Pursuit of Happiness

Has there ever been a greater divergence of opinion over the proper role of our Federal Government? Is the core role to take care of the citizens? A growing proportion of the country identifies with this philosophy. The counter philosophy promotes a role of creating and maintaining an environment for the pursuit of happiness, not assurance of happiness.

Government funds came from us. They are our funds. When the Federal Government "takes care" of us it is simply taking money from some citizens and giving their money to other citizens. Actually our socialism has grown into a more concerning circumstance. 60 cents of each dollar of cost of socialism is paid by each tax payer, while 40 cents is funded by debt.... funded by China! Worse yet, prospects for every social entitlement program is to drive accelerating growth of unsustainable debt. Independent of whether socialism is ethically good or bad, our entitlements, our socialism is an unmitigated mismanaged financial disaster, creating a shameful burden for our children, their children, and their children. The virtues or evils of socialism are subjects for a separate post.

"I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them." Thomas Jefferson with this quote expressed his fear of exactly what we have done to ourselves. Both sides can argue the role of the Federal Government, but the financial viability of our social welfare programs are clearly unsustainable and raining down damaging ramification upon every citizen.

Even the Pilgrims through their disastrous first winter quickly identified the natural flaws of the socialism/communism model. They nearly starved when all were dependent on a communal model. Once land was parceled to each family for them to fend for themselves more food was produced than could be themselves consumed. Said William Bradford, "This had very good success, for it made all hands very industrious." Socialism saps initiative. Said Bradford, "For this community (so far as it was) was found to breed much confusion and discontent and retard much employment that would have been to their benefit and comfort. For the young men, that were most able and fit for labour and service, did repine..... Common sense and experience through the ages indicates lost productivity contributes greatly to costs over and above the direct cost of the entitlement programs.

Our form of socialism has proven not to be financially viable. Europe''s form is obviously unsustainable. The Soviet Union's form was not sustainable. These are a few of many examples of the impractical financial model of socialism. Thomas Jefferson feared our system would not protect our treasury from being raided by greed for power manifested by buying votes with give aways under the guise of "taking care" of the people. It has happened. Our country is in great financial danger. Washington is unable to even begin a solution oriented coherent dialog over arguably the greatest threat to our way of life. The way forward is filled with peril, begging for an uprising of patriotic citizens sending clear minded leaders to Washington with an unquestionable mandate to bring financial sanity back and to implement structural change to protect our treasury from the inevitable return of the raiders.

Two structural and permanent changes will greatly contribute to establishing the proper function of government and help protect the people from political corruption, greed and abuse of power:

Congressional Term Limits: Overwhelmingly, voters prefer term limits. It is arguably commonsense. Term limits reduce the impact a very few senior Congressmen or Senators can have over the country for decade as is now the case. Term limits will increase competition and encourage new challengers. It will Build a ‘citizen’ Congress by driving out career politicians breaking ties to special interests. Most importantly it will improve tendencies to vote on principal. It will by default create term limits on congressional staff and bureaucracy. Through elimination of career politicians the temptation to buy votes is reduced, creating a natural reduction in wasteful federal spending, encouraging lower taxes, and smaller government. Greater candidate competition will rejuvenate voter participation in elections and get reelection rates back to near 50%, versus the current 99%. Healthy rotation in office was envisioned by the founders.

Balanced Budget / Spending Limit: Overwhelmingly, voters prefer a balanced budget amendment (BBA). It is also arguably commonsense based upon the recent horrid escalation of national debt. 15 trillion and climbing! The only way to get Congress to balance the the budget is to give them no choice. The only way to keep the President's, the Senator's, and the Representative's hands out of OUR cookie jar is to give them no choice. To prevent congress from raising taxes to continue the reckless spending practices, BBA must include a limit on spending such as 20% of GDP. For national security carefully crafted exceptions should be triggered in times of declared war to solely support the declared war. An accompanying Presidential line item veto authorization will help limit ear mark (pork) spending. Ear marks are much worse than the cost of the actual ear marks. Ear marks are routinely and regretfully used as bribes to gain votes for congressional spending bills, which would otherwise fail under votes base solely on principal.

Limiting the size of the Federal Government and returning to the Federalist principal of State's rights will lead our country back to its foundation, reestablishing the environment for the pursuit of happiness.

Roger Marksberry r.marksberry@gmail.com

Save Us from Congress!

Are Senators and Congressmen dedicated to the work of the people or is their focus self preservation? Americans consistently rate the performance of Congress low, often in single digits. I argue it is because their performance is consistenly poor. If Congress continues to structurally function as it has, how can we expect different results. Is self preservation the source of gridlock, bad legislation, too much legislation, and masssive unsustainable debt? How can this structual flaw be resolved? Term limits will dramatically mitigate opportunity to pursue self preservation and thereby eliminate the possibility of life long legislators.

