LANCELOT AND ROLAND PLUS TWO

Authored by William Robert Barber

Last night I watched the televised “Hannity” featuring Mark Levin espouse his new book “The Liberty Amendments” wherein the brilliant Levin describes the multiple abuses (offering examples layered upon examples) perpetrated upon the original intent of the Constitution by any and all that possessed the power and the means. The perpetrators were presented as having many differing ideological hues spanning specifically from 1913 to the present. However, the clear standout, the overriding persistent abusers, according to Levin, were unequivocally the Liberal Progressives and their socialist brethren.

Further in the discussion was the consensus amongst the panel of political wonks, the host, and the author that because of the precedence of law (settled legal matters), even if these maxims were established by extralegal means or simply misinterpreted judgments, correction is highly improbable to impossible. Withstanding, all participants agreed that the only alternative to correcting the wrongs and reestablishing limited federal government is to persevere, campaign, and educate, with the goal being to win over their fellow citizens. To cause the country’s citizens to reject their heretofore liberal-progressive-political-economic quasi-acceptance for the values inherent in liberty and individual freedom.   

I have not read the book; nevertheless, what I gathered from the forty-five minute program was that it is Mr. Levin’s passionate understanding that “the people,” will cajole their elected representatives to add his amendments to the Constitution. Hmm… he has more faith than I do.

Here are a few of the obstacles: Politicians are not required to tell the truth and the mainstream media conveys a political prospective regardless of the truth. One-man-one-vote does not require the voter to understand anything whatsoever. Ideological and predisposed beliefs create predeterminations that erode reexamination. Contrivance is much more interesting because the prevailing perception is that the facts are ambiguous even when the facts are well-defined. Pointedly, the predominate challenge, the one wrong that if not righted — all other efforts or concerns are for naught — is to redraft for definitive purpose the individual tax obligation owed to  the federal government. When over 45% or more Americans pay no, none, nada, in federal income tax they have no “skin in the game.” Therefore, they have no interest in the prevailing political indiscretions or if the federal government is running amok with injurious, imprudent, costly, ineffectual spending. They endure the careless, the stupid, and the nonsensical because they are not directly paying  the price of incompetence. Indeed, they are being paid not to care. This tax avoidance put forward by politicians is nothing less than buying votes and should be illegal. But here is the greatest obstacle to Mr. Levin’s righteous offering: the progressives promise what does not truly exist and the majority buys it with their votes.

Righting the wrongs of over a hundred years of statutory perversion and unconstitutionally applied procedural distortion requires a high degree of multifaceted political dexterity coupled with the courage of Lancelot and the virtuous sacrifice of Roland plus two.  In other words, a super-leader(s) must emerge from America’s Hinterland and lead the nation back to its founding values.

What are our chances?

WISHFUL THINKING

Authored by William Robert Barber

Mindboggling, bewildering, amazingly dumb, and downright ignorant is the concept of peace at anytime; much less peace in our time. The very idea that peace (as a foreign policy goal) is an attainable probability is an absolute absurdity. Realpolitik dismisses peace as outright naiveté — a dangerous strategy and a silly forethought. Yet, although, and still the intelligentsia unapologetically touts peace as its ultimate goal, the raison d’être of a nation state’s primary obligatory, and most profusely, those who profess to know just about everything (wonks of the department of state for one) pronounce peace as the moral-ethical priority of an enlightened society.    

For those of Harvard, Yale, and Princeton legacy, the very ones that underwrite, regulate, and administrate the workings of the government dismiss the available volubility of documentation to the contrary and continue to profess peace as feasible. After all, they who behold MBAs and JDs have degreed that peace is the rational extension of humanness, of intellectual enlightenment; conclusively therefore, these of Noblesse Oblige lineage (the ones that run the show) have confidently surmised: Rational deduction reasons that peace is reasonable thus attainable.

