Authored by William Robert Barber

Those Democrats, “they cheated, they lied, they said that they loved me.” But instead, duplicity was their means to achieve what they perceive as best for their countrymen. Even through their president is a rabid talking-head who will promise anything, cajole anyone, and deceive with the audaciousness of a cat-burglar. They fooled just enough of the people at just the right time to achieve their goal.

From crisis to crisis, press conference to explanatory speeches, the Obama administration ventures “forward” while demonstrating disdain for the slightest inkling of criticism and charging such reproaches as evidence of racist personification.   

And all along I thought the thesis of a constitutional republic was premised on the idea that the elected representative of the people are confronted and restrained by the mores of procedural precedence as well as statutory principles. That a divergent perspective is a characteristic of a democratic republic and as such engenders the basis of discussions aimed at the truth of the matter. After all, so I thought, a politician is armed with evidence laced persuasion wherein the target of such persuasion was consensus. But of course, particularly within the Obama administration, artfulness instead of truthfulness is the skill set of their persuasion; their methodology is resplendent with the amoral thesis that any means to achieve the desired result is better than ceding the rightfulness of a Republican or Fox News.

Withstanding, the pretentious fantasy of congenial compatibility and tolerance amongst the three branches of government unresolved issues arises, dissenters cast aside lawfulness, and scofflaws emerge. Respective of the rightful or wrongful nature of the particular, the finality of a persuasive effort often results in belligerent and aggressive behavior. Such behavior configures the argumentative nexus when striving to govern a democratic republic.  But because of the exponential growth of our federal governing systems, the legislative process as exemplified within the constitution has been redirected to an anonymous, unelected, unionized elitist regulatory bureaucracy. It is this regulatory bureaucracy that governs the process of governing and it is the process of governing that governs this nation’s business.

When the going-ons of political conflict swell into mayhem the media adds its flammables to the fire of controversy. And if that is not enough added perplexity for the average Joe, Congress is overwhelmed by the bog of ideological contrarianism.

Personage leadership in the presidency has dominated over the spirit, if not the tenets of the constitution.  Governing by fiat is now the norm instead of the exception. Hamilton’s vision of a strong executive is fulfilled.

The president has governed his way through all the missteps and outright incompetence of his governorship by a blend of dishonest ignorance and portentous resolve. Of course he had more than a little help from those that choose to cover their eyes, ears, and mouth.


Authored by William Robert Barber

Let’s give some thought to the mandated increase of the minimum wage: The Obama idealists and their progressive brethren, while arrogantly flying the pennant of fairness, have, with righteous indignation, declared that moral purpose is their impetus. In addition, they cite the Keynesian multiplier theory as the economic reasoning for raising the minimum wage.

Well alright… Aside from the confounding determination (held as virtuous by many) that government has the right to infringe on the labor for hire relationship with management, the unforeseen looms just over the horizon. It is a conspicuous fact that government relies on the profitability of private enterprise for its revenue. A deliciously fat and saucy portion of government revenue is derived from taxes garnered from a private company’s GAAP definitive of profit.  When government imposes either normative or excessive regulatory or labor cost upon enterprise it attenuations its very own tax revenue. Often the (regulatory) administration that enforces rules and mandates their interpretation of legislation upon enterprise simply increases the cost of governing bequeathing nominal if any benefit to the taxpayers. As to labor’s advantage of earning more money for the benefit of government’s taxable revenue because of our progressive tax system, the increase of earnings to labor adds zero positive to government taxable revenue. 

If the Keynesian multiplier is founded on the principle that the higher the mandated pay the more the economic stimuli, then… wait a minute — of course that could not be the case. Oh yes, it’s the Keynesian expert that will fix the mandated amount that management should pay for labor. Only the Keynesian wonk is smart enough to evaluate and fix the metrics of labor cost to management profit.

But once that ratio of the perfectly balanced minimum wage is fixed by the Keynesian expert, the concept is that those earners will spend their net increase of funds instead of saving it. Well, let’s give that concept some consideration: The net after tax difference between earning $7.50 an hour and $10.00 an hour is XY&Z. The earning differential has many subjective elements such as the state where the earner is domiciled, single or married, with children… the exceptions are numerous. Withstanding, there is no doubt that an increase in gross money is a reality. And so is the factual that taxes will increase every payday; these taxes will be withheld until the filing of ones taxes on April 15. Wherein monies withheld will be refunded. It is then — and only then — that the minimum wage earner receives a significant depository of cash. 

Labor is a commodity. The pricing of labor has wide fluctuations by sector, era, and a variant of other prompts and instigators of flux. The only pure pricing of labor is at the pleasure of the market; if — or should I say when — the government establishes a minimum wage, the market forces ally with technology and a new metric is implemented.

The basis of any agreement is mutual satisfaction; even if the satisfaction is momentary, what must pass the muster of sensibleness is an agreement amongst all participates. This “must” is the required “something” the government cannot impose.

