of history and human nature.) that they prefer an activist judge, rather than one who will base their rulings on the law and the WI State Constitution. Really!? How dumb are we?

"He that turneth away his ear from hearing the law, even his prayer shall be abomination." ~Prov 28:9

How do we determine good character?

Warning to parents: This video contains mature language.
It's all well and good for me to talk about how we should be voting on character and values rather than party affiliation, but how do you determine what kind of character a candidate has or what values they hold?
Sometimes they make it easy for you. (I am still glad I don't live in the area where this young woman is running for office. If her electorate finds such a thing acceptable, I'm prtetty sure I wouldn't fit in.)



"Unto this day they do after the former manners: they fear not the LORD, neither do they after their statutes, or after their ordinances, or after the law and commandment which the LORD commanded the children of Jacob, whom he named Israel;"~ 2 Kings 17:34

Arizona's "New" Law

There seems to be quite a lot of uproar about Arizona's "new" law. I have to wonder how many of those protesting so vociferously are aware that this "new" law is nearly the same as the federal law that has been on the books for some time now. The only difference is that Arizona, tired of waiting for the federal government to do their job and actually enforce the federal law, has made it possible for agents of state level law enforcement to do that job too.

The lack of enforcement on the federal level seems like just one more indicator that the federal government of this nation has broken the contract with the people. The people elect legislators who are to govern "by the consent of the governed". These legislators all take an oath to protect and defend the Constitution. I don't see a whole lot of protection or defense out of the Obama administration or the 111th Congress for that venerable document, nor much respect for the governed either. Breach of contract is a serious thing in business, how much more grave is it when the breach is between We the People and those who have been elected to do our will.

I also can't help but wonder how many of those protesting this "racist" and "inhumane" law have really thought through the issue of illegal immigration. I have stated my opinion in previous posts to this blog and others. My opinion is basically that illegals are an overall detriment to this country. They drag down the character of her citizens and provide fodder for gangs and other groups that engage in illegal activities. Their children cannot expect legal employment or education, as they lack a social security number. The adults cannot perform the duties of citizenship for fear of being discovered and deported. Those who employ them are tempted to treat them as slaves, knowing that these people have made victims/slaves of themselves by coming here illegally.

I have to wonder, too, how these protesters can square their "humanitarian arguments against the pleas of those families left behind in Mexico? I am also very tired of everyone denigrating Christians for what they perceive as unchristian behavior, when, by my observations, most of those who claim the title of Christian today have no idea what they believe or why aside from some lovey dovey, goody-goody, "a Christian must be nice to everyone and never say anything mean" requirement.

True Christianity confronts evil and does not remain silent when people are behaving in a way that harms themselves or others.

"This he said, not that he cared for the poor; but because he was a thief, and had the bag, and bare what was put therein." ~ John 12:6

Why do I even turn the thing on?

I turned on the television the other night (well actually very early morning-I tend to be a night owl) to find a show titled "My Super Sweet Sixteen" or some such thing. I was horrified to discover that the premise of the program was to glorify rampant consumerism and the celebrity lifestyle at the expense of the character of some rather spoiled American children.

I have seen this program a few times now and I'm truly appalled. These children manipulate their parents into spending unseemly amounts of money to satisfy their wish to throw the "biggest party ever". On the face of it, there seems to be a fascination with the celebrity lifestyle into which these children are attempting to buy their way. In reality one can see children desperately seeking for limits and sincere friends. I say that because there is no end to the demands these children put on their parents-expensive new cars, jewelry, dress codes for the guests, exotic animals, bands etc. But, when the time comes to distribute the invitations, on more than one occasion, their "friends" are not where they were supposed to be. Perhaps this is simply poor planning on the part of the show's producers or a naive expectation that of course "everyone" would be waiting on the whims of these wealthy young people. In either case, these children often choose to simply give invites to whoever happens to be hanging around. To me this appears to be a desperate bid for friendship. One that is doomed to fail, because money can't buy you friends.
These children (one of whom, appalling in and of itself, was the child of the minister of the city's largest Christian church), clearly understand that true friendship is a valuable thing and equally clearly, they understand or believe that their "friendships" may not be trustworthy due to their wealth. They do not seem to trust those whose friendship they claim and seek to deepen those relationships through vacuous displays of wealth and celebrity like behavior. Their parents may not have provided a foundation of logical thinking whereby they should be able to objectively evaluate their relationships and be content with them.

These shows are a parental "FAIL" in more ways than one. I hope that, upon viewing the programs, these parents will be able see themselves and their roles in the upbringing of their children more appropriately. I hope it gives them the fortitude to exercise appropriate limits and give their children the guidance they are so clearly craving. Otherwise these children will remain as pathetic and needy as they were at the time of their parties and that would be a very sad thing.

