Sunday, August 30, 2009

Choice

Of all tyrannies a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."- C.S. Lewis


America we have a choice before us. As August comes to a close and our congressional representatives depart their home states and return to the federal environ of Washington, D.C. we can choose to:

1. Adhere to the classical western and American ideal of sovereignty whereby the individual is master of his own destiny or

2. We can allow the federal government and its collectivist’s allies to force collectivism upon us the point of government gun.

The battle as of late whether it be in regards to the nationalization of health care, cap and trade, TARP and/or the plethora of “crises” that have been afflicted upon the American people by previous and current administrations comes down to control.

Who will control you, your family, your business, your money, your property and your choices?
We are being asked to confer our individual responsibility, our very sovereignty to the federal government and their fellow travelers who have deemed the American citizen as incapable of administering their lives.

Largely absent in the current and past debate is should we be having this debate at all? Who decided that we require the nationalization of the private sector health care apparatus? Who decided that we need to spend billions and trillions of U.S. taxpayer monies in bailing out banks and private industry? Who decided American veterans and those that hold traditional American values are to be viewed as “enemies of the state” in accordance with the much publicized DHS domestic threat report?

Congress, special interest groups, lobbyists’, community organizers, read that as Marxist front groups, have all decided that you, Mr. and Mrs. American cannot be trusted to manage yourselves. Dare to speak out, dare to protest, dare to question the regime and quite clearly you are bought and paid for by some group. The collectivist mindset cannot admit that a rational, self synchronizing individual can exert their will and act for themselves.

We have arrived at a time and place in history where clearly we have two paths before us; the road to collectivism controlled and administered by the nanny state and their various apparatchik or the road to personal responsibility, freedom to choose, and the pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness (property).

One road will lead to despair, the destruction of the nation and ultimately the tyranny of the majority enforced through government force while the other will lead to individualism, freedom via personal responsibility and the continued existence of the shining light of liberty.
Which road will we chose America? Whose America will survive into the future? Will it be an America whereby the political class and the new mandarins control your destiny or will it be one where the individual, exerting himself will make manifest his own destiny?


Choose wisely.


Thursday, August 27, 2009

Citizen's Corner: The Rule of Law vs. Rule of Kennedy



Two of the fundamental principles of a Constitutional Republic are a general respect for the Rule of Law and that all citizens are equal before the law. What these mean in practice are that everyone of us must conform to the law regardless of our personal and temporary circumstances. Also it means that Laws should be given great deference and not changed for light or transient purposes. Finally it means that ruled and ruler alike are expected to conform to the law despite temporary personal disadvantage. It is these requirements that make us a land of laws, not of men. They create an atmosphere that serves the needs of the many without infringing on the liberties of the few or the one.

However, these important concepts of our republican form of government seems to have been lost in recent years. Advocates and politicians for both sides of the duopoly have been disrespecting the law and treating it as their personal tool. The most recent example is what is happening in Massachusetts today. With the death of Sen. Kennedy, and at his pre-death request, the State of Massachusetts is seriously considering a change in their election law to allow the Governor of that State to appoint a replacement for the seat once held by Mr. Kennedy. The existing law requires that the seat remain vacant until a special election is held some months hence.

The motive for this move is the fact that without Kennedy, the Democrats who control the Senate would have a more difficult time ramming through the Obamacare Bill in the Senate. They need a firm democratic senator from Massachusetts to shore up their numbers. Given that he current governor is a Democrat, such a change in the law would assure this a result.

What makes this move even more damning is the fact that back four year ago, the law in Massachusetts provided for appointment by the governor of a senatorial replacement, exactly what is being advocated now. The twist is the law was changed because at the time the other senator from Massachusetts, John Kerry got the nomination of the Democratic Party and it looked like he would win the Presidency. If Kerry won, then the Republican Governor (Mitt Romney) would have been allowed to appoint a senator of his choice to fill the seat. So the Democratic Legislature rammed through a bill forcing the change to the current system. Now the Massachusetts Democrats are having “buyers remorse” due to a change of circumstances. It appears that no one in the Massachusetts legislature even thought about what would happen in the future or what were the long term consequences of the legislation. In essence, they changed the law for short-term personal political gain and for superficial reasons.

