Authored by William Robert Barber

They, those, and them; the political class, the “in-the-know politicians,” and certainly the liberal national media all agree that President Obama has “won” a significant political battle. He has suppressed an intrinsic Republican inclination to cut government spending by harnessing a coalition of progressives that are In favor of more government spending. But of course he has done much more and beyond than simply  that: The President has purged the check and balance system of governess by circumventing the House of Representatives’ heretofore “power of the purse.” He has eroded federalism; he has enriched and empowered the executive branch of government. The president and his helpful cohorts (the have-less and have-not) have realigned the constitutional concept of equal branches of government in favor of the presidency.    

Abandoning the ideals of statesmanship, political parties have embraced Machiavellian tactics to achieve this goal of ‘winning’ elections. The idea, the envisioned concept, the implemented design, their public behavior and rhetorical formation, is only about winning elections.

As a consequence — because winning has been beyond their reach — the Republicans are now disorientated (at least Moses had an ultimate direction as he led his tribe across the wilderness!). They’re discombobulated because they have lost the office of the ‘golden goose’ twice and since their party is wholly devoted to winning they just can’t get past the loss. Stymied, disarrayed, bewildered, and confused the Republicans may fall on their sword instead of honoring their governing principles.

Instead of prudent governess we citizens of 2012 seem to prefer the pretense of ‘fairness’ as the guiding beacon to the ultimate equalitarian society wherein everyone has a “fair shot” at achieving the “American Dream.”  Hence the rich (a class defined by Obama & company) need to pay more. I honestly have no idea what implicitly or explicitly the meaning of ‘fairness’ is; neither do I have any concept of how a government creates a “fair shot.” Nevertheless, there must be many who do understand those words; after all,  the voters cast their ballot for the president’s reelection.   

For the Republicans to get their act together they need a leader, a single voice, a consolidator of diverse ideals, and a person who can deliver the message of states-person-ship to the American people. The Republican Party must stop this constant complicity of compromise for the so called “common good” and stand tall for the statecraft of acting within the confines of their political tenets and innate ethos.    

The election 2010 proved that conservative thought is not a forlorn political articulation. Clearly, the cost of governing has become absurd, idiotic, and senseless. Noticeably, there is a synergistic distinction between the appreciation of taxes and government spending. Individual taxation is founded on a progressive tax system. If more citizens make less money than those that make more, either the bar of individual tax liability is to be dropped or other means are to be applied to feed government’s insatiable need to spend.

The Republicans need to rally around their beliefs and call the liberal progressives’ bluff. They are two years away from the next election; if they cave on their beliefs they will lose that election anyway.


Authored by William Robert Barber

I have evidenced by news print and televised media that this congress, prompted and prodded by the Keynesian ideals of the Obama administration, has identified, propagated, and so far successfully, conned a significant percentage of the American people into a docile acceptance that the fiscal deficit and the financially unsustainable entitlement programs are a taxing, not a spending problem.   

The leadership of the House of Representatives (the in fact appropriator-caretakers of public funds) while acknowledging its steadfast belief that the government’s problem is not taxing but spending has nevertheless all but acquiesced to what they are against. Such a convoluting approach to governess could only apply when the dim-witted, the ideologues, and the want-to-be reelected politicians are managing congress.

Taxes according to liberal progressives are now a moral obligation. Hence, under the treaty-of-fairness (an Obama invention) those that have more are obliged to give their hard earned monies to those that earn less or earn nothing at all. The Obama administration won reelection on that very premise. The voters — you know, the ones that earn less or nothing at all, the ones indebted to a continuum of government education-loans, the recipients of welfare, Medicare, food stamps, and those academic wonks who are able expediters of available government grants — did benefit by the Obama reelection.

Well, as we commonly say, we are where we are and it is what it is. Let’s see how long this fiscal concept of how to administer such an economy will last. Does anyone actually believe that ObamaCare will lower the cost of governing? Or that taxing those that have more is a functional alternative to the present?!?

The truth is that this nation is in shoddy fiscal condition. But that is not the first cause of concern. The first cause of concern is that we Americans either do not accept that fact of our indebtedness, believe that software will be invented as a fiscal cure-all, or we are delusional and quite pleased to be so.

Whatever our reasoning or illogical conclusiveness to the habitual (regardless of the empowered political party) matrix of tax and spend, all this nation is capable of doing is enhancing the federal debt. Those that know all things mutually agree that only economic growth will reduce federal indebtedness, these wonks point to the Clinton surplus, of course that surplus was created by other than GAAP accounting principles. There never was a surplus of funds because if one simply retired the treasury notes that were substituted for cash within Social Security that transaction would eradicate the so called Clinton surplus.

Nonsense makes up an overwhelming amount of congressional action. Process and ambiguity shields congress and its politicians; the truth of the matter is distorted, misdirected, deferred, or altogether dodged. But maybe the truth is that “you (we) can’t take the truth,” possibly, our democratic-republic is a convenient self-induced ruse to satisfy some mythological America that has never truly existed.

These next four years have an election measure coming up in two….