Much needs to change for Congress for it to routinely function in the best interest in the country. Unfortunately parties in the majority are not naturally motivated to give up power even when change is in the best interest of the country.

Many in Congress are truly trying to perform in the best interest of our country. But too many are not, their decisions and votes, corrupted for personal gain, including willful decisions draining the national treasury under the guise of caring for the citizens. The current structure enables and perpetuates such tactics for decades.

We all know power corrupts, self preservation is a corrupting temptation, and members perpetuate the problem for decades. It seems almost common sense that it is not a good idea for members to hold office for decades and in many cases nearly their entire adult life. Presidents, governors, in many states, legislators are limited in term length.. The House fo Representatives and the United States Senate do not operate under this safeguard.

Term limits create advantage for everyone but the limited politician. It prevents anyone from holding office indefinitely dispite the funding and power at their disposal. Term limits reduce temptation for self-serving governance, increase urgency to perform for the party in power, provide proper hope for the party not in power, and force the electorate from incumbent apathy.

Is there a valid reason not to pass a contritutional amendment for Congressional term limits. Why not 12 years maximum... not more than 6 two year terms for the House and 3 four year terms for the Senate. The only huddle to term limits for Congress is for Congress to limit itself, a large challenge.

Frightened for the First Time..... Should I Be?

I am frightened of a President for the first time in my life. While fundamentally disagreeing with most of Johnson's, Carter's and Clinton's policies, they were still my President.

It's not a matter of what is said about Obama or what is said about those he has placed throughout our government. It is a matter of the words from their own mouths. Videos clips have left me speechless, shocked, astonished, astounded, bowled over, devastated, distraught, and angry. Should we be surprised considering what we know about his upbringing and associations throughout his life. No!

If you had any doubt about the intent to fundamentally change our country just view the links below. How is it possible that such people can be placed in positions of responsibility within the Executive Branch?

Is Obama the orator of orators able to manipulate, and distort in a way that is leading so many good but sadly uninformed citizens over a horrible financial and cultural cliff. Do the dots connect to validate such a charge. Let's consider a hypothesis. How could a radical, revolutionary, Communist, or Marxist possibly win the Presidency and fundamentally transform the United States. Could such a person accomplish this goal by honestly promoting those philosophies? Or would it take an orator of orators able to deceive, manipulate, trick, and distort?

Surely if you are pro Obama you do not pay much attention to his detractors; so, don't listen to detractors. Listen to Obama and some of those around him, then listen to your gut... the words are shocking!

What you are about to listen to is not an issue of party but I believe of country and family.

Van Jones, Green Jobs Czar, avowed Communist ("by August I was a Communist","the white polluters and the white environmentalists are essentially steering poisons into the people of color communities") and forced out without comment by the White House BUT replaced by Ron Bloom!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMa3l23-rRc

Ron Bloom, Manufacturing Czar - "we get the joke, we know that the free market is nonsense", "we kind of agree with Mao that political power largely comes for the barrel of a gun"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RCvQ8BSUv-g

Mark Lloyd, FCC Diversity Officer - "in Venezuela, with Chavez, really an incredible revolution" he believes that Chavez enacted "Democratic" communication by nationalizing or shutting down media!!??
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wF2C235fD7o

Anita Dunn, White House Communications Director - "two of my favorite political philosophers, Mao Tse Tung and Mother Teresa.... the two people I turn to most" Mao's political philosophy was to shot people in the back of the head... children, pregnant women, and men. Surely we all know that Mao was responsible for more deaths than Hitler or Stalin. Mao, our White House Communications Director's hero. No wonder she is complaining about Fox News.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HiBDpL2dExY

John Holdren, Science Czar and proponent of Eugenics - He believes that adequate authority exists to mandate population control under the constitution... mandatory abortion, sterilization, etc. He also proposes that animals should be able to file suit against humans.
Google John!

Obama - Does he believe in redistribution of wealth. Yes, from out of his own mouth. What is he? Is he a Socialist, Communist, or a Marxist? He is working hard to redistribute great sums of wealth. He has formed a massive team of extremists to make it happen, whether it be through stimulus, health care reform, cap and trade, regulations, or global warming... Oh, it is now Global Weather Change since warming is now cooling.

There is growing evidence that all of this is not about saving our jobs, our health, or our planet, but about fundamental transformation.... or is it about revolution? We cannot possibly afford what is being spent, so why are we moving forward so fast? Anti-capitalist revolutionaries believe the route to "Social Justice" (Communism)is to bring down capitalism under its own weight of debt by spending. Humm.... & what are we doing at an unimaginable rate? Obama's own Manufacturing Czar doesn't even believe in capitalism, but does believe in the barrel of a gun.

Is anyone else beginning to become alarmed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iivL4c_3pck