The above does not imply that the Republicans aren’t exempt from such dealings, only that the Kennedy case is a prime example of the rulers placing themselves above the law, thereby disrespecting it. It is no wonder that people no longer trust their elected officials and have such a negative view of the role of government. With actions like these, it is no wonder that the average person, special interest group, and lobbyist treat the power of government as a tool for personal gain. Our government has become little more than a gang of self-promoting elitists paying lip service to a love for the law while using the awesome power of government to fulfill their petty political needs. The citizens of Massachusetts, regardless of party affiliation, should be appalled by Kennedy’s request. All of us should be made aware of the destructive nature of this blatant gesture of political gamesmanship from Senator Kennedy which will live on as a final cancerous and black mark on his career.

The lawmakers and enforcers must be the first held to the requirements of the law. They must be held to the highest standard of conformity to the law. For if they are not, then how can we expect the average person to respect the law, obey it and support it. “But who,” you may ask, “will hold our leaders to this standard?” We, the citizens of our republic, must do so. For too long we have failed to do so and as a result our republic has suffered greatly in confidence, respectability, resources, and self-respect. Our laws are in shambles. Enacted with little calm, rational, and humble reasoning. Enacted without a clear understanding of the foreseeable consequences and with little regard for the possible abuses that they could cause upon the liberty, property, and opportunity of many in our nation. But for the want of a little forethought and caution, Massachusetts and this nation are faced with the wages of unintended consequences. Consequences which we can not afford now or in the future.

Doctors or Bureaucrats?

Who knows more about health care, doctors or bureaucrats? Here's what one physician had to say about the issue at a New York Meeting:

Watch people try to shut her up when she blames the government for the crisis in health care. Watch the crowd defend her strenuously.

And, just to contrast her view of who's at fault, and where the solution really lies, check out the 1000 page government plan.



Tuesday, August 25, 2009

Citizen's Corner: Three little Congressional Pigs- a Fairy Tale (?)



Once there were three little pigs who lived in a magical land where everything they said was true and money just appeared out of nowhere. While in this magical land, our pigs said and did things which were not all that good for their neighbors back home. In fact, as the three pigs spent and gave away, the forest began to lose its trees, wealth, and opportunities. Yet, the pigs didn’t care. “They are so small, docile, and far away,” Said our pigs, “that they can’t hurt us or do anything to stop us.”

One day, after a long time had passed, the pigs were finally forced to leave their golden land of lobbyist money, cocktail parties, and power lunches and return to the forest from which they came. All three were frightened. They hadn’t really been back in the forest for a long time and they had heard that the forest creatures were not happy and lurked about awaiting their return. The three pigs got together to decide how they would protect themselves when they got back to the forest.

So the first little pig said to the others, “I know what to do. I will find a small out of the way place in the far north of the forest. I will only let a few people know and only a day or two before hand. That way the other creatures will not find me.” As the other two pigs watched, the first little pig acted on his plan.

But you see the forest creatures that the pigs left back at home heard about the first little pigs plan. The forest creatures chose the pigs long, long ago to represent them. They seemed so smart and could talk so well, not like most of them. But now they found that the pigs had been gone so long that they forgot their forest. Now all the pigs wanted was to stay in their new homes far away where they caroused with other pigs and practiced their piggish ways. It seemed that the forest creatures were stuck with them, though once in awhile they would return to the forest to pretend they cared about things in the old woods. These creatures had for years tried to ignore the arrogance and stupidity of the three pigs. They tried to forgive all of the waste and destruction that the pigs had created while living in that magical land. Now, however, they had enough. Their forest was almost gone. Their hard work wasted away by those living in the magical land. Their future looked dim. They were angry and frustrated at being ignored and used by the pigs. So, once they learned of the first little pigs plan, they gathered together and met the pig in his far away place.

The little pig was shocked and frightened by the other forest creatures. He was hurt that they didn’t like his wasteful ways. He was angered that they didn’t trust him. Mostly, he was afraid that they didn’t believe his lies anymore. So the first little pig ran back into hiding and would only come out of his hiding place when no one but the media was around. The pig knew that the media would never confront him or ask embarrassing questions.

The second little pig saw what had happened to the first and was immediately afraid as well. “I don’t want to meet the other creatures,” he squeak, “I will run far away until they calm down.” So the second little pig jumped on a plane and flew to the land of good television, but bad teeth and stayed there until he was sure he could avoid running into the other forest creatures in his forest across the sea.

