Shifting Gears on the Issues of Gays

Thousands of protesters marched on Washington DC this weekend to pressure Barack Obama and Congress into changing their stances on gay issues, particularly marriage and the military.

Gays have grown disenchanted with the Democratic Party for treating them the same way as they treat other minorities, with platitudes and promises but no action. Likely many also beneath the surface worry about the impact of the higher taxes passed and proposed by the Democratic Congress that will harm small businesses and professionals.

On the issue of marriage the GOP should switch gears. We are at our best when defending freedom and attacking government intereference. As I have stated a few times before, the small government solution is to have civil unions for any two people who wish to create a legal bond. Marriage is left as a religious sacrament (or ritual), and/or a cultural and social event. I do not even have a problem with unsanctioned polygamy, provided that consenting adults are doing it. How is it that government ignores every other alternative lifestyle combination, but doggedly pursues people who practice polygame for religious reasons (not that I want government investigating those practicing alternative lifestyles of any sort if they are consenting adults.) That is a slap in the face of First Amendment religious rights (again, provided that all involved are consenting adults at the time of the match.)

The gay population is much more likely to be entrepreneurial than most other recognized groups. This leaves them very vulnerable to rises in taxes, overregulation, and economic downturns. If purely left to their economic interests, they would vote Republican or Libertarian.

As far as the military is concerned, it ought to be left to that institution itself to determine what its policy is. They have a legitimate fear that sexual relations can break down discipline on an individual and collective basis. Individuals get thrown together and subjected to stress for extended periods, encouraging illicit sexual behavior. That being said, the military ought to find a place for gays somewhere and enforce rigorous discipline upon all while examining whether or not to put acknowledged homosexuals into combat situations. It is not as if people join the military to hook up with other servicepeople. However discipline must be preserved, especially in time of war.

Does this mean that the whole gay agenda should be swallowed hook, line, and sinker? Absolutely not! Extremists that want to teach about gay sex in elementary school need to be stopped. Sexual discussions are inappropriate at young ages. Also sex education later needs to stick to talking about reproduction only and not delve into lifestyle discussions. I also have a problem with legislation that punishes those that attack gays and minorities more than other violent crimes. So-called hate crimes statutes violate the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. If I hit a guy upside the head with a 2x4, it means that I don't like him regardless of his race, creed, ethnic background, or orientation.

Society has changed considerably in the past twenty years. The Republican Party has an opportunity to seize the anti-Big Government mandate again. It cannot do so if it gets bogged down in enforcing social restrictions. Will we lose the social conservatives if we make this shift? Not if we couple it with a reaffirmation of our anti-abortion position. Everyone deserves the right to life. Thomas Jefferson wrote it and most Republicans still believe it. There is no such thing as a situation that is too poor or dysfunctional for a child. Read about Alexander Hamilton's birth and upbringing. Some of our greatest people have come from much worse situations than that and used the lessons learned growing up to make themselves great.

The point is that our party wins when it supports freedom and rights. Backing off the gay mariage issue will only help, especially with young voters.

Ten Questions for Obama from the Nationwide Tea Party Coalition

Time to Make a Constitutional Challenge Against the Czar System

West Virginia mining operations filed for almost eighty permits to begin surface mining operations within the state this year. Obama's administration denied every single one of them. Denied permission to mine. Denied the state needed revenue in hard times. Denied countless West Virginians good paying jobs. The Environmental Protection Agency officially denied these permits. However a known "globull warming" expert, Carol Browning, serves as czar of the environment and climate change.

Here's the question. What role did she play in denying these permits? A Freedom of Information Act request should be directed at her office and the EPA to try and find any causal links between Obama's "special advisor" and these denials. If there is a definite link, then coal companies and miners should launch a federal case.

These special advisors skirt the Constitutional requirement that the Senate confirm every presidential appointment. We have seen bewildering appointments, such as a "safe schools czar" who proudly admitted to encouraging a fifteen year old boy to have sex with an old man at a bus station, but only if he used a condom. Sean Hannity revealed FBI transcripts of a seminar he attended that described how a man could have intercourse with an eighteen month old baby. If for no other reason, this is why the Founding Fathers wanted Senatorial participation in the appointment process. We also need congressional oversight over these appointments for policy reasons.

Senator Byrd complained several months ago about these appointments. Democratic Senators have launched hearings into the practice. They requested that Obama send a representative to explain his position; he so far has failed to respond.

Someone at some point needs to challenge the "czar" system. Few people worried when a handful of special advisors worked for presidents on extraordinary problems. Forty-one appointees and counting demonstrates a willful avoidance of the Constitution. Time to bring this presidency back to reality.

Betraying a Sacred Trust and Appeasing Islamofascists Does Not Bring Peace

During the presidency of Thomas Jefferson, Americans emgaged Islamic terror for the first time. The Barbary Pirate states of North Africa charged each nation tribute for the privilege of shipping on the Mediterranean. When they unilaterally tried to raise the tribute paid by the US, we sent not more money, but the Navy and Marines. The Marines made deals with the local opposition who helped us invade Tripoli. Once we accomplished our goals, we left. Our opposition friends ended up in the hands of the Bey of Tripoli.

American history has this dark side. We convince people to help us, then we abandon them when public opinion moves on. We did it to Tripolitanians; we did it to the South Vietnamese. We are about to do it to Afghanistan.

Obama and his advisors are leaning towards giving the Islamofascist Talibam a role in that nation's government. Imagine giving the Nazis a role in 1946 Germany! The Taliban massacred its opponents. It tortured, mutilated, and killed women who went to school. These murders were public spectacles in soccer stadiums!

It does not matter that we promised these people a new future and that we would help them achieve one without fear. Obama simply wants to abandon these people to the fates of fanatics with guns. He wants to lose everything our soldiers fought and died for because Afghanistan is inconvenient to him.

Obama just got the Nobel Peace Prize. It was given to him by people who know not what peace actually is. Peace is not platitudes. Peace is not the absence of war. Peace only comes when problems are solved. George W. Bush's diplomacy gave us the promise of long term peace because it aimed to actually solve problems, not ignore them or put them off. apologizing for doing the right thing, putting our enemies in control of nations, only encourages the militants to fight harder because they learned that terrorism accomplishes their goals.

Obama has that award and he may shout that he is looking for "peace in our time." But he has set himself up as this generation's Neville Chamberlain, another naive politician who thinks that his country's enemies can be dealt with reasonably.

NRCC launches Fire Pelosi Campaign

In 2008, Nancy Pelosi received 204,996 votes to win reelection in her home district. We need your help today to collect at least 204,997 names on our "Fire Nancy Pelosi" mobile petition. You can put us one step closer to our goal by signing the petition right away.

Republicans are in a strong position to take back the House majority and fire Pelosi in the 2010 midterm election. In terms of candidate recruitment, fundraising, and issue development, we are far ahead of where we were at this point in 1993 - and you remember what happened in 1994.

Please take a moment to sign our petition by entering your mobile number to the right and send a clear message that Americans are unhappy with Pelosi's "leadership."

Breaking Down Health Care Opinion Polls

The media is trying very hard to give legs to the notion that Obama has a "silent majority" out there that approves of his ideas of socialized health care. It is rather interesting that writers keep coming back to Nixonisms when they speak of Obama. I suppose that is improvement over seeing him as either Lincoln or the Messiah.

