Vanishing Freedoms

“That government is best which governs least.” – Thomas Paine

The evidence of destructive liberal policies are all around us in our once great dynamic and energetic cities… cities such as Detroit, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, New York, Chicago, Washington D.C., Los Angeles to name a few. Most of these municipalities and their states have been governed for decades by liberal progressives that promote a larger government, supported by higher taxes, excess spending and general policies that are unfavorable to family, and business and industry that supply the jobs needed for a financially viable, healthy and vibrant economy. Prosperity and vitality has been replaced by slums and despair.

Curiously, in an added footnote, many of these cities and states are union heavy localities, who for many years have supported the Democrat Party and its policies. But that’s a discussion for another time.

The decay and devastation has just accelerated since the ‘New Deal’ and ‘Great Society’ initiatives, especially in the black community. As an example, North Omaha (Omaha’s black community) was once a flourishing and prosperous area of commerce that has since struggled to recapture its once thriving and proud history. This common scene has been duplicated in many major cities across our country.

It’s true that the racial turmoil of the late 60’s, in conjunction with the destruction of many of the local business establishments helped devastate the commerce that was so prevalent in these specific communities, as well as other prominent cities around the nation. Thankfully, that sad period in our nation’s history is mostly behind us. The pigment of ones skin should never, or ever be an excuse for the failure of an individual to prosper… and our country has done much to remedy that societal problem.

Additionally though, I believe the implementation of malevolent Federal entitlement programs and hurtful policies that contribute to ongoing social decay actually impaired businesses and the people from becoming more affluent, self-sufficient and successful.

Crime, poverty, social unrest and lack of community continue to haunt these particular neighborhoods. Breakup of the family unit is prevalent and commonplace.

The people that reside in these affected municipalities have become more dependent upon government solutions and handouts which stifle ambition, resourcefulness and the incentive to succeed on their own.

It is imperative that our citizens begin to examine more closely the ‘results’ of these harmful policies, and not just the promised government solutions or espoused ‘intentions’ of our political leaders.

Remember, government does not produce our nation’s wealth… it just confiscates it, redistributes it and consumes wealth that is produced by the achievers of our nation.

In addition, if industry, corporations and business cannot afford to stay in business because of burdensome regulations and taxes within that environment, they permanently leave or close their doors, unable and unwilling to hire the additional workers to grow their businesses.

This is currently being demonstrated in states such as California, Michigan, New York and New Jersey, where there is a mad dash by industry and individuals to leave these locations to more business friendly states with lower taxes, and to alternate environments where jobs and opportunity are more plentiful.

Without a healthy environment for the economy and crucial job creation, the citizens cannot financially support themselves or their communities. Neighborhoods collapse into disrepair and are no longer able to sustain its people. The city and state lose a vital tax base for needed revenues that power their local economies.

Without the promise of jobs, the citizens resort to crime and unproductive activities that not only hurt their neighborhoods, but also to the state and the country as a whole. Instead of reversing these detrimental policies, the city, states and federal government perpetuate the problem by governmental hand-outs to those downtrodden that are affected by these expensive and unhelpful policies.

This has become a vicious downward cycle with ever increasing taxes and spending to solve this expanding problem. With no hope for a future, and continuous monetary assistance from government entities, these affected people lose all hope for self-reliance, ambition and incentive is crushed along with self-respect and the ability and desire to succeed.

The individual becomes a sloth… a ward of the state and an easy targeted constituency for the progressive cause.

Instead of reducing the size of government, and excess government spending, supporting individual and corporate tax cuts, economic incentives and creating a favorable environment for commerce and job creation… now local governing bodies around the nation and the Federal Government’, led by progressive leadership, is enacting injurious fiscal and social policies, then taking them to the entire nation for implementation.

However, the increase in crime and destructive activities cannot, and should not be blamed totally on economic reasons. There has been a larger fundamental shift in culture from my younger years.

Most of the families who lived in my neighborhood during my youth were of modest financial means too, but a vast majority didn’t resort to criminal acts or destructive behavior on account of their impoverished conditions. In fact, this form of restrained social behavior was also exhibited during the ‘Great Depression’ years in the U.S. as a whole, where the people survived on much less than what the people do today.

Our societal decline has been caused by factors other than mere economics. It has been a basic breakdown of our long held traditions and values that once supported our American culture and families, and all willfully supported by our current progressive government and their damaging initiatives.

As a people we continue to fight this decline using ineffective means, such as throwing and squandering massive amounts of money at social problems, when what we face are deep cultural and philosophical problems that cannot be solved by only monetary means.

As a country we face a crisis of the soul and societal direction.

It may be harsh but true, but I believe the majority of our people now know the ‘change’ that was promised us by this current radical far-left wing government was just a sales pitch, an illusion… and outright propaganda designed to build a imaginary Utopia… which can never be built.