Finally, the third little pig, having watched his two colleagues run in fear, decided on what he thought was a better idea. “I know,” he said to himself in his heavily accented way, “I will trick the people and pretend that the forest creatures love me.” So the third little pig made a call to his friends the skunks, trolls, and lemmings that he new from the different forests in the land and said, “Come to my forest with me and pretend you are from my woods. I want you to shout down and attack the other creatures while singing my praises.” The lead skunk replied, “What’s in it for us?” “I’ll provide the transportation, signs, and t-shirts.” Replied the third pig. “What else?” growled the Trolls. “ahh….Money.?” The pig said. “You got a crowd.” Replied the skunks and the trolls. “Us too… whatever it is.” said the Lemmings.

So the third little pig held public meetings in the heart of the forest. But at each meeting, the trolls, skunks and lemmings filled the halls and chanted “go pig go.” When the local forest creatures tried to express their displeasure with and at the third little pig, they were met with howls and threats. Their voices were drowned out. The media that were there seemed surprised by the number of skunks, lemmings, and trolls that lived in their forest, but never questioned where they were from. Soon, the other forest creatures gave up trying to be heard and returned to their homes.

What would they do? How would they stop the three pigs’ wasteful and dangerous ways? I guess we will have to wait and see what the little forest creatures will do. But if they don’t act together and soon, the forest will be lost.

Monday, August 24, 2009

Citizen's Corner: Barney Frank's rant- the arrogance of power



Recently, Rep Barney Frank held a town hall meeting in Dartmouth, MA, his home district. During this meeting, several people came forward to criticize the Obama Plan and challenge Mr. Frank’s Support of it. Here are some clips from that event;
www.youtube.com/watch?v=AmwddT_3nA0
www.youtube.com/watch?v=KU_0ZrVAD5U
www.youtube.com/watch?v=w5YhdVk8iNc
Having watched the video and heard the applause for his attitude throughout this meeting, the only thing I can say is that it is a sad day indeed when an elected official, so sure of his power and his job, can ridicule and attack a constituent as he did.
Regardless of what was said and regardless of whether he likes what is said, his role is servant of the people, not master. Yet, Mr. Frank, who has control of the microphone and the room, went into attack mode without regard for his position nor for the fact that while what his constituents may say may not be to his liking, it is his job to listen, not ridicule.
Yet, looking at Mr. Frank’s other you tube videos, one immediately realizes that the events in Dartmouth are not singular nor unique. Whether it be an interviewer on CNBC, a college student at Harvard, or an average joe in Dartmouth, Mr. Frank treats all as his personal servant and whipping boy. When he doesn’t like it what people ask or says, he attacks them. If they don’t back down, he walks away like a spoiled child.
What surprises me the most about the reaction to this attack on constituents by Mr. Frank is how quickly and without reservation Democrats and liberals of all shades embrace his actions and cheered him on. If I remember clearly, the mouth pieces of the left, like Mr. Olbermann and Ms. Maddow, where “shocked… totally shocked” by such behavior from Bush, Cheney, and the Republicans when they held power. Yet, now they feel that behavior was entirely appropriate and necessary when done by a Democrat. Hypocrisy is a clear sign of moral and intellectual bankruptcy regardless of party label, or perhaps they forgot that?
The more I see of the member from Massachusetts, the more he reminds me of a bully I knew in high school who had an inferiority complex to match his waistline. This man enjoys bullying people and feels no obligation to respect those with whom he disagrees. Was this the change that supposedly the nation voted for?
Every citizen should be offended by his language and attitude. We, the true sovereigns of this nation, must not forget, they work for us. Barney Frank and the other life-time members of the House and Senate need to be reminded of this fact often and consistently. The same holds for Bernie Sanders and Jim Douglas (have either ever held a real job outside of government?), Pat Leahy, Peter Welch, and Brian Dubie. It is our republic. They are our employees. We have a responsibility to hold them accountable when they slip the leash. We must call them to task when they begin to think and act like entitled rulers. Citizenship of this Republic requires nothing less.

Sunday, August 23, 2009

VT Cap & Trade Costs

On June 26, a 1,427-page climate change bill introduced by Representatives Henry Waxman (D–CA) and Edward Markey (D–MA) passed the House by a narrow margin. The bill, also known as Waxman–Markey, includes a number of alarming provisions, chief among them a cap-and-trade program that would attempt to curb global warming by imposing strict upper limits on the emission of six greenhouse gases, with the primary emphasis on carbon dioxide (CO2). The mechanism for capping these emissions requires emitters to acquire federally created permits (or “allowances”) for each ton of greenhouse gas emitted.