I say that peace is mythical as well as a convenient illusion void of all empirical evidence as to its attainment; further, peace as a stated policy goal is nothing more than a rhetorical utility extensively used as a reason for violent conflict; an excellent example of such rhetorical utility is WWI: “The war to end all wars.” Since humanoids learned to fashioned and bound stone to stick, millions of humans have died directly or indirectly from the purposeful misdirection of establishing peace in the name of war.

The intrinsic behavioral dysfunction that prompts one to rob, deceive, murder, and lie on an individual basis is the same — although exaggerated dysfunction that prompt nations to, under the ensign of manifest destiny, xenophobia, theocratic intolerance, ideological incongruity, or a myriad of other such ‘causes to act violently’ predicaments that render the idea of peace as a foreign policy goal impossible.  

Amongst nation states the great persuader is not kindness, personal niceties, nor offers of understanding and friendship. The great persuader is power coupled with the will to act. Power if uncoupled from the will to act disadvantages the nation with power; such a disadvantage eventually disables the persuasion of power rendering the nation in common denomination with the not-as-powerful.

The choice is self-evident: America is either the most powerful nation on earth or not. If the choice is “not” then another nation will take its place; the weaker will either submit or conflict. Prudence and analytical reality compel America to be the most powerful nation on earth. Therefore a foreign policy that is as unrealistic as the ridiculous notion that peace is an attainable goal only misdirects costly efforts, wastes resources, and corrupts time spent. Further, when one accepts peace as an attainable goal one expends treasure, resources, and blood in the hope that the particular counter-party will be converted to civil sensibility, rational deduction, stop the violent behavior, and act reasonably. The key word is hope. Hope is not a tactical or strategic policy; hope is emotional wishfulness.

My assumption is that peace as a goal is so impeded in the American psyche that my thoughts will be dismissed and disregarded; nevertheless, I have expressed my thoughts on the subject and found accordingly satisfaction in doing so. Obviously, my concern is that as Secretary Kerry and President Obama seek compromise with America’s enemies and pseudo-allies in the interest of peace the result will be diminished U. S. power while eliminating this nation’s will to act from its quiver of steal-tipped arrows.

THE PRICE OF SECURITY IS TOO HIGH

Authored by William Robert Barber

Fearfulness is frequently an injudicious facilitator of imprudent action which often results in a consequence contrary to expectancy. Fear is a tool used by politicos and oppressors. Successfully exploited it always abates liberty and increases the power of government. Fear will initiate marshal law and effectively rescind individual rights in favor of authoritarian rule. In its finality fear is a grand hoax perpetrated by the knowing,  powerful, and  ambitious to psychologically flagellate the weak, intimidate the strong, and appease their affiliates.

On 9/11 terrorists attacked this nation and thousands died. And as tragic as that day was, the real tragedy was this nation’s response — the immediate curtailment of our liberties.

Today we learned that the federal government is harvesting voluminous amounts of data on Americans because “we fear another terrorist attack”. Fear has prompted an Orwellian policy of incursion, blatant disregard of the 4th amendment of the constitution, plausible intimidation, and the blessings of congress. Now it really does not take an extraordinarily high IQ to master the idea that if a government run program was secret and the essence of secrecy required limited access, how does congress judge not only its effectiveness but also its constitutional compliance?  

Well, the fear mongers have the answer, “trust me I know what I am doing and if I don’t know what I’m doing well I personally know the guy who does”.

There have been many, many, instances of government abuse, incompetence, denial, and downright unconstitutional actions. The government is managed by human beings. The very same humans that interned Japanese-Americans after looting all of their possessions, locked up American Indians in reservations, invaded Mexico, and took Panama from Columbia. I could go on but I think my point is secure.

No, I do not trust this government  — or any government for that matter — and if I want to hold my individual liberty dear, my distrust is sensible. Please name a government, any government anywhere in all of history, that has not exampled corrupt practices, incompetent management, and served some perceived self-interest over the common good.

The Patriot Act is not patriotic; it is the injudicious imprudent action of a fearful state of mind and being.  I will not cede another word from the Bill Of Rights nor surrender more of my American breed freedoms because of a possible threat from an Islamic Jihadist.   