"But godliness with contentment is great gain.
For we brought nothing into this world, and it is certain we can carry nothing out.
And having food and raiment let us be therewith content.
But they that will be rich fall into temptation and a snare, and into many foolish and hurtful lusts, which drown men in destruction and perdition.
For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.
But thou, O man of God, flee these things; and follow after righteousness, godliness, faith, love, patience, meekness.
Fight the good fight of faith, lay hold on eternal life, whereunto thou art also called, and hast professed a good profession before many witnesses. "~ 1Tim 6-12

Part 6 - In State Tuition or making it harder for legitimate citizens of WI to get into college while degrading their character.

Update: The House passed this monstrosity at around 5:00 am on Saturday. Apparently having a majority wasn't enough-they felt the need to vote without witnesses. One rather believes there would have been protesters had the time of the vote been made public. It's up to us now. Call your senators folks - particularly those who ran on the democratic ticket. I have no objection to paying my fair share for government services, but this is increasing where we should be cutting and adding where responsible people would subtract.

The Governor's budget proposal contains a provision to provide in-state tuition at the UW for the children of illegal aliens. This proposal made it through the Joint Finance committee. Yes, it does contain a condition that these children must have lived in the state for 3 years, graduate from Wisconsin high schools or earn equivalency degrees here and show proof of applying for citizenship, but so what?

That's just a way of saying, if we can't catch you in three years (after tying the hands of those who would be the most likely to find and report you), you will be rewarded by allowing your children to get a reduced rate for college. How do you like that WI parents? You've worked hard to get your child to the point of college and now the governor wants to increase competition for the available spots in the freshman classes at the UW-system. This will also serve to ensure a growing population of illegal aliens as well as a skyrocketing crime rate because other criminals will be drawn to those that they may exploit.

And to whom is he giving this financial boon? To the hard working, legal inhabitants of this state who will be paying huge tax and fee increases to cover the more than 6 billion dollar deficit in this budget, if it passes as is? To the people whose car insurance premiums will skyrocket? To the people who will be watching as the state raids any funds that are not currently in use, even though they may have been sensibly designated for the purpose of covering future costs? (another proposed item in this travesty.) People whose cars are being damaged by driving on poorly paved roads because the transportation fund has been raided to pay for the general budget yet again?

NO. The recipients of this largess will be illegal aliens. People who are breaking the law by being here. People who are unable to uphold the smaller duties of neighborliness or the greater duties of citizenship for fear of being discovered and deported. People who are so lacking in character that they will raise children in a community where those children may expect nothing but a life of crime, because they are criminals (by definition) who do not have and cannot legally obtain a social security number.

Rep. Jennifer Shilling (D-La Crosse) said: "This gives children hope,".
How nice of you. It gives which children hope? Which children? The children who are actually citizens and to whom you owe a duty of protection as a legislator of this state or the criminals who have been made into criminals by parents who don't have enough moral fiber to become citizens before dragging their families to a new country?

How do you think it will affect the character of our own children to watch those citizens (state employees) who should be helping to enforce the law being forced to turn a blind eye to the law? What message does that send to them? It says:" You are worth less in the eyes of the law, because if you break the law, you will be charged with a crime." It says: "Laws are subjective. Their enforcement is selective depending on who you are." How does that give any children hope? Might I suggest you review our Pledge of Allegiance, particularly the end, you might have heard this part before - it's the part that says, "...with liberty and justice for all." Liberty without justice is not liberty - it's license.

May I remind Ms. Schilling as well as our governor that their first duty is to the citizens of this state. If you want to be nice, take your OWN money and set up a citizenship assistance agency to aid foreign nationals in becoming citizens. You do not have my permission to spend the money of the taxpayers of this state to give tuition breaks to criminals because it will make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

"Understanding is a wellspring of life unto him that hath it: but the instruction of fools is folly."~Prov. 16:22

Part 5 - Prevailing Wage changes or Crippling the ability of volunteers to help their communities

In WI currently, there is a prevailing wage limit of $223,000.00 on government projects. That means that any project done to or by any business, person, or agency that receives government money must use union workers (or at least pay the same wage as union workers would receive) for any project costing $223,000.00 or more.
Our governor wanted to drop that limit to $2,000.00. The Joint Finance Committee bumped it back up to $25,000.00.

While a $2,000.00 limit would have prohibited volunteers from doing even small projects, a $25,000.00 limit will still discourage groups from doing many projects that would be to the benefit of their community. As an example, the Order of the Arrow (Scouting's national honor society) completed a massive project for our national parks system just last year. Under this limit, such an organization would not have been allowed to do that work in WI because the cost of the work done by those Arrowmen and women was significantly more than $25,000.00. I know that was a national project, done for the national parks system and not just WI, but I'm sure there are projects such an organization could do on a state level that would be equally beneficial to the people of this state that would cost more than the $25,000.00 limit and this change would prevent that.