Because these allowances carry a price—and because 85 percent of the United States’ energy needs come from carbon- emitting fossil fuels— Waxman–Markey is best described as a significant tax on energy use. Since everything Americans use and produce requires energy, the tax hits U.S. pocketbooks again and again. The Heritage Foundation’s Center for Data Analysis forecasts severe consequences, including skyrocketing energy costs, millions of jobs lost, and falling household income and economic activity—all for negligible changes in the global temperature.

Workers and families in Vermont may be wondering how cap-and-trade legislation would affect their income, their jobs, and the cost of energy. Implementing Waxman–Markey would put a chokehold on Vermont’s economic potential, reducing gross state product by $0.95 billion in 2035. Consumers would be hit hard. Between 2012 (when the restrictions first apply) and 2035 (the last year of this analysis), the prices of electricity and gasoline will rise sharply when compared to
prices in a world without cap and trade. By 2035, Americans living in the state of Vermont will see their electricity prices rise by $1,299.29 and their gasoline prices rise by $1.27 per gallon solely because of Waxman–Markey.

View full article at:

http://www.heritage.org/research/energyandenvironment/upload/wm_2585-vt.pdf

Tuesday, August 18, 2009

Vermont State Sovereignty Resolution

AFFIRMING THE CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTIONS OF THE 10TH AMENDMENT

WHEREAS, We, the people of Vermont, like Ethan Allen in 1781, are “resolutely determined to defend the independence of Vermont”; and

WHEREAS, The Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States specifically provides that, “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”; and

WHEREAS, The Tenth Amendment defines the total scope of federal power as being those powers specifically granted to it by the Constitution of the United States and the principle of Federalism is the constitutional division of powers between the national and state governments and is widely regarded as one of America’s most valuable contributions to political science; and

WHEREAS, The scope of power defined by the Tenth Amendment means that the federal government was created by the states specifically to be limited in its powers relative to those of the various states; and

WHEREAS, Many federal mandates are directly in violation of the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States , and infringe upon Vermont ’s reserve powers and the people’s reserved powers; and

WHEREAS, the United States Supreme Court has ruled in New York v. United States, 112 S. Ct. 2408 (1992), that Congress may not simply commandeer the legislative and regulatory processes of the states; and

WHEREAS, over the course of the last century the Federal Government has slowly and incrementally invaded the legislative jurisdiction rightly granted to the State's under the Constitution of the United States to such an extent that Federal Government has preempted said jurisdiction thereby limited the State's ability to provide for their citizens.

WHEREAS, today, in 2009, the states are demonstrably treated as agents of the federal government; and

WHEREAS, A number of proposals from previous administrations and some now being considered by the present administration and from Congress would further infringe on the States’ reserve powers and the people’s reserved powers, and may further violate the Constitution of the United States;

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED,

1) That the State of Vermont hereby claims sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the Constitution of the United States and this Resolution shall serve as a Notice and Demand to the federal government to maintain the balance of powers where the Constitution of the United States; and it be further

2) That this memorial serves as notice and demand to the federal government, as our agent, to cease and desist, effective immediately, mandates that are beyond the scope of these constitutionally delegated powers.

3) That all compulsory federal legislation that directs states to comply under threat of civil or criminal penalties or sanctions or requires states to pass legislation or lose federal funding be prohibited or repealed.

4) That the Clerk of the House shall immediately transmit copies of this Resolution to the Honorable Barack Obama, President of the United States, the President of the United States Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives of each state’s legislature of the United States of America, and each member of Congress from the State of Vermont.


If you are opposed to federally mandated, unfunded programs which create liabilities for the taxpayers of Vermont without the benefit of local deliberation please sign this proposed resolution and send it to your State Representative and State Senator. Let him/her know that you support State Sovereignty legislation for the state of Vermont.

We the People:

Your Name: ________________________________________________

Address: ________________________________________________

Town ____________________________________ VT _______________
Your signature: _____________________________________________
Send this signed resolution to your Representative and/or Senator:
Their name: _______________________________________________
115 State Street
Montpelier, Vermont 05602

You can find your representatives online at: http://votesmart.org/