No, federal government, you cannot limit my liberty or freedom for the sake of fearfulness!

VOX POPULI

Authored by William Robert Barber

 

In the words of Alexis de Tocqueville:  “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.” 

 

As never before in American history the warning of De Tocqueville has been realized. This election plainly presented a classic exemplar, the quantitative consequence, of President Obama’s class warfare propaganda.  The ethnic minorities, the have-less, the welfare-dependent, the callow, the obsessive contrarians, the idealistically inclined, and the devoted liberal-progressives…  in essence an assortment of divergent special interest groups coalesced to defeat the candidate with the only viable political-economic alternative to the current economic malaise.

 

The Federal Reserve can and will print all the cash it deems necessary, congress will tax, nevertheless printing monies and increased taxation will not generate a fiscally viable economy. There are some financial-commercial realities that cannot be swept away by promises. Taxes and fees (all taxes and fees) are generated from the profits of commerce. Even those creative municipalities that feed off of total revenue instead of net profits can only successfully collect their monies if the particular private enterprise is profitable. 

 

President Obama’s second term will include the enthusiastic continuance of unions financing Democratic politicians, States with Democratic governors will excessively levy, budgetary problems of federal entitlements rhetorically regurgitated but not resolved, ObamaCare implemented at a price of fiscally disastrous effects and complications, statutorily compliant corruption will proliferate, the concept of central planning and green energy rewarded, as the constitutionally enshrined meaningfulness of federalism retrogrades into a meaningless historical-remnant.   

 

On the international front Russia and China will enthusiastically extend their influence, allies will exhibit anxiety, Iran ecstatic, Israel apprehensive; and Canada is wondering if the pipeline will ever go through.   

 

The president and his disciples will immediately focus on the next election with the ambition of returning the House to Democratic control. They will continue overtly and in Argot to personally demonize the Republican Party and its members. Obama’s Deus ex Machina magic requires his coterie of devotees to control all branches of government. By the midterm election the president must establish the means to execute the progressives’ egalitarian entitlement state and their brand of authoritarian statism.

 

The plenipotentiary ambitions of the Statist contested against those persons of conservative principles and limited government will almost immediately evolve into an indignant balkiness of will. A spectacular reminiscent of a televised Mexican Lucha Libre wherein stories of hair-pulling, spitting, and eye-gouging dominate the news media.

But no matter who does what to whom, socialism, progressivism, authoritarian statism, or a status of egalitarian entitlement will not displace the present economic malaise with the antitheses. Governmental largeness will always fail to deliver fiscal success and abate freedom from the within and the without. Obama and his progressives will, at great cost to Americans, follow the path of the entire socialists and progressives of the past — they will fail to deliver.

CAN THE AMERICAN PEOPLE GOVERN?

Authored by William Robert Barber

A question of significant concern: Can the American people adhere to the covenants of the 2012 constitution (that being the amended and present judicial interpretive of the 1789 constitution) and govern themselves? The answer is NO, the American people cannot… Well, why not?

Because… At the expense of prudent governing — and to the detriment of self-governing principles — Americans have allowed the central government to create a Byzantine operational process wherein the accepted methodology of congressional bureaucracy is opaque, confounding, and counter-intuitive. Legislation is voted into law on ideological concepts; committees of staff and appointed, not the elected, write and explain legislation to the legislators. The agencies, departments, and congressional committees of our government have literally been overrun by legalese ambiguity. Prompted by the dominance of political parties and to the joy of media outlets, both, the scurrilous and the panegyric bandy about the daily news cycle as though scheduled melodramatic programming. Governing units as a matter of routine persistently produce contrivances of misdirection and outright distortion. Citizens pay more attention to sports, games of chance, and celebrity doings than civic responsibilities.

Because… Governing is so confounding in scope and process that professional wonks disagree on the merits of legislation, rules, and regulations. Obviously, the workings of government are no longer understood by the governed; hence government has evolved into a perpetual motion machine accountable to few. The clear indicator of such a charge is government’s uncontrollable spending.    