In our soul searching… do our people continue to subscribe to the damaging progressive agenda of the last several decades… or do we re-adopt the plan of our country’s Constitutional founding? That is, ethical, limited and responsive government… governed by the people, instead of by non-representing representatives and bureaucrats.

And lastly, are ‘we the people’ willing to again follow proven, long-held traditions and the laws of a civil society that are just and forthright, in other words… one that’s guided by principle and morality.

The healthy change that is needed won’t be an easy transition for our citizens, and time is running out quickly for our country.

In fact…the time to choose is nearly upon us…

Now, we’ve all heard of Sonia Sotomayor, and some of her highly controversial remarks, but should those controversial remarks hold her from being confirmed?

Let’s first look at what her job would be. According to Wikipedia (which is sometimes useful):

“A supreme court, also called a court of last resort or instance, court of final appeal or high court, is in some jurisdictions the highest judicial body within that jurisdiction’s court system, whose rulings are not subject to further review by another court. The designations for such courts differ among jurisdictions. Courts of last resort typically function primarily as appellate courts, hearing appeals from the lower trial courts or intermediate-level appellate courts.”

Note, that nowhere in that does it say that the court has anything to do with policy making, or law making decisions does it? Now, without getting into the dry, and long winded explanation from our founders as to what the Courts are for, let me sum it up in this: “The Court system is the 3^rd power in a check and balance system. It is to interpret the law regarding whatever case is in front of it.” Certainly, if we had 3 bodies in our government that could create policy and law, our system would be off balance. Thus, it is only Congress’s job to create policy.

I would think understanding your job, and the responsibilities of your job, would be critical to being hired; especially for such a powerful position. However, as shown in this video clip (and on YouTube) she obviously believes that it is her job to create policy. Now, this would be fine in some other country, but this isn’t how America is run. Obviously, she doesn’t understand her job.

You would think, that if you were interviewing someone for the highest court in this Nation, that you would want answers to crucial questions that she may face as a Supreme Court Judge. Yet when asked things that we, the America public, find to be hot topics, she avoids answering the questions. Now some may think that this is a minor issue, but would you hire someone who wouldn’t answer your question about whether or not they were a felon? Or had stolen from an employer? Or if they even supported the widgets that you produced and sold? Obviously she fears that her opinion will be out of step with what a majority of the American public believes, so she chooses to keep dynamite topics out of reach. She can’t risk a loud public outcry to stop her confirmation.

We’ve heard all these amazing stories about her past, how she grew up, her gender, and her ethnicity, yet do any of these answer the questions as to who she is and how she will rule on cases? No, they don’t. We hear about how she considers herself a “wise Latina,” yet why doesn’t even she say that she is a wise American? She wasn’t born in Puerto Rico, she was born in the Continental United States. She’s a citizen. She’s an American. So why the race card? Why the gender card? Why should we care what color/sex/height/weight she is and not just care that she is an American?

It is where she stands on issues, and what her character is that is most important, and I would have to assume that intelligent people on both sides of the aisle would agree with me on that. So why would we want to support someone who obviously believes that the law should FORCE all men to be equal based on race? Our country and government isn’t here to make all people equal, it is to treat them all as equals. What that individual does with the base of being treated like everyone else is up to them. When she withheld a promotion from all firemen, because there weren’t enough “African-American’s” that scored well on the test, she not only created a racial divide, but she withheld rights from men who earned that promotion. How equal and fair is that?

When one is called a bully by her peers and coworkers, even before she is appointed to be Obama’s first pick for the Supreme Court, you have to question her character. Is she really going to be fair and use sound judgment? Or will she coerce, and push here way through decisions and cases to get what her personal agenda wants? Even after the Supreme Court (the very court she is “applying for”) decided that the 2^nd Amendment is most assuredly a personal right that is not only federal, but extends to states as well, she ignored their decision and many decisions made before them in various cases, and “…held that the Constitution does not protect the right to keep and bear arms against infringement by state and local governments.”
When the 14^th Amendment specifically {imposed new restrictions on the States, forbidding them to abridge the “privileges or immunities” of American citizens or to “deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.”} – RCP

So where does that leave us? We obviously have someone who believes their background, gender, and race should be of matter to her confirmation. She’s a bully who doesn’t understand the job she is eager to start, and has knowingly made decisions that are in direct violation of what the VERY COURT she is awaiting to be a part of. Remember folks, there is no term limit on Supreme Court Judges. Once they are in, they are in until they choose to retire. Is this really the type of person we want hearing the most important cases in this country? Or do we as the American people deserve a judge with less personal agenda and bias? Or do we want someone who knows the duties of their position, and interprets the law with a clear, and un-biased mindset.