When I asked him about the negative aspects of this change with regard to volunteerism, Mr. Leibham pointed out that only agencies which receive government money are affected by this. When I pointed out that the very college that was hosting his breakfast had just been the recipient of an Eagle Scout project, he conceded that such things would be nearly impossible under the $2,000.00 limit.
I would contend that the $25,000.00 limit is just as harmful. It limits volunteers from even envisioning helpful projects over that amount.

Why should the people of WI, or any state be bound by such a ridiculous provision? I'm sure the argument is that it would create jobs because more projects would require paid labor. The reality, if I'm understanding this correctly, would be that, either these projects will not get done or they will cost the taxpayers of this state, because we would be adding to the government payroll. While this may create jobs, it is creating government jobs. That means it is creating more debt and a larger deficit while simultaneously decreasing our quality of life and damaging the character of the people of Wisconsin.

Unions have a place in this country to assure safe working conditions. But when unions are preventing community members from volunteering to do projects that benefit the community, they have overstepped their bounds. I will grant that many projects require specialized knowledge, that safety and quality must be considered with such volunteer projects. But are we really so lacking as a people that we couldn't overcome such objections by having a union worker review the plans for such projects and leave it at that rather than force our communities to pay for union labor when we have perfectly capable volunteers willing to do the work? (Often the volunteers for such projects have the technical training or may be union members.)
I don't think we are and I would hope that the legislature would agree..

"There is nothing better for a man, than that he should eat and drink, and that he should make his soul enjoy good in his labour. This also I saw, that it was from the hand of God."~Ecc 2:24

Entitlement Question to Rep. King

This is one of the questions from the call referenced in the previous post.

One question to Mr. King was '...You say reducing capital gains taxes is the right way to rebuild the economy. David Walker and the Peter G Peterson Foundation say that the upcoming unfunded liabilities for entitlement programs are the bigger threat.' "Do you propose to cut spending in the area of entitlement programs and how are you going to address that?"

Mr. King's answer was to say that Mr. Bush had expended his political capital in attempting to remove some entitlement spending during his administration to no avail. He said he would be supportive of what could be brought to reform Medicare, social security and others, but he's turned his focus more on real tax reform. He then went on to say that we are in a crisis and leaping off the brink of the abyss into a socialist economy. He wants to know how we can get this thing to the point where we can make some positive changes.
He believes two "transformational" changes would put us back on the road to fiscal responsibility: a fair tax, and giving parents school choice.

First, I don't believe a fair tax (by which I think he may be referring to a flat tax or the consumer based sales tax model - but he didn't say really, so perhaps he, or someone in his office will correct this if I am mistaken) will ever be passed because the tax code as it stands is such an excellent tool in the hands of government/law enforcement. If we cannot stop some criminal in any other way, we have the get-them-through-their-taxes option. The current tax code is longer than the Bible. I believe that it is now, nearly impossible for anyone to file their taxes in a way that is above reproach. It's a catch - 22 in the system, a sword of Damocles, if you will. It does need to be changed, but I don't think anyone who currently holds an ounce of power in the government will really vote to change it to a simple and easily understood system. I sincerely hope to be proved wrong at Congress' earliest possible convenience.

Second, school choice is a wonderful thing. I am currently utilizing a school choice program for my own son. Yay to school choice. So what? Federal funding of education is an entitlement program. One does not get rid of entitlement programs by continuing to fund adapted forms of them.

Put the states in charge of their educational systems and have a federal competency test. Education is important, but from all that I've seen and read, the two most important factors in a child's education are parental involvement and good teachers. Not extracurriculars, not fancy facilities, not athletic programs, not the many bureaucratic layers necessary to ensure compliance with state and federal guidelines, not even community support - parental involvement and good teachers.
Putting the states in charge of their own educational systems brings the choices closer to home and begets parental involvement. Here's a really revolutionary and transformational idea for Mr. King, let schools fire teachers when they need to be fired. The NEA has been holding this country hostage long enough. Teaching is not any more noble than any other job which serves it's community.

A national competency test would assure us that when a student has obtained a high school diploma he/she will be able to read, write and do math with a certain level of competence whether they were taught in Maine or Hawaii. That would be transformational and reduce a large entitlement program.

Thirdly, yes, I agree we, as a nation, appear to be ecstatically leaping off the edge of fiscal irresponsibility and into the abyss of socialism. However, refusing to address the entitlement programs we have on the basis of pointing out the fiscally and philosophically perilous entitlement programs we are about to be adding is illogical. Don't vote to add the new ones and tackle the old ones head on. Yes, that means you risk being labeled as heartless and voted out of office in the next election. That's what character is, doing the right thing regardless of popular opinion and personal risk. We are a republic, not a democracy, for just that reason. Because popular opinion is not always right. While a congressman/woman does need to be responsive to their constituency, they also need to be aware that their constituencies do not have all the information they need to make good decisions in all matters legislative-that's why they hired you-to do the right thing for them and the country, to oppose their wishes when your information is better.