Because… Politically inspired econometric analysis… what? Econometric analysis is the application of mathematical and statistical techniques to economic data and problems. I’m suggesting that because such analysis is tainted and besmirched with the supplemental of political gamesmanship and the constancy of ideological inclination, the sum of the collected data is at risk of never achieving definitive accuracy.  The analysis of data is considered, evaluated, and eventually summed with diametrically different results depending on the ideological beliefs of the entity conducting the analysis. In other words, if the basis of founding evidence is distorted by other than the empirical, the deductive, and the utility of logic, then the baby goes out with the dirty water.

Because… Many within the electorate have succumbed to mimicking the ideals of minimalism. They have allowed pretty words and handsome smiles to delete the application of prudence, due diligence, askance of the elected, honesty, and honor. They have traded individual liberty and the meaningfulness of freedom for the naïve, even childlike acceptance that government will render to each and every American a panacea society. A significant percentage of Americans have rejected self-reliance, existentialist principles, and the steadfast adherence to the vital a-priori principle of Americanism: Never subordinate one’s individual freedom, in form or function, to king or government.

We may never regain the means to self-govern; but, if there is interest in such, this election of 2012 would be an excellent measure of public sympathy for one or the other…

A REPUBLIC IF YOU CAN KEEP IT

Authored by William Robert Barber

“At the close of the Constitution convention in Philadelphia on September 18, 1787, a Mrs. Powel anxiously awaited the results, and as Benjamin Franklin emerged from the long task now finished, asked him directly: “Well Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?” “A republic if you can keep it” responded Franklin.”

Simply defined a republic (of the United States of America) is a constitutionally derived government wherein the power of governance is held by the citizens entitled to vote directly or indirectly through their elected representatives.  This nation’s constitution was constructed specifically to deny the executive branch omnipotent power; congress was purposefully divided into two houses of representation and the Supreme Court, though justices require senate approval, was structured to avoid political influence or pressure by having the justices serve life terms. The uniquely American system of checks and balances was tantamount with the 1789 concept of limited government power wherein each branch of government was restrained and purposely did not reign supreme over the other.

After a couple of hundred years plus, the response to Franklin’s challenge to Mrs. Powel is that the nation could not keep its status as the republic of original intent: As with all preceding governments since ancient Rome, original intent was converted, dismissed, and resubmitted with caveats and amendments or replaced by the finesse of legalized sleight-of-hand.

There are many causes, reasons, and excuses as to the loss of original intent… but if one was to be extracted from the many to form the critical it would be the following:

The first is the inclination of those that govern to fashion governing in the image of their ideology first and the tenets of the constitution last; and if not persuaded firstly by their ideology, then it is their personal perspective of righteousness, their egocentric wanting enthusiastically seeking applause; or their craving for immortal achievement and recognition.

There are numerous examples of extra-constitutional actions by the elected; forthwith are two:

Presidents John Adams and his Federalist within congress enacting the unconstitutional Alien and Sedition’s Act, and Thomas Jefferson affirming the Louisiana Purchase without the approval of the Senate; all such actions undercut and evaded their oath to uphold the constitution. The reason for such extra-constitutional action is obvious: The elixir of power dominates over many a president and congressperson, not to mention those non-elected appointees that wield immense influence within the authority intrinsic to governess. The will to ‘get it done,’ be it Machiavellian or the sweetness of rhetorical style, will always dominate the constitutional process; therein lies the issue of concern and the cause for the dismemberment of the republic as originally conceived.

The second of causes, reasons, and excuses is taxation; as so eloquently stated by Daniel Webster, “the power to tax is the power to destroy.” In 1913 the 16th amendment to the constitution was ratified and the meaningfulness of the republic of original intent was diverted into the sector of a republic awaiting permanent deletion. When this amendment was adopted, wherein the congress shall have the power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source…the idea of limited government died and the concept of forever-encroachment by the governing authorities on personal liberties and freedom began. 