If government could ever free itself from its tether to conflicting interest and the politics of politicians striving to staying in office instead of paying attention to governing, 1-2-3 may replace the time honored #@3&5&*. But then again, deduction, logic, and pragmatism are easily trumped by the word “fair” which is particularly effective when rhetorically toned by an orchestra of righteous indignation.   


Authored by William Robert Barber

Tempered by the tether to mortal reliance, the actuality of societal dysfunction, and the continuum of political malfeasance, the intent, spirit, and anticipatory adherence to the founding documents have been fragmented into a variant of interpretations and asymmetrical regulatory bias.  

The ideals expressed and implied within this nation’s constitution have been ignored, wantonly reinterpreted, or wrongfully implemented. For example, the constitutional tenet establishing three branches of government convened under a system of check balance has been decimated. The principles of federalism have been abused, corrupted, and duplicitously misdirected. Federalism as implemented within the relative present is no longer limited by its enumerated powers or to the decisions of the John Marshall or Rodger Taney courts; but, exclusively to the whims and inclinations of political exploiters seeking federal prerogatives.

Today, as never before, the applied ingress of the executive branch upon congressional authority jeopardizes the resulting miracle of the 1787 constitutional convention. Power has once again become the utility of the individual processor instead of a derivative of constitutional authority. The presidency has circumvented the limits of its office by eliminating the legislative processes of congress. President Obama has effectually convened his own congressional convention and appointed himself executive-in-charge.

This ideological diametric is as old as the contesting between James Madison and Alexander Hamilton. However, today the contesting is not limited to the differing of an academic or theoretical disparity.  Now, after over a hundred years of diminishing the meaningfulness of individual liberty in favor of State empowerment; our nation’s republic has effectually converted the aspiration, “of, by, and for the people,” into a governing selective of political affiliates and sponsors who will promise anything to win the next election.  And of course once elected they insist on remaining in power forever…

We Americans elected the leadership that perpetuated the nonsensical legislation; we have silently endured the overt lies of politicians. We have insisted on the perpetuation of counter-intuitive policies both domestic and foreign. We continue electing handsome faces who compose prosaic speeches with the oratorical sway of Richard Burton instead of merit-quality statespersons. Citizens willfully submit to the ambiguity of the governing process; we endorse the variant governing apparatuses who operate free of intense scrutiny. We accept the authority of the State over that of individual freedom with little regard for what we have sacrificed. We fear the very established agencies and departments that were designed to enhance and protect a citizens’ righteous wherewithal. We have allowed the creation of a governing monster and we are afraid to address the fire-breathing dragon.

So…we vote into powers those that comfort us with lies. They tell us that all will be alright…all that’s required is the trade of liberty and freedom for the promise of security.


Authored by William Robert Barber

To paraphrase the words of others “if one wants peace prepare for war,” politics is “war by other means,” and “you’ll always have that ten percent.” There are two main threats to one’s peaceful existence: The discretionary actions of nature and the violent, irrational, and chronic unreasonableness of humankind.

The assumption is that what can be done to mitigate the blatant, quantifiably harmful actions of nature is and will continue to be done. The behavioral dysfunctions of humankind are defined by the societal establishment of good and accepted behavior; such a definition however is subjective and often relative to differing perspectives.  The people of Russia for instance are responding positively to Putin’s taking of the Crimea — while Kiev and the West view the action not only as an act of illegal aggression but fear that Putin will slice-off an annex Eastern Ukraine.

The leaders Putin and Obama have conversed; they have deployed and instructed their diplomatic corps, other world leaders have added their two cents worth of advice. But as worldwide onlookers can palpably evidence treaty violations, the invoking of moral sanctity, multiple threats of economic boycotts and sanctions will not deter Putin from his purpose.  

Contention is a mainstay of human behavior. Contention provokes varied efforts to persuade; ostensibly, the objective of persuasion is to achieve consensus. The problem is that persuasion is not limited to the artfulness of what is considered rational and reasonable; persuasiveness does have a violent alternative. As historically expressed (for thousands of years) this perchance for violent expression is behaviorally pervasive; its effect is emotionally apathetic and demonstratively destructive. Nevertheless, as witnessed by the events of today’s crises of conflict this alternative tactic of persuasion remains steadfastly unavoidable. 

The administration of President Obama however is determined to establish an America of equivalence not an America of all-powerful. He is an ardent disciple of the progressive doctrinaire. He is a dangerous amoral politician. To enable policies and elections he lies and deceives. He is not bound by either promises or the constitution. He is self-vested with the righteousness of not only knowing what is best for America but he is (within his own mind) providence reckoned (elected by the people for two terms of office) and therefore specifically obligated to force his willful-omnipotent understanding of what’s best upon the nation.  

Domestically, taxes and fees along with unemployment are higher; the nation’s debt is persistent, the regulatory engine is lustful, the growth of government flourishes, and irrespective of a Republican victory in November the damage to this nation by Obama policies is very real.

Internationally, this nation’s prestige as a world power and leader has been undercut by the silliness of the president’s world-view and the insistence of his progressive brethren of implementing progressive ideals of round into a square reality.

Will conservative principles prevail in November? If not…