You have to think about these polls and what is asked. The question can skew the result. If I asked 10,000 random people if health care in the United States needs reformed, a solid majority would say "yes." However, if you dig a little deeper the differences emerge in the details. Some want full socialism, some want a government option. Most want to keep the whole system private. Many support tort reform to eliminate frivolous lawsuits and lower costs. Quite a few want to find ways to decrease free use of the system by illegal aliens. Many have proposed changing regulations to encourage pooling by small business owners. Most support getting rid of the "pre-existing condition" cluase from health insurance. You won't find many people defending that little detail. Just asking if you support reforming the health care system includes all of these different positions.

This only indicates that health care reform is a big tent issue. Most want to see changes. That does not mean that people want the radical plans and unconstitutional requirements now floated around by left wingers. Create small business pools, pass tort reform, get rid of the restrictions on pre-existing conditions, and keep the government out. That is what Americans want; that is what they ought to get.

I Like Clark

Last weekend my parents were in town. We went for dinner at a local place here in Keyser called the Candlewyck Inn. You pick up the menu in a place like this and think hard about all the choices. So many look appealing, but eventually you settle on one because you think it is the absolute best choice out of several good options. (I picked the filet mignon covered in crab! Delicious!)

That is how I feel about the many choices we have in the First Congressional District for the Republican nomination. So many good options, some of whom would make good candidates and respectable Representatives. To me, speaking only for myself and on behalf of no other person or group, Clark Barnes represents the most solid choice.

I note reactions of non political people when they hear Clark decided to run. News of Barnes in the race generates a lot of excitement. Even Democrats who have grown sick of the mess in Washington see Clark as a man who can make things happen.

To those who have never met him, it may be difficult to convey the energy and charisma he brings to an event or a campaign. Barnes has both of the key characteristics of a great campaigner. He connects well with both crowds and individuals without fudging on his principles. Barnes brings a systematic campaign style that emphasizes personal contact with constituents. Many successful GOP candidates have used the personal touch to overcome Democratic majorities in their districts and Clark is no different.

Next year we have an opportunity to add West Virginia to the list of states that will successfully rid themselves of Democratic Representatives. Alan Mollohan is well-known and well-funded, but Jim Humphries of Charleston will tell you that money and notoriety alone will not beat a popular and charismatic congressional candidate (lost to Capito twice.) We need the right kind of candidate, however, to connect with Democratic and independent voters.

Nominate Clark Barnes and he will beat Alan Mollohan. Send him to Congress, and he will represent his state and district, not the whims of a dictatorial Speaker of the House.

Capito to EPA: Miners Deserve Clarity

As uncertainty remains throughout the Appalachian coal mining region, Rep. Shelley Moore Capito, R-W.Va., is calling on Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lisa Jackson to clarify her agency’s actions as it relates to delays in the mine permitting process. Capito outlined her concerns in a letter to Jackson today, arguing that continued ambiguity and delays in the permitting process will cost Mountain State jobs and choke off economic investment in the state.

“Further delay of mining permits creates enormous uncertainty that’s forcing mines to delay investment, halt production and lay off workers across the region,” she wrote. “It is imperative that the EPA clarify the process for approving or rejecting permits – hard working West Virginians depend on it.”

Capito, who met with representatives of the EPA and the US. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) after the original June announcement from the EPA, also called on the EPA to reconcile their stated commitment to an expedient resolution to the 79 outstanding permit applications in Appalachia.

“While we were promised that permits would be reviewed deliberately, but expeditiously, what we have is a process with no apparent end in sight,” Capito added later.

Though the EPA has pointed to a 60-day clock for approval of permits, the clock only begins when the Corps is able to officially “pick up” the application and it is unclear if any of the permits in question have even been released by the EPA. It is also unclear what timeline – if any – the EPA has placed upon itself, given that it has retained overall authority to veto any pending permit.

“It's certainly appropriate to have legitimate oversight and review of all proposed permits, but the EPA’s most recent statement is only the latest in a series which have created uncertainty and ambiguity for mines across our state and region,” Capito wrote.

Of the 79 permit applications in question, 23 are located in West Virginia.

The full text of the Capito letter can be accessed here.

Maybe Because He Wants to Win the War

General McChrystal has written, spoken, and probably leaked to the public his earnest desire to win the war in Afghanistan by requesting what the Democrats called for several years ago, more troops.

Back when Iraq's future remained uncertain, many Democrats, including the current Secretary of State, called for more focus on Afghanistan. They, including the current president, called this country the real war and Iraq the distraction. Now Afghanistan is the distraction and the Olympics are the real war.

Naturally the officers and soldiers have gotten fed up with the shifting of attention. Obama called health care the most important struggle of this generation (excuse me, are we not at WAR?) He has little concern or time for Afghanistan, so long as he can get one domestic victory and the Olympics (oops, may have screwed the pooch on that one.)

Danger does exist in too massive a buildup; after all, we trained them to hit the logistical units of massive concentrations of men and armor during the Soviet occupation. However we need to expand our presence in the countryside. Experts at the Army War College have studied two hundred years of irregular warfare in American history and figured out a gameplan for victory.

They concluded that you can pacify a region like Afghanistan in two ways, offer security or terror to the most important factor which is the population. Americans do not terrify civilians, even though that is the easiest way to win. Instead the goal is to establish permanent security. It makes no sense to advance into a town, secure it, gain cooperation, then abandon it to go after another objective. You need a long term presence to help train security units and home guards so that they can protect themselves. This requires time and more manpower.

Is Obama interested? Does Obama care? His generals have taken the extraordinary step of speaking out to try and pressure him into giving the war more attention than the Olympics. Let's hope they succeed. Failure in Afghanistan means emboldened terrorists and more attacks on our soil.

My Friends, My G________ Friends!

“I have no trouble with my enemies. I can take care of my enemies in a fight. But my friends, my goddamned friends, they're the ones who keep me walking the floor at nights!” Warren G. Harding

Warren G. Harding serves in so many ways as the template for the current presidency. He served a short time in the Ohio state senate, then the US Senate. Prior to that he edited a small town newspaper and helped the Ohio Republican machine. The GOP ran him because he was attractive and sounded very good speaking about nothing. He hinged his campaign on the word "normalcy" and defeated james Cox and the Democrats. Harding then went on to failures that still did not reach the level of the neophyte Obama The reason for this was that perhaps because deapite all his failings, Harding still believed in hands off government. He did not give himself a chance to screw up too badly. Obama, meanwhile, believes in interventionism on a Mussoliniesque level.

Both Obama and Harding had friends to worry about. They both dragged the flotsam and jetsom of their own local and state political machines to Washington with them. Harding's friends tried to leverage illegal profit out of the system while Obama's simply want the power to enact their kooky ideas. Both men found themselves embarassed time and time again because they appointed men to influence with embarassing predilections.

Obama recently appointed a man as "safe schools czar" who admittedly in a published book encouraged a fifteen year old boy to have sex with an older man in a bus station. Many (not all of, but many of) Obama's biggest Hollywood supporters line up to denounce the arrest and imprisonment of Roman Polanski who drugged and sodomized a 7th grade girl. They feel that his status as an artist raises him above the law. I rarely agree with Chris Rock on anything, but he made a good point when he said that not even Johnny Cochran would defend OJ by saying "did you see him play for the Bills?"