The unlimited capacity of government to extract any percentage of a citizen’s personal income affords government a predominance that surely was never thought possible by the Founders. The ability for unlimited taxation far exceeds the government authority required for implementing and delivering services. Because of the 16th amendment to the constitution taxation is a weapon used by congress and the executive branch to subordinate and compel citizens to its will.

The harvesting of tax revenue by necessity creates a coercive extension of the federal, as well as, State power. But it is the distribution of taxes collected that enables political, economic, and societal corruption. Political favoritism is always a player when taxes collected is distributed. This corruption could have never have been a factor if the 16th amendment had NOT been ratified.

Evidence suggest that the larger the government the more grandiose and entrenched its bureaucracy. Correspondingly, a government other than one limited in scope, power, and means will always, unavoidably, abate the ethos of individualism; such a government will obligingly retard personal liberty and freedom. The government’s ability to tax at will has aggravated the sagacity of The Bill of Rights; it has shifted the ultimate power of governess from the people to the government and therefore from a republic to one of statism.

The third cause, reason, and excuse for the loss of the republic’s original intent has been because of the explicit exploitation of governmental operations by the legal and political class. It is these practitioners of the dark arts that have intentionally interfused the process of legalize-ambiguity into the mainstream of the legislative result. Regulators have lobbied politicians to purposefully injection enigmatic language within the nation’s laws so to establish themselves (the regulators) as the ultimate arbitrator of the law’s meaningfulness. All of these actions were and are intentionally designed by those in power, those close to those in power, and the always looking out for themselves appointed government bureaucrats charged with the tasks of transforming the simple and mundane into the complicated and extra-ordinary.  

The forth and the most notorious reason for the loss of the republic is the apathy of the ordinary citizen. The average citizen of a republic must participate in the national debate and they rarely do. They must be concerned with the political events and feel an obligation to be engaged and informed nevertheless with noted exceptions the voting populous sit on the sidelines seemingly satisfied to be enchanted by the spectacle whiles feeding on bread, beer, and games.

So no, Doctor Franklin, we could not keep the republic of 1789; indeed, the federal government of 2012 would be unrecognizable to the Founders…

DEDICATED TO LIBERAL PROGRESSIVES

Authored by William Robert Barber

“I am Barack Obama and I endorse this message,” by righteous continuance should actually  say, “I know the truth of the matter (regarding this commercial) is distorted to suit focus group interpretation, well, in reality this commercial message is much more than a clever distortion of the truth — it’s an outright lie. But the folk in Peoria will not fact-check the scurrilous charge and besides, the goal is reelection not truthfulness.” The campaign for reelection is not making declarations (against or for) under oath or penalty of perjury; indeed, the statutory rules do not apply. Campaigning for elective office accepts outright lies as overstatements or understatements of the truth, understandable hyperbole, a moral and ethical ‘get out of jail’ pass; in other words, politicians are excused from the truth of the matter.  

“I am,” the president concedes, “thankful that the media is ideologically in lockstep to my political ideals and cannot imagine the challenge to my reelection if this bias in my favor was not so. Nevertheless,” the president continues, “it’s not as if the people do not understand my political and economic ideals; after all, I am a Chicago politician and I have been president for almost four years.”

I think that the liberal progressives believe that their ideology is one of enlightenment, that their understandings are above the chaos of the mundane and societal ordinary; they believe in President Obama and accept that he is a leader of vision and uncanny insight.

The president therefore acknowledges that he is a harbinger. He is duty-bound despite popular resistance and even if contrary to the constitution, he is compelled to act in the interest of the people. In his teachings (speeches) to the populous, President Obama has taught us that a majority of issues and legislative concerns are beyond the intellectual comprehension of the common citizen. Consequentially, at least half the people are instinctual followers, subordinate to the thesis of his teachings, and hence reasonable. But there is the troublesome other half or so; they do not understand what is in their best interest (the ones that pay federal income taxes) and resist the president’s decisions. They are, as President Obama has identified, contrarians for no other cause than to be difficult. The president justifiably calls these persons ignoramuses inclined to the ruse of arrogance. They are obstinately opposed to what has been decided (after careful consideration by President Obama and his confederates) to be in their best interest. The president understands their cultural and societal shortcomings demonstrated by their clinging to bibles, guns, and antiquated distinct American beliefs.