I thank you Mr. King for taking that question. My observations are not those of a republican, just a conservative. I thank you for making yourself available for the conference and for your service to the country as an elected Representative.

I'll get to more of the questions from this call in another post.

"And Eliab his eldest brother heard when he spake unto the men; and Eliab's anger was kindled against David, and he said, Why camest thou down hither? and with whom hast thou left those few sheep in the wilderness? I know thy pride, and the naughtiness of thine heart; for thou art come down that thou mightest see the battle."~1 Sam 17:28

Character Counts

Why do we have such problems finding good people to serve in positions of leadership in this country?

I've heard it said that "Character is what you do when no one is looking." The implication being that if your behavior in public is consistent with your behavior in private, then you have strength of character. In my opinion, character is only one half of the equation when we are considering to whom we should give our votes. Character may be what you do when nobody is looking, but leadership is what you do when they are. Character in private does nothing for those who would otherwise be strengthened by your actions. Leadership is crippled when it is not accompanied by good character.

That said, I ask again, why do we have such problems finding good people to serve in positions of leadership in this country?

I submit to you that it is because We the People have become lazy and lacking in discernment. We have before us, in these last months three wonderful examples of what happens when lack of character meets lack of discernment.
I shall start with Mr. Franken.

Mr. Franken gained the endorsement of his party(political parties are despicable things which tend to distract people from the real job of choosing a candidate by providing an "easy button", but I digress.), ran a campaign, and, when the result of the vote was close, asked for a recount. These are all reasonable actions for someone seeking political office.
The recount, however, has been fraught with bias and irregularities. This is where one expects a person of character to show their true colors. One would expect Mr. Franken to issue a statement saying that until he, himself along with the people of Minnesota are satisfied that the election results and recounts are true and without bias or irregularities, he would refuse to accept the seat. Has he done so?

Next up is Mr. Burris.

Mr. Burris was appointed to a senate seat by a man under investigation for corruption, specifically corruption regarding the sale of that particular seat. What man of character would accept any position of authority under such a cloud? Doing so can only serve to cast suspicion on one's entire life and career and bring shame to one's family. And yet, Mr. Burris has not only accepted the seat, but has engaged in legal wrangling to frustrate the well intentioned attempts of Congress to deny him the seat under these conditions.

One challenges the good people of IL (I know there are some good people in IL) to recall Mr. Burris as soon as can possibly be arranged and likewise a challenge to the good people of Minnesota in regard to Mr. Franken. If We the People want people of good character to be our representatives, then we must start doing what is necessary to make such a change. That starts with refusing to allow those of demonstrated poor character to continue serving past such demonstrations. It continues with making an active effort to find people of demonstrably good character to fill those seats.

I refer you to http://www.primarychallenge.org/ for a starting place. This is a site asking for folks to help them identify RINOs and find the names of good people to challenge them in your state's primary elections. (RINO = Republican In Name Only- I am not a republican, I am a conservative but I support the notion of replacing those who are not representing their constituency's wishes in this manner as a good start - you liberals will have to find your own site)

You are probably asking yourself who the third example is. I would ask you to examine the actions and words of Mr. Obama. He promised transparency and yet has spent significant amounts of money to avoid verifying that he is Constitutionally qualified to sit as president when a minimal fee would have sufficed to remove the challenges to his election. With this refusal, he plunges our country into a Constitutional crisis and jeopardizes the careers of every serviceman and woman in our military. This has been made to seem a small matter, something of no consequence, ridiculous even. But how arrogant and disrespectful of the American people is it to take the office of POTUS with such an easily addressed question unresolved?
I challenge the American people to really look at this man's actions and words over his lifetime. You tell me if this is a man of good character. Be prepared to defend your position.

For the next election cycle, I challenge the people of America to disregard the admittedly biased mouthings of the MSM and research the candidates yourselves. Vote, not by party, but by principle. Be guided not by the mouthings of talking heads and celebrities but by the dictates of your own conscience and common sense. Do not sympathize with those who have failed morally, or allow the lecherous, drunken or fiscally unsound private behaviors of someone requesting to serve as our leader to be glossed over but rather demand good character and adherence to high moral standards from those we put into positions of leadership. We are better than that. We need leaders who exemplify the standards we want our nation to adhere to who can demonstrate them to the world. We have the God given freedom to do so, but with freedom comes responsibility. This is not someone else's job-it is ours, individually.

"And the LORD said unto Moses, Gather unto me seventy men of the elders of Israel, whom thou knowest to be the elders of the people, and officers over them; and bring them unto the tabernacle of the congregation, that they may stand there with thee." ~Numbers 11:16