Most of Obama's appointees as czars have shady pasts of some sort; that is why they were not sent to the Senate as choices for real executive branch posts. However, his lack of concern for their opinions and actions have come back to convince many that we are one year into a chaotic and incompetent presidency.

Beneath His Dignity, An Epic Fail

George Washington was one day walking down a street in the capital. One of his old friends, Governeur Morris, had just arrived and was anxious to see Washington, but first saw the Secretary of the Treasury Alexander Hamilton. Hamilton pointed out the president and encouraged Morris to walk over, slap him on the back, and greet him with enthusiasm. Morris did so. Washington stopped, slowly turned his head to face Morris, and froze him with a stare like pure liquid nitrogen. He then coldly continued his walk.



Washington had a very conscious idea of the image of a president. He strove daily to present the image of simplicity and dignity. He required no uniformed guards, bands, or announcement. Washington believed that if a president was worthwhile, people would know when one entered the room. He also remained very strict about what actions lay beneath the dignity of a president.



I am positive that George Washington would react with rage at the idea of a sitting Chief Magistrate of the United States kowtowing to a group of foreigners to get games played somewhere in America. I do not care if the Prime Minister of Britain or the President of Russia has done it, we should keep high expectations of our head of state. Would Queen Elizabeth beg for Olympic games? I think not!



Let us, though, for one second assume that begging foreigners to allow us to spend uncounted millions and go farther into debt is an appropriate task for an American president. Surely that is a task reserved for when times are good and burdens are light. As a person with family fighting in the Middle East, it insults me that Obama went to Denmark to flash his smile, speak about his dream of a Chicago Olympics, and make an "oh by the way" stop to meet with his generals. A smart politician would have played up the meeting with commanders and made the Olympic stop secondary. Otherwise, people might get the idea you care more about the Olympics than the sacrifices of our fighting men and allies.



Then, if your Olympic pitch fails, you do not look like you spent a lot of money to travel across the ocean and waste everyone's time. Also the IOC doesn't get peeved when you do not stick around to watch all the other presenters who courteously watched you. After all, if you are fighting a war and care about those fighting it as well as the outcome, people understand if you have to leave to meet the generals.



But Obama didn't. As usual his priorities got skewed, he failed to think things through, and ended up looking stupid again. Not saying he is stupid, but he has not learned much political competence since entering office.



As the kids say these days, Olympic campaign 2009 will go down in history as . . .



Epic Fail.

The Best Presidential Administration Ever Will Start With a Chicagoan

***Note**** Since this post was written this morning, Obama's personal push to bring the Olympics to Chicago has been thwarted. Republicans have responded by expressing concern over the expenditure of time and money in this cause while so many other problems remain unattended.
****************************************************************

Time to look forward to 2012. We have a candidate and we know he will drop kick Obama through the goalposts of American politics. Let's get a short look at our next president and the Cabinet he will select.
President: Mike Ditka
One glare from Ditka's steely eyes and Obama will run back to Michelle, curl up in the fetal position and whimper. You say Obama is a great campaigner? You didn't see the Chicago Bears in 1985 then. That, my friends, was a campaign. His presidential campaign against Obama will look like a lion campaigning against a wounded wildebeeste. Ditka will windsprint the economy back into prosperity and send terrorists home crying to their mamas.

Vice President: None
Vice presidents are for wussies. Nothing happens to Ditka unless Ditka says it can happen.

Secretary of State: Paul "Bear" Bryant


Our diplomatic corps needs to get back into fighting trim. No striped pants boys in this man's State Department. he will take our foreign service out to the desert of Texas for three weeks, forcing them to do 217 wind sprints a day and live off of nothing but oranges and raw soup bones. Yes, I know Bear Bryant is dead. You know Bear Bryant is dead. But millions of Alabamans do not and if they can be fooled, so can most foreign governments who usually are not as bright as Alabama football fans.



Secretary of Defense: Buddy Ryan

He led Ditka's defense once and now he will do it again. The Germans think they know about blitzkrieg but they never saw the 46 in action. Buddy Ryan built the most fearsome defense the NFL has ever seen, the early 90s Philadelphia Eagles, around a Southern Baptist preacher. Who else do you want preparing our military to seek, destroy, and sack. Head of covert ops and special forces will be his starting strong safety from those Eagles teams Andre "Dirty" Waters (unfortunately also dead.)

Ambassador to the United Nations: Bubba Smith

Theodore Roosevelt said "speak softly and carry a big stick." Bubba Smith, Hall of Fame linebacker, can say nothing and carry nothing and still get his point across. Just wait until Ahmadinnerjacket or some other Middle Eastern crazy or Latin American Commie wants to speak at the UN. They'll see Bubba Smith standing at the door, arms folded, and just waltz right on back to the poor, desperate country they tyrannize daily.




If we can't get him, Robert Parrish from the Boston Celtics is a close second.


Commander in Chief CENTCOM: Pat Summit



The best way to humiliate a Moslem is to get his tail end kicked by a woman, especially a very scary one. Just ask the SEC. Pat Summit scares the hell out of football teams, and she is a girl's basketball coach! No better strategist exists in the sport and she will find a way to kick Al Quaeda's butt with fifteen young women on scholarship to the University of Tennessee.






Secretary of Homeland Security: Don Nehlen


Dandy Don, one of the great nice guys in the history of college football right? This Hall of Famer built one of the greatest defenses in the history of college football at West Virginia University in the mid 1990s. Nine of those players went on to play in the NFL, would've been ten if Charles Emmanuel had not been injured in preseason the next year. Most of them started and stayed for a long time. a few making All Pro. It led the NCAA in every statistical category you can imagine. It single handedly scared the University of Miami into mediocrity (I can't really back that up.) If we can find the old Don Nehlen spirit, we can get that southern border situation squared away right now.






Director of CIA: Mike Tyson


Yeah, we know, secrecy and intelligence gathering requires a more subtle spirit than Iron Mike. But the CIA used to actually go out there and find and kill bad guys once upon a time. We need the perfect model of a one man wrecking crew and no one beats Iron Mike in his prime. Can you imagine Tyson interrogating a terror suspect? The guy would talk in twenty-three seconds or after two knockdowns. How can you go wrong with a presidential administration featuring two "Iron Mikes."


National Security Advisor: Red Auerbach


This position calls for a cerebral strategist to contrast with the guy we picked to head CIA. You need a balance of personalities. Red, with apologies to Jerry West and WVU fans everywhere, was the greatest individual to ever contribute to the history of the NBA. A great point guard with the Washington Bullets, coach and president of the Boston Celtics. Just wait until the National Security Council staff and the president light up long victory cigars every time a terrorist leader gets sent to his final judgment.

Introducing Your New Superintendent of Schools.....Barack Obama!

Is there any pie that he won't shove his fingers into?

Last week Barack Obama comtinued his ADHD administration by creating for himself a new uproar. He suggested that American students lag behind foreign students in key subjects. Of course Obama cites studies indicating that our schools also require children to attend less than those of other countries.