Liberal progressives and the president understand that corporate corruption is ubiquitous; that corporations are prompted by a greed quotient to the edges of the insatiable. The president is wholly cognizant that business is inclined to put profit in front of social justice. He has ordered government regulators to keep an ever firmer grip on businesses’ constancy of striving to make more money for insiders and shareholders while not paying their “fair share” of taxes. These companies — we all know which they are — lead by capitalist seeking to undermine and eventually disband unions, are resisting “change we can believe in.” They must be stopped.

The president is at the bare minimum a liberal progressive who espoused a European socialistic way of life. But no matter what he or his confederates do, they cannot put the round into the square and maintain the circle of round. Government is reliant on private businesses for taxes; if private businesses employ fewer, less individual taxes are collected. If government does not cut its cost of operating by half, the running of services rendered, whether these services are good or nonsensical, will cost more than net tax revenue. Good intentions can only print so much fiat currency before the faith in its value is eroded. 

Although reality can be deferred, it will always win over pretense and wishfulness; in the ultimate finality, the expenditures of status quo governing is unsustainable. So WAKE UP, AMERICA! Vote conservative… and end this president’s bid for reelection!

OUTSOURCING — ANTI-AMERICAN OR A CRIME? REALLY?!

Authored by William Robert Barber

Outsourcing seems to be the bone of contention between the political clans Obama and Romney. For inexplicable reasons (well, it seems inexplicable only to me), the idea, concept, and practice of outsourcing is anti-American or counter to the working peoples of America… or something like that. The supposition is that outsourcing is counter to America’s economic interest. My assumption is that (obviously I am wrongheaded) every able bodied individual with an 8th grade education would understand that trade is international. That American companies are in every geographic sector of the world and correspondingly, international (non-American) companies are operating in America; outsourcing is not only commonplace, it is the international business norm.

American companies operating in a United Europe can only operate in those countries if they are duly licensed and compliant to domicile rules and regulations. So in Germany, IBM is a German company. The currency is €uro and the labor force is predominately German. Such is the circumstance for every country that for example Procter and Gamble operates within the global economy… Is that outsourcing?

This entire argument is totally stupid. The president willfully and with purposeful intent internationally outsource(d) stimulus funds: he invested in Brazilian oil exploration, the World Bank, and International Monetary Fund; besides the State Department spends billions in foreign aid supposedly to garner commercial support, and through the UN’s corruptive means & ways the US sends billions of dollars, willy-nilly, all over the world.

Rome is burning and Obama wants to discuss when Romney left Bain Capital… and in his defense, Romney cannot muster up the truth of the matter.

The problem within the EU is not whether austerity or growth is the answer; the problem is its policy of social solidarity since post WWII. The issue at hand is satisfying an addiction to a belief that entitlement is a basic human right. The enormous social security and entitlement promises made over successive political administrations was founded on the premise that borrowing into the future was the god sent economic surety. People wanted to believe that lifelong protection was feasible, and most importantly that such an entitlement would not infringe on their personal liberty and freedom. So they baked the cherry pie à la mode and ate it all… now what? Wait a minute, isn’t that the issue at hand here in the good ole USA?

There are those that believe that the financial burden must now fall on those that have. No matter if you attained your wealth by the sweat of one’s brow and the risk of one’s own monies, the wealthy are to share their wealth with those that have less. Ideally, this dividing of wealthy resources should go on until everyone is denominated to less rather than more. For the liberal progressives this is the perfect example of fairness…let’s call it righteous fairness.

If spreading the wealth is slowed down by those nasty conservatives, there is always inflation. Negating the U. S. Congress Act of 1792 that declared currency debasement a felony punishable by death because it constituted theft from the citizenry. These very same suggest that inflation is an alternative that either is commensurate with spreading the wealth or certainly an economic model valued enough to implement at will.