First of all, I'm tired of hearing about studies that compare the schools of other countries to America. Almost every other country separates children at the age of twelve into different tracks, college bound and vocational bound. Those studies compare all American children to teh select college bound children of other places. When studies compare children as a whole, the United States ranks near the top in everything. The difference between the two systems is that American schools operate on the assumption that all children need encouragement to do the best they can. You never know who will become the next great doctor or playwright.

Why do we continue to cite studies that make us look bad? This is powerful empirical evidence that our schools are not doing the job. Everyone involved claims it means that they need more money. Problem is that America financially supports its schools at a higher rate than any other country on earth.

Obama claims we need to send our children to school for more time. As a parent of two, I believe my children spend too much time there already. I worked in the school system and homeschooled them a couple of years as well and understand that there is a lot of down time. A good homseschooling program can do in a few hours what a school does in seven. The school experience by itself wipes out children physcially and mentally as it is. Their only chance to be kids for any extended period is the shrinking summer break that Obama wants to take away. Character building extracurricular activities will see less participation because it takes a superman to endure a full time job and then football practice.

The problem in our schools is size and structure. Schools are way too big. Everyone knows that as class and school populations rise, educational levels decline. We also need competition that will force administrators and teachers to perform better.

The final problem is the federal government. School control needs to be local. Mandates and curriculum made in the federal and state capitals do not coordinate well with diverse local populations. We need to get back to a time when parents and teachers had more impact on learning than bureaucrats and elected lawyers.

Finally we need to remember that kids need time to be kids. School takes away too much time from that right now. They need time to develop as individuals and find out who they are, not be led here and there down the halls of buildings designed by prison architects. We want children that are educated, not burned out. We certainly do not need another "fix" from the same incompetents that appoint a guy that thinks child molestation is wonderful as the "safe schools czar."

Honestly, isn't everyone just about sick of this guy telling us how he can make our lives better when he has not accomplished one thing in his entire life outside of campaigning?

When Describing Obama, Pelosi, etc., Socialism Is Not Just a Buzz Word

I hear it a lot. Liberals accuse us of using socialism as a label to tarnish a target, much in the same way that leftists use the word "racism." Using the "s" word is seen as destroying civility. Of course racism gets tossed at our side by a former president.

So where's the proof that the leftists are socialists? Why not ask the experts on the subject? In 1991 Bartlomiej Kaminski (PhD University of Warsaw, currently professor of government and economics at the University of Maryland) published a groundbreaking study on socialism in Poland called The Collapse of State Socialism . It explains the nature of state socialism, compares it to a free market system, then describes how it is ultimately unsustainable.

The first table in the book lists comparisons of a free market system against state socialism and the comparisons should scare you.

The left wing in America, including the Obama Administration, compare strongly to the listed characteristics of a state socialist regime. I am going to list a few of them:

"Society as an object" Obama does not engage society, he informs it what he expects of it.

"Conflict suppression" Kaminski says that democracies mediate conflict. Socialism finds ways to demonize and marginalize opposition.

"Political unity" Socialist states see unity as the primary goal of politics and achieve it by a variety of means. Democracies believe in political pluralism, the give and take between people that disagree on the issues.

Kaminski sees law in a democracy as being a constraint upon both the people and the government. Socialist states see the law as a tool to accomplish their goals for society.

Democracies at times want to convicne people to act in a certain way and use arguments to appeal to people's reason and sense of self-interest. Socialist states use coercion and bribery.

In terms of the economy, democratic and capitalist systems exclude themselves from the private sector, although they do enact policies that apply to the whole system. Socialist economics tends to be interventionist, trying to alter and control individuals and specific businesses. Democracies tend to create regulations that are understandable and specific. Socialists make the rules unstable and hard to comprehend by design. They want people and business to be constantly breaking the law because it provides the government leverage over them.

In this way, the state system envisioned by Obama, Pelosi, Reid, and leftists resembles more a state socialist system than a capitalist one. The government has arbitrary power over people and corporations that it uses to pursue its own goals. History shows that such a system is unsustainable in the long run. That, and the fact that it deprives people of freedom, makes it and the people that advocate it very dangerous.

Congresswoman Capito Comments on Latest EPA Announcement

Rep. Shelley Moore Capito, R-W.Va., today re-emphasized her economic concerns surrounding the latest announcement from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency that 79 Appalachian region mining permits have been officially singled out for further delay. The EPA announced today that it has finalized its list of area mining permits that will demand “additional review and coordination.”

“Today’s announcement is yet another blow to miners throughout Appalachia who continue to seek certainty from the EPA when it comes to mines across our state,” said Capito, who has argued that the EPA’s ambiguity surrounding permitting standards jeopardizes jobs and economic growth throughout the state.

In its June announcement, the EPA identified more than 100 permits as potentially needing further review. Some of those permits were then withdrawn and others were dismissed for administrative errors. This left the 79 permits that the EPA has now officially determined must receive additional review.

“We’ve seen a slow-bleed of coal jobs throughout the state and announcements like this certainly don’t offer much hope for turning around that trend,” said Capito. “We will continue to see a backlog of permits that threatens to choke off investment and jeopardize jobs throughout the region.”

Capito noted that as of today’s announcement there remains no binding deadline for resolving the outstanding permits and that considerable uncertainty remains about the EPA’s criteria for evaluating potential mine sites.

“Miners can’t meet a standard that has yet to be clearly identified,” she said. “There has to be an endgame. Yet, right now all we have is further review.”

Twenty three of the 79 permits referenced in today’s announcement are located in West Virginia.

Common Good Versus Tyranny of the Majority

Obama's defenders often point out that those opposing his policies are really opposing the common good. They claim that those that resist higher taxes, government run corporations, and climate legislation are merely selfish, evil, or sinful (yes, those words were all used!)

"Common good" should raise a red flag among freedom loving individuals. On one hand, this phrase evokes an image of individuals banding together to perform great acts of work or sacrifice that benefit almost everyone. A such thing as the "common good" does exist. You see it in the actions of churches around this nation. The most effective and positive actions for the common good come from private and individual action. From time to time the government asks the people to sacrifice for something that can benefit the common good, such as the interstate highway system. It both stimulated the economy and promoted national security.

The idea of the "common good" also cloaks proposals from authorities that benefit fewer people, have less positive impact, but require sacrifices from the people. That is why we as free citizens must scrutinize every proposal that asks us to sacrifice for the common good involuntarily. The government uses high sounding phrases to mask the fact that they want to take your money, freedom, or both.

It is not that many of them do not truly believe it is for the common good. The problem is that we cannot afford to let anyone, especially the Left, define the common good for us in every situation. To many of them, the common good means that they choose what we eat, how often we exercise, and what our kids learn in school and at home.

America has seen many cases where the common good has been a mask for outright oppression. In the 1940s, most felt the common good was served by black Americans being unable to vote, mingle with whites socially, or even fighting alongside whites during World War II. As late as the 1960s several Senate Democrats launched a fillibuster to preserve their interpretation of " the common good" from Republicans and northern Democrats seeking to respect the rights of blacks.

Today those that seek to promote the common good want your money and to force you to purchase a product that you may or may not want. All of this flies in the face of national tradition. Be careful and watch your wallet every time a leftist talks about "the common good."