Obama and Romney both graduated from Harvard with a degree in something or other; nevertheless, one blast (knowing otherwise) outsourcing as counter to America’s economic interest and the other can’t seem to grasps the reins of deductive logic to declare outsourcing; simply put, in the interest of America as well as a by-product of international trade. I think both should sue the university and get their tuition money refunded. Neither one has learned anything at Harvard…

THE EROSION OF INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY

Authored by William Robert Barber

The Constitution of 1789 has since its affirmation been parsed, freely interpreted, redefined, and adjudicated as well as having its thesis, spirit — even its contextual edicts all together! — subordinated to whim of presidential executive order. The original ideal of limited government has been confiscated, individual liberty subjected, the power of governmental taxation judged unlimited, and for businesses the freedom to act severely curtailed by appointed regulators. This nation is evolving from a nation of laws to one of men; the amount of enforcement discretion (of existing laws) is held in the hand of a few.  

Federal agencies and departments ignore, circumvent, and deceive the orders of their congressional supervisors; process has displaced truth telling, attorneys have disabled the simplicity of truthfulness, and President Obama will make any promise, break any promise, manipulate half-truths, lie, falsify, distort, and deceive in order to win reelection.

Instead of adhering to the constitutional mandate of oversight, writing and passing a budget, congress,  particularly over the last century, has ceded much of its original constitutional authority to the executive branch. Indeed, recent history suggests that congress prefers contentious contrarianism and loyalty to political party over constructive legislative action. Federalism,  checks & balance, enumerated, implied, and expressed powers — the initial cornerstone of The Constitution — is subject not to literal interpretation but the whimsical of ideologues and the strength of their power base. Like a soap opera appealing to advertisers and the flighty emotions of a public overwhelmed by events difficult to comprehend, news reporting, more than ever before, is ideologically biased. The ‘free press’ has not only taken ideological sides, similar to a Hollywood production it writes, directs, produces, and presents the news from an entertaining opinion only perspective.

Unequivocally congress, often covertly, sometimes overtly, but always with purposeful intent, has neglected its direct responsibilities. The elected rely on legal opinions, unelected staff, a multitude of appointed attorneys, and lobbyists to write legislation; the elected need not read nor understand the very laws they vote for or against.  The administrative process is more important than what is being administrated. The game of chessman-craft has replaced Washingtonian leadership. Politicians and the gamesmanship of politics supersede good-sense; appointed regulators instead of legislators discern the meaningfulness of laws. Government apparatuses specifically designed to discombobulate transparency, purposefully create a wholly ambiguous bureaucratic process… all the while the size and power of the federal government is enhanced. The idea of statesmanship, public service in the interest of the nation, has been eclipsed by deviously crafty practitioners of politics whose only interest is retaining or attaining office.

Government has enabled an economy founded on the ridiculous premise that borrowing can substitute for organic “buy/sell” transactions; clearly, the circulation of borrowed monies derived from printing fiat currency utilizing the government as the costly intermediary distributor at the cost of rising deficits is absurd.

Government cannot create jobs — its role is much simpler: Do no harm. Nevertheless, congress led by nape-of-the-neck by the office of the presidency (of both parties) has progressively insisted on federal-funded stimuli as an economic policy. Recently, such funding was shrouded under the heading of “shovel-ready infrastructure,” public-employment support for States, and sustaining or favoring a variety of union initiatives; I say balderdash. This economic stimulus has more to do with rewarding political confederates, enabling the election of Democratic or Republican brethren, and playing a tune that placates or pays off their constituents than encouraging fiscal growth.   

What this nation requires (and that will never happen) is a constitution convention; a reestablishing of maxims that reinforce the Founders’ original intent: Limited government. However, in real terms the only true alternative to the chaos of President Obama’s liberal progressivism-socialism-elitism is to capture congress and the presidency. We’ll all see soon enough if the 50% of the voting public who pay no federal taxes, the Hispanics, Americans of African descent, and unionist favor the Obama continuance by voting for their hero…

SEEKING ANOTHER GEORGE WASHINGTON

Authored by William Robert Barber

There is an instinctive veracity that defines and distinctly identifies a leader. A leader, in the interest of attaining sustainable consensus, utilizes the persuasive qualities of prudence; a leader diligently administers the doctrine of good sense principles; a leader applies an assertive enunciation of deductive analysis; a leader so to articulate the solution, is forthright in discernment.

Where there is no leader(s) to rise above the chaos, to stand, separate, and distinguishable, as in the case of the current congress, followers tend to dilly-tally; they, as if a leave that falls from a branch, oscillate until the stronger wind vectors the descend. Followers devoid of a leader believe in short-cuts. If challenged to pronounce their bearings, they willfully concede to the effectual of the prevailing opinion. They have a tendency to huddle while espousing, with timidity, some populist fancy believing that if they just bandy words about, style and grace will suffice. Well, the contrivances of the leaderless are imaginatively multi-faceted. But for sure without a leader in congress good sense is eroded and displaced by fickleness, the governing process becomes an amoral corruptive normative; eventually, the constancy of legislative compromise deletes the meaningfulness of principles, precedence substitute’s the need for decision making, and bureaucracy impairs innovation.

Today the governing from Washington is renowned for the dilution of individual responsibility. The elected defer their individual responsibilities within the opaque decision-making enigma of governing by committee. The imaginative attorney, the harbinger-economist, and the deflector qualities of a rhetorically enhanced politician all add additional buffers so that an individual politician rarely needs to accept personal responsibility. Maybe history has been so distorted by the victor or pitifully dramatized by the loser, that even the idea of leadership is now nothing but a faint memory. Certainly, many of our politicians, in all levels and sorts have forgotten that the highest priority of public service is to serve the public good. Not to raise capital for the next campaign, create personal wealth-prestige, faithfully serve their political party, and have popular celebrities as friends.

In order to be declared a leader one requires followers; surely, not the most profound of deductions. In the early days, leaders were not difficult to measure. In other words, leaders were in front. The follower’s sensed the up close and personal sighting, hearing, intuitional and intuitive smell of a leader’s prudent tenacity. The leader’s identity was behavior-apparent; courage palpable.

In today’s world a political leader is distanced in the physical being, although technology has its (contrasting to the days of old) enhancements, the apparatus of government and the operating of governing are ambiguous, aloof, and disconcerting. The leader is no longer in front. There is no obligatory to demonstrate independence, sovereignty, and spontaneity. The pseudo-leader(s) of today are required to raise funds so to attain or retain office, look like GQ models, and speak with stylistic elocution.

Nevertheless, in the days of old as with the present, genuine leadership is recognized by one intrinsic absolute: A leader’s judgment must effectuate a positive consequence. This result, this requirement, this one distinctive-discernible-obligatory, this steadfast definitive must-do of a leader is success, achievement, and or victory.

Despite conduct and mannerisms seemingly to the contrary, Americans, traditionally are a result oriented society. Granted, in America, an increasingly heterogeneous nation but with deep and vibrate homogeneous instincts exceptions are a constant. Nevertheless in the majority respectful of nuances and subtleties that are commingled with intermediate causative expressions of anxious withdrawal, Americans will not tolerate failure. Nor will its citizens accept the sophist blend of speciousness and deception. There is no substitute for success. Withstanding the efforts of liberal progressive ideals and the nanny state influences on this country’s laws and culture America is not a: Pathetic, victimized, and aggrieved culture.

The conservative movement needs and requires a stalwart congressional brand of leadership, one that leads from the front. America necessitates a leadership of dynamic vision, leader(s) with the wherewithal to stand confident and sovereign; possessing a willful personality coupled with an inner sense of purposefulness, leadership that persuades others, leadership that establishes a political consensus of common rationale. Leadership that can defeat President Obama…