Welcome to the other side of the Looking Glass

I have read several articles in recent days that make be feel as I have stepped through the looking glass to the other side. The side where right and wrong are mixed up. One article talks about how the Empire State Building with be bathed in Red and Yellow light to celebrate the 60th Anniversary of the founding of the Communist Government in China. Another talks about a Communist Chinese flag flying ceremony at the White House. Why would, let alone should, the most successful capitalist nation in the world celebrate the oppressive regime that killed an estimated 50 million of its own people under Mao? The obvious answer is we shouldn't.

We should be embracing those that fight for freedom. On the 60th Anniversary of the founding of the Communist Government in China I will be saying a prayer for this fellow. He is a true Chinese hero, no a world hero.

I refuse to celebrate anything but freedom. This Communist Government that we are about to celebrate in Washington and New York is the same government that attacked US Troops during the Korean War, a war that has never officially ended. This same government supplied the Viet Cong that killed US troops in Vietnam. This same Communist Government in 2001 captured a US Navy aircrew after a Chinese fighter jet harassing a P-3 Orion in international waters collided with our plane forcing it to make an emergency landing. The Communist Chinese Government has been caught spying on the US. They block attempts to stop nations like Iran from getting nuclear weapons.

The Communist oppose every freedom we believe in. The world has been turned upside down when the free peoples of the world celebrate those that choose to enslave their own people. Welcome to the other side of the Looking Glass.

Our Taxpayer Dollars At Work

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/sep/29/workers-porn-surfing-rampant-at-federal-agency/?page=3
Wanted: Senior Executive for National Science Foundation. Must be able to avoid looking at porn sites.
Wanted: Supporting staff at National Science Foundation. Must be willing to refrain from placing pornographic pictures of themselves on government computers.
The article above, an exclusive from the Washington Times (not that their crosstown rival would not have loved to be the first on this story) describes how staff and executives at the NSF spent so much time and foundation resources on internet pornography that millions have been spent by their inspector general. The IG was not able to do his real job of tracking down grant fraud; he was investigating a large number of employees spending all day looking at porn. A senior executive defended his actions by saying he was helping to support underprivileged Third World women.
So will ACORN be banned from running this outfit, too?

****************************************************************************

Congressman Rahall of the Third District recently defended his vote against defunding ACORN as a strike in favor of the Constitution. He (and likely Mollohan as well) interpreted the congressional action as a bill of attainder. A bill of attainder means that the government targets the actions of an individual or group for unfair punishment. The fact that widespread fraud and illegal behavior was found in this organization means that it was defunded for legitimate and legal reasons. The government has the authority to cut off funds when it believes they are being used for fraudulent purposes.
At what point did Congressman Rahall start representing Chicago and stop representing West Virginia?

Is Obama turning Afghanistan in to his Vietnam?

As President Obama struggles whether or not to go for the win in Afghanistan we are reminded of a very similar decision made by a President over 40 years ago. General Westmoreland became Chief of Staff of the Army in March of 1968, just as North Vietnamese Army was destroyed by US forces at the end of the Tet Offensive. The media did not report this victory as the victory it was and the public was weary of the war. Westmoreland’s request for 200,000 additional troops had been leaked to the media and was ultimately denied for political reasons.

Today a similar request for additional troops sits on Obama’s desk. History repeats its self at General Stanley McChrystal's request for an additional 40,000 troops was leaked to the press.

Obama should learn from history. The first lesson is let the General fight the wars and keep the politics out of it. If Obama does not give the troops to McChrystal to push to final victory, then American soldiers will continue to die with no chance of victory. That is not an acceptable out come. We do not need another Vietnam.

The way I see it Obama has two choices. The first, if you will not give the troops what they need to win, then pull them out immediately. Do not sacrifice American lives without the chance of victory. However Mr. Obama needs to be prepared for what will follow. Afghanistan will revert back to the haven for terrorist bent on destruction of the United States and the western world. History also shows us that it will destabilize Pakistan, a nuclear armed country.

The second choice is not to repeat the mistakes of Vietnam. Keep politics out of it. Give the Generals what they need to push on to final victory. Win the war and keep America safe.

Taxation and Resistance

In the late 1760s King George III appointed Charles Townshend to the British Cabinet. One contemporary said that this man had abilities above any man, but judgment beneath any man.

Townshend came to office in a time when the British government was trying to prove a point to its colonies. Colonials believed that the British Parliament could not tax it because Americans had no representation there. The British believed that each Member of Parliament represented the entire empire sufficiently no matter where their district lay.

Townshend tried to raise revenue by passing excise taxes on certain goods thought popular or necessary. Glass, tea, and other items were taxed. Americans were sufficiently roused bythe political nature of the tax. Money would be used to pay colonial governors directly from the British Treasury. Previously the colonial assemblies elected by the people paid these important officials. This taxation had a political goal in mind in reducing the liberty of the people.

Americans responded by refusing to purchase the items, one of the few truly successful boycotts in history. Britain once again was frustrated and angry. However their hands were tied. The government cannot punish people because they refuse to buy something, right?

Today the US Congress is looking at just that. They have proposed a virtual excise tax in the form of compulsory health insurance. Unlike the British they intend to force us to buy it. Like the British their motive is political, transform this country into a bastion of socialism and infringe upon our liberties.

Persistence by the British led to more serious conflict than angry words.

Clark Barns to take on Alan Mollohan for Congress

Clark Barnes currently serves as a State Senator in West Virginia's 15th district. Which includes Grant, Hampshire, Hardy and Pendleton Counties in the Potomac Highlands. Barnes is also known as the winning underdog taking on well fund candidates and defeating them on the issues. Clark becomes the 4th Republican Candidate to join the field against Mollohan.

Left to Right: State Senator Clark Barnes, Tom Collins, State Senator Dave Sypolt

Creepy

I remember being accused a few years back of being a 100% backer of President Bush, agreeing with every single thing he ever said or did. My responde was always the same, that I agreed with probably six or seven out of every ten things. I argued that I liked him because I agreed with him most of the time, especially on the big issues such as security. I also really like Ronald Reagan, but when I teach on him in class I criticize the way he handled Lebanon. The way we left that country and handled hostage situations encouraged more terrorism later.

No conservative will answer that they agreed with either Bush 100% of the time and very few will say that of Reagan. You are not disloyal to the cause in conservatism for thinking freely.

Contrast that with some of Obama's followers, people who believe that he rules, not governs.

Most people saw the extremely creepy video of a schoolteacher leading children in a song of praise about Obama. Part of it was sung to the Battle Hymn of the Republic! It parroted his campaign messages and other speeches since his inauguration.

Many correctly pointed out that this goes beyond education into simple propaganda. Parents responded with anger at their children being used and then put on You Tube. It reflects the attitude common to fascist, communist, and personal dictatorships. This attitude exalts the Leader over the individual, his will over your judgment. It is way to common for a certain segemtn to adore Obama instead of simply support him.

That is frightening.

Great Quote From John Stoessel (thanks to Tracy Karol)

"I'd say the government spends money like drunken sailors but that insults drunken sailors - they spend their own money." John Stoessel said this in a talk today on health care.

Hat tip to Tracy Karol

Dumb and Dumber

I have said it before and I will say it again. Professional athletes and nightclubs do not mix. Add someone carrying a gun who does not fully respect it and you have a bad combination indeed.

Former Giants wide receiver Plaxico Burress found this out the hard way. He jammed a gun into the waistband of his sweatpants and went out for a night on the town. It fell into his pants, went off, and injured him. It could have been a lot worse.

It was stupid and irresponsible in execution, but not necessarily logic. Professional athletes are targets for hateful threats or designs on their money. In other countries they have been killed over poor play. It is not dumb for an athlete to consider carrying a weapon. Carrying it in the waistband of his sweats is. Burress should have gone the legal route, gotten a conceal and carry permit, and worn it in a holster.

OK, so he was not acting brightly. Someone besides him could have gotten hurt. What should New York do with this character? Slapping two years in prison on this man went way over the top. He made a stupid mistake which was criminal. I cannot fathom this man spending two years in jail while some child molestors get less time.

This is apparently an anti-gun statement made by the authorities in New York. Make an example out of Burress. You have to wonder how many intentional criminals go free after doing much less time than this inept example of foolishness. It is not fair to Burress to be held up as an example. A better idea would be to have him star in a campaign explaining how to properly get yourself a permit and carry your weapon. Make him do some time in home confinement, then let him get back to work. Another NFL receiver got drunk and killed someone with their car. He did a lot less time than you might have expected or wanted.

Also, they obviously want him to be an example to other athletes and entertainers with more money than sense. The only thing they will see today is that Burress got shafted by the man. A better example would be an educational program starring Burress produced by the National Rifle Association and the State of New York explaining the legal process for conceal and carry as well as proper gun safety. The target audeince would be more receptive to that than an unfair sentence.

Burress got a bad deal. An appeals court needs to correct this injustice. Burress was dumb, but the justice system in this case was dumber.

Socialist Realism

During the 1930s, the big three dictatorships left no stone unturned in looking for ways to motivate the masses. They used the mass media and even art to push their agendas. Official artists of the regime created paintings, poetry, novels, and other works to promote the goals of the beloved leader.

Stalin's Soviet Union even gave this movement a style, "socialist realism." My Soviet history professor at Marshall, Professor David Woodward, referred jokingly to "boy meets tractor" stories. Boy meets tractor, boy falls in love with tractor, boy and tractor meet officially set grain quota, boy and tractor live happily ever after.

This replaced the former revolutionary style of avant garde art. What the avant garde lacked in coherence, it did make up for in individualism. Stalin was not interested in individualism, or art really. He wanted art, like everything else, to serve the state. And Stalin, like Louis XIV, believed in "L'etat c'est moi" or "I am the state."

Fast forward to last week when the National Endowment for the Arts was caught organizing the 21st century of socialist realism. The White House "Office of Public Engagement" (run by a woman named "Buffy") and others organized a conference call with other groups to outline how the National Endowment for the Arts can promote the Obama agenda. Sure they can pick from four master topics, but please help out. We know you are eager to. That is a paraphrase of what they actually said.

The hat tip goes to Big Hollywood.com Here is the link to the story.

http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jjmnolte/2009/09/21/propaganda-health-care-and-acorn-full-context-of-nea-conference-call-reveals-disturbing-pattern/

Because He Obviously Has Nothing Else to Worry About

The politically weak Obama requested that New York Governor David Patterson (D) abandon his bid for re-election out of concern that he could lose the race. Obama considers the race too important for the Democrats to lose and Patterson must step aside. Thus spake Obama.

Does the arrogance of this administration know no bounds? How will New York Democrats react? Historically the governor's mansion is a powerful position that finds itself at odds with the New York City leadership. The US Representative from a district in Queensm Gregory Meeks, made the request. He has strong ties to the president.

Patterson is unpopular. His unpopularity comes from the fact that he follows the liberal Democratic playbook to a T. The state's economy deterorated and he has proposed a bizarre range of taxes instead of spending cuts. Yes, Patterson is less than effective. Still, according to tradition, the voters select the candidates, not the president.

This does come on the heels of New York reviewing its association with ACORN, one of the first Democratic states to do so. Patterson also did not select Obama's hand picked Kennedy to replace Hillary Clinton as US Senator.

The New York media and voting population should be outraged that Obama is trying to pick their governor for them.

From Revolutionaries to Aristocracy

In the 1770s Massachusetts made a very definite statement about its opinion of mindless hereditary aristocracy. This week a majority of polled voters in that same state made their own kind of statement.

Most Massachusetts voters said they preferred Hugo Chavez's buddy Joe Kennedy II. Just like his ancestor, he prefers the apparently orderly authority of a dictator to freedom and democracy. Kennedy appeared on commercials for Citgo that tried to restore the Venezuelan state oil company's image after Chavez stole elections. Analysts agree that the state has a soft spot in its heart for the Kennedy name. If you ran a pit bull named Kennedy up there it could win a congressional seat.

True, the Kennedy family has brought to the state a national leadership role larger than its declining share of the electoral college and congressional represetnation. It's not hard to understand why they would have a sense of loyalty. However you have to look behind the name. You cannot expect that all the members of a family will have the same qualities as those that have led in the past. This is not Rome, Senate seats should not be seen as a family trust. Then again we are a democracy. The voters have the right to choose.

Problem is that I am not sure what the Kennedys have accomplished outside of being tabbed as natural leaders. President Kennedy had some noteworthy moments. Robert Kennedy's reputation for ruthlessness died when he was assassinated. What had Ted Kennedy actually done? I may be simply misinformed, but what did he do to earn his leadership role outside of being the brother of a president? What have any of the other Kennedys actually done whose names have been tossed forward for public office?

Assigning someone a position of importance based upon a family name and little else smacks of aristocracy. Massachusetts is not the only state that gives a pass to its first families. However it was at one time the first state to toss that idea of authority aside.

Please accept an American Citizens apology for what our President has done

Embassy of the Republic of Poland
2650 16th St. NW
Washington, DC 20009
daria.nowak@msz.gov.pl

Dear Ambassador,

The American people stand with the people of Poland in defense of your nation. We thank you for your support in the War on Terror. Our President announcing he would not defend your nation and ours on the 70th Anniversary of the Soviet invasion of your nation was wrong and without feeling. It is not the feeling of most Americans. We appreciate your nation being our ally. May God bless Poland and the Polish people.

With Warm Regards,
Gary Howell

Democrat Rules of Civility and Decorum

Obama's Misplaced Priorities

Obama went to one of the few crowds left in the world that adore him, liberal college students, and made the announcement that the struggle for health care reform was the most important one of our time.

Honestly, this guy is the president?

The President of the United States is commander-in-chief of the armed forces of the country. Tens of thousands of troops remain in harms way in Iraq. Tens of thousands more are going actively into battle every single day in Afghanistan. Their loved ones wait every day to hear good or bad news.

Obama, get this message. When American soldiers are in battle THAT is the most important struggle of the time. Everything else is secondary.

Did Obama mean to show disrespect to the troops? Probably not. He just lacks a basic understanding of America and what we consider most important. Our soldiers fight in Afghanistan to prevent the reestablishment of a regime that assisted in the 9/11 attacks. They fight to give to that nation a measure of stability and rule of law where women can go to school and almost all can live without fear. Compared to those ends, Obama's health care proposals pale considerably.

Again, Obama shows a basic lack of comprehension and inability to understand the big picture. He needs to stop campaigning and start being president.

Capito Statement on Corridor H Congresswoman Applauds Progress, Renews Call for Project’s Completion

Rep. Shelley Moore Capito, R-W.Va., today praised ongoing progress in the construction of Corridor H, while also calling for renewed efforts to complete the project.

“Corridor H is critical for promoting economic growth and opportunity through Appalachia,” said Capito. “We’ve already seen the benefits of the completed portions of Corridor H, and those opportunities will only grow with today’s developments and the full completion of the highway.

“This project has been held up long enough. Simply put, it’s time to see this project completed.”

Capito also reiterated her desire to see real bipartisan investment in highway infrastructure.

“It’s clear that – despite the rhetoric – the stimulus bill’s highway investment amounted to less than 5 percent of the bill and dozens of projects remain unfunded or underfunded,” she noted.

“With a smart, bipartisan highway bill we have an opportunity to start filling in the gaps with infrastructure projects we know can set the stage for economic growth now and in the future.”

Make Mine Freedom (1948)

When Will Our Democratic Congressmen Stop Listening to Pelosi and Start Listening to Us?

Revelations over the past two weeks transformed the image of ACORN from merely shady community organizers to a group apparently willing to help bring children into the United States for the purpose of prostitution. Multiple branches of this recently federally funded group offered to help various investigators commit a variety of felonies. The former Secretary of State Betty Ireland understood them enough to investigate their activities prior to last year's election. Her successor has not followed up on this problem.

The US Senate quickly voted to suspend funding of this rogue group. Several executive branch agencies, including the Census Bureau, stopped coordination with them as well. Today the House of Representatives voted overwhelmingly to shut down funding for ACORN.

Two representatives, Alan Mollohan and Nick Joe Rahall, voted against cutting off funding.

Why?

How are two rural congressmen so bound to these would be abbettors of child sex slavery?

It would have been appropriate and risk free to support the majority of Democrats and all Republicans on this issue. West Virginians are not known as vocal supporters of ACORN.

So why not vote against them?

Tyson Replaces Labor Day With Muslim Holiday

Capito Asks for ACORN Hearings Housing Subcommittee Has Oversight Responsibility Congresswoman Says

In light of troubling reports about the conduct of the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), Rep. Shelley Moore Capito, R-W.Va., is calling for congressional hearings to ensure that taxpayer dollars are not being used improperly or illegally. ACORN, a recipient of federal funding, has been under intense scrutiny after representatives of the organization were documented providing housing assistance to a couple attempting to set up an illicit business.

In a letter to Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Cal., the chairwoman of the House Financial Services Subcommittee on Housing and Community Opportunity, Capito notes that the subcommittee has jurisdiction over many of ACORN’s key housing-related functions and she asks the chairwoman to hold a hearing to investigate current and past allegations.

“ACORN has been on the receiving end of more than $50 million from U.S. taxpayers and it’s only appropriate that we ensure that those dollars are not being mis-used,” said Capito, who is the subcommittee’s ranking Republican member.

“Housing programming forms a significant portion of ACORN’s activities and our committee should not ignore the implications of these recent developments.”
In her letter, Capito also addressed passed allegations of misconduct by ACORN representatives.

“… we cannot forget that this entity is also facing investigations regarding potential voter registration fraud in Ohio, Nevada, and Florida among others,” she wrote.

***Complete text of the letter can be found below***

----------------------------------------------------------------
September 16, 2009

Rep. Maxine Waters
Chairwoman
Subcommittee on Housing and Community Opportunity
House Financial Services Committee
2344 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515

Dear Chairwoman Waters:

Over the August recess, many of the concerns expressed by my constituents involved the amount of money the federal government is spending. They want to know where this money is going and when we will begin to reduce the overall level of spending. I think we can all agree that we must bring our nation’s fiscal house in order and be good stewards of the taxpayer’s money.

With that in mind, the recent reports of inappropriate behavior by employees of the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, commonly referred to as ACORN, must be addressed. In the past few weeks, there have been numerous accounts of ACORN representatives advising a young couple on how to obtain housing assistance to set up an illicit business.

While ACORN reportedly is taking steps regarding some of the individuals involved, this is but the latest development in a series of serious charges being leveled against this group. Since 1994, the American taxpayers have provided ACORN with approximately $53 million in federal funding for housing assistance and counseling. While there may be entities within ACORN that provide appropriate assistance to Americans struggling to find housing, we cannot forget that this entity is also facing investigations regarding potential voter registration fraud in Ohio, Nevada, and Florida among others.

Many of ACORN’s activities relate directly to issues under the jurisdiction of the Subcommittee on Housing and Community Opportunity. Specifically, the ACORN Housing Corporation provides counseling to first time homeowners, mortgage counseling and foreclosure prevention assistance, and low income housing development. Earlier this year, the Committee adopted an amendment I offered directing the Committee to conduct oversight over the use of Federal funds by non-profits, for-profits, and third party entities; especially with the identification of questionable behavior by housing personnel. It is imperative that the Subcommittee hold hearings on the current and past allegations against ACORN to ensure that the taxpayer’s money is not being used improperly or illegally.

Thank you for your consideration of this request.

Sincerely,

Shelley Moore Capito
Ranking Member
Subcommittee on Housing and Community Opportunity

Mollohan moves up from top 20 most corrupt to top 15

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington which puts out the list of most corrupt politicians and backs it up with facts, named Congressman Alan Mollohan (D, WV-1) to the top 15 this year. (Click Here for the Full Report)

Capito Asks Colleagues to Focus on Issues at Hand

As House Speaker Nancy Pelosi brought legislation to the floor today to chastise Rep. Joe Wilson, R-S.C., for comments made last week during the President’s address to Congress, Rep. Shelley Moore Capito, R-W.Va., today urged her colleagues in the House of Representatives to avoid a partisan side-show and focus instead on the issues at hand.

“It’s striking that as we approach the one year anniversary of one of our nation’s greatest economic collapses and with unemployment still creeping towards 10 percent, that the House continues to dwell on an issue that both Mr. Wilson and the President himself have said is over,” said Capito.

“Mr. Wilson rightly apologized for his rude and inappropriate behavior, and the President rightly accepted his apology. They’ve both asked us all to move on and focus on the issues that matter – we should heed their logic. If Mr. Wilson’s apology is good enough for the President, it’s good enough for me.”

The morning after the President’s address to Congress, Capito appeared on national television and criticized Rep. Wilson for his outburst, calling it “very inappropriate.

Awakening the Sleeping Giant

Admiral Yamamoto used this analogy to describe the reaction of the United States after the proposed attack on Pearl Harbor. He could not have been more accurate.

Politically speaking, the attempt to wrench the United States down a left wing socialist path during a prolonged economic crisis has done the same thing.

In this case the sleeping giant was conservative and libertarian America. These folks, for the most part, are the backbone of America. They own small businesses, many served in the military, some work for larger companies in every capacity you can imagine. Others are self-employed as professionals. Some grow our food or even work in the government itself. All share the same ideal, that in America you can get farther, faster on your own efforts without government getting in the way.

Taking over major corporations with government power, promising to raise electric bills based on a discredited environmental theory, running up major deficits and planning to spend even more money on dubious health care programs are bad enough. Meanwhile we have pursued a policy of weakness in foreign affairs.

Increasingly it is clear that America did not vote for Obama. It voted against a centrist Republicanism that talked small government but delivered more debt. It voted for change in a time of economic fear, willing to gamble on the outsider, perhaps wanting to prove once and for all that America is not a racist nation. John McCain would have made a solid president, but the times demanded a stronger statement from the GOP. Conservatives refrained from casting a ballot for president in silent protest, a portent of the release soon to come.

We bet on the wrong horse.

You might also call the Republican Party a sleeping giant. Its limbs have awakened faster than its head, but it is roused and ready for action. Tea Party advocates crammed the streets of Washington last weekend. Morgan McComb of Texas proudly related on Facebook that at Obama's inauguration people had room to sit. At the 9/12 tea party in the nation's capital, bodies were jammed together, peacefully standing and protesting socialism. They also protested teh centralization of power in the hands of Obama along with the Chicago style corruption that has tarnished appointments and appropriations.

The RNC seems to still be wary of the movement, cautiously backing it. That being said, the West Virginia state party leadership has shown tremendous enthusiasm. You have to remember, until recently many Republicans proudly said "conservatives do NOT protest." As Bob Dylan sang once, the times they are a changin'. People are roused to direct action nationwide in numbers reminiscent of the 1960s. Many of the people mobilized to act were of that generation. They do not want to see the government steal their lifetime of savings or take away the Medicare plans that were promised them.

Left wingers reacted with hysterics at the suddenly uncivil tone of conservatives and libertarians. Accustomed to strongly worded letters to the editor, they had no experience in dealing with the kind of action they endorsed against the policies of President Bush. Confident in their mastery of a radical playbook, they could not fathom that their opponents might try the same ideas used by them for the past eight years. Leftists seem to have all been stricken by some kind of amnesia related to their past behavior. All they can do in response is shout the trite label "racist."

Our nation is at a crossroads. We need to work to build a strategy for the future. Will it be big government paternalism or a return to small government that unleashes the potential in each individual willing to work hard? The next two elections will indicate where our country goes from here. It is time for free people to stand with the Republican Party, elect strong candidates in the primaries, and take them to victory in Novembers to come.

The Ugliness of Pure Unadulterated Bigotry

In the past few days we have seen the ugliness of bigotry directed at the good people of South Carolina.

In a defining moment of the current political debate, Congressman Joe Wilson shouted during Obama's speech to Congress last week "You lie!" Under pressure from other Republicans he issued an apology. Pushed to reiterate his retraction, he refused to budge another inch. In other words he does not dispute what he said, just the forum in which he said it.

Wilson's statements triggered an unusually heated blast of hatred from the Left that coincided with the massive protests last week in Washington DC and elsewhere. Obama's Administration dictated to the protestors that their stance was simply "wrong." Columnists such as Maureen Dowd of the New York Times and Margery Eagan of the Boston Herald attacked Wilson as a racist. His powerful stance against a president that happened to be black could not have come from honest disagreement over that chief executive's policies. No, it must be racism.

And here is how you know that the leftists have lost. They try to hush all debate by hauling out what used to be the dreaded "R" word. That word used to make people shake in their boots. Stab me, shoot me, just don't call me a racist. However it has been trotted out so many times, it's lost its punch.

Eagen was particularly eager to slam the state of South Carolina, hauling out historical figures who, except for Strom Thurmond, all died before any of her readers were born. Of course she recounted all the insults (the Audacity of Dope I particularly liked) and accusations aimed at Obama as a sign of hysteria. Did she feel the same when Bush was accused of falsifying National Guard enlistments, or was compared to a monkey? She was likely right along with that hatred, feeling morally righteous all the while. Today she says the whole state of South Carolina is full of crackpots and dingbats. Maybe I think that her entire newspaper is just as filled with hate, bigotry, and vitriol as she is. That would not be fair, but the left specializes in collective generalization.

Folks, this is what they think. Don't assume that they will not attack West Virginia. They feel the same, if not worse, about us. It is hatred, pure bigotry, a knee jerk negativity that knows no reason or bounds. If they could get away with hanging all rural conservatives from a sour apple tree, they would.

The scary thing is that two groups of Americans move farther and farther apart, unable to fathom the other side or how we even live in the same country. They blame it on conservatives and libertarians, but they lie. Two visions exist of what America ought to be. One side wants government paternalism, the other a restrained system that promotes freedom and responsibility. Just as before the Civil War, the realm of compromise shrinks to imperceptibility.

In the Civil War no option remained by 1860 except to fight. No political solution existed to solve the divide between those that believed that individual liberty was best protected by states and those that believed the federal government ought to play a predominant role (although much less predominant than leftists today.) Are we seeing the same trend in our time? Perhaps, but probably not.

Bigotry from the left expresses a hatred not seen in this nation since the 1960s. That hatred was the last gasp of the dying segregationist culture. They knew history was closing the book on them. Hopefully radical left wing socialism is issuing its last foul and dying breath with this administration.

The Trap of the Imperial Presidency

Historians will often use the phrase "Imperial Presidency" to describe a personal style of rule that some chief executives assume. When thinking about this concept, Abraham Lincoln and Franklin Roosevelt often come up in discussions. Debates arise over whether or not personal rule is best for the country because it gets things done quickly, or whether it violates the balance of powers set in the Constitution.

The main instrument in the hands of an aspiring imperial president has been the executive order. This has the force of law and can claim indirect lineage from the Middle Ages era power of the monarch to make statutes. In recent years executive orders have proliferated and encompass a much broader scope than in the past. Obama exacerbated the problem of expanding presidential power by appointing powerful bureaucratic chieftains nicknamed "czars" to direct policy. These men and women, unlike official advisors, do not require Senatorial consent.

Lincoln and Roosevelt have this in common. They used their expanded powers during a time of national crisis. After Lincoln, the power of the president, for various reasons, shrank. During the Cold War and after it has expanded. Yes a president needs the authority to meet national emergencies, but too many use that power in more mundane situations.

Much of this is our fault. We expect our presidents to be superhuman. They must maintain economic prosperity, national security, protect innocents around the world, and attend to every issue that we think is important. When crises occur, we expect him or her to do something. We are not sure what, but we want something done, even when it would be better to do nothing.

In this way we resemble Rome at the end of the Republic. They had elected consuls that could not solve every social problem. When the dictator Julius Caesar acted forcefully, the people approved even though it broke their constitution. After Caesar came civil war and the establishment of the empire. Augustus was everything his people could have wanted in a leader, just, wise, effective. He seemed to affirm the positives of the imperial ideal. However when less scrupulous, and then downright insane people inherited the throne, the power Augustus used for good was bent towards evil goals.

We must put the brakes on the imperial presidency through constitutional amendment. First, kill off the czars. No major appointments without the "advice and consent of the Senate." Second, cap executive orders. No executive order may remain in force for more than five years without congressional affirmation. That is enough time for a president to address an emergency. Executive orders involving the seizure of land must be approved by the state legislature, or territorial, or Indian reservation authorities before they go into effect. This is the first step in restoring balance to our system and saving our Republic.