About Me

In writing the "About Me" portion of this blog I thought about the purpose of the blog - namely, preventing the growth of Socialism & stopping the Death Of Democracy in the American Republic & returning her to the "liberty to abundance" stage of our history. One word descriptions of people's philosophies or purposes are quite often inadequate. I feel that I am "liberal" meaning that I am broad minded, independent, generous, hospitable, & magnanimous. Under these terms "liberal" is a perfectly good word that has been corrupted over the years to mean the person is a left-winger or as Mark Levin more accurately wrote in his book "Liberty & Tyranny" a "statist" - someone looking for government or state control of society. I am certainly not that & have dedicated the blog to fighting this. I believe that I find what I am when I consider whether or not I am a "conservative" & specifically when I ask what is it that I am trying to conserve? It is the libertarian principles that America was founded upon & originally followed. That is the Return To Excellence that this blog is named for & is all about.

Monday, June 18, 2012

Eliminate The Government-Dependent Mindset Infestation

Thanks to the Night Watchman for passing along this link of a video that vividly shows the government-dependent mindset that infests over 144 million Americans.  The video shows how people Google "how do I qualify?" to learn how to get benefits like food stamps (as of U.S. fiscal year 2009 euphemistically called SNAP - Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) & make being poor the best investment in America in that low income people receive on average $10 back in federal spending for every dollar they pay in taxes.
The link came with the comment from the Night Watchman – "Talk about having no "'skin in the game.'"
Well of course these 144 million government-dependent people have plenty of skin in the game – they just don't know it.  They are just like all of us who were blessed to be born &/or live in America – every one of us has it all to lose & we have been working on losing it double time for many years.  
Since the great majority of the ever increasing government-dependent people have no immediate incentive obvious to them for changing their mindset they never consider that the current system cannot continue indefinitely as is.  Long time subscribers of these messages have read for years that we are @ or @ least are approaching the unsustainable point where we have more takers than makers.
My test is to gauge whether people I meet want to create wealth (makers) or redistribute it (takers).  The takers are winning.
But all of this can be turned around over night by releasing the American spirit & work ethic that can eliminate the budget deficit & national debt in rapid fire order if only the government would get out of the way.
BO is the champion of larger expanding government so if he is reelected we ultimately will have the biggest divide in income inequality imaginable where only a small handful of elites prosper while the rest of us all share the same socialistic underdevelopment, poverty, & misery.  Just like in 2008 we do not have a presidential electoral choice this November that will totally stop this slide – the choice once again is socialism or socialism lite.
The important thing is to build a bedrock foundation of congressional candidates who will work with Jim DeMint & against BO & the establishment Republican Party leaders.  Below is the center editorial from today's WSJ that reveals a list of just the type of people that can fool us.  Now I know that one vote does not make a bad career but some are appearing on these type of lists more & more often – like Congressman Allen West & Senator Marco Rubio (below).  I like editorials that name names.
A Tale of Two Conservatives

Sixteen Senate Republicans, including Marco Rubio, vote to preserve the sugar quota program.

One test for economic conservatives is whether they are willing to oppose constituent business interests looking for government favoritism. On that score, two recent contrasting votes by Jim DeMint of South Carolina and Marco Rubio of Florida are instructive.

Last month the Senate easily voted to reauthorize the Export-Import Bank, 78-20, a vote that was never much in doubt given the backing from business lobbies and the White House. But it's still worth saluting the 20 votes in opposition—19 Republicans and independent socialist Bernie Sanders—and especially Mr. DeMint, a rare case of a Senator voting for principle against the biggest interests in his home state.


Boeing is the largest beneficiary of Ex-Im bank taxpayer loan guarantees and it has a new plant to turn out 787s in North Charleston. General Electric and Caterpillar have major plants in South Carolina and get Ex-Im help too. Mr. DeMint went so far as to lead the charge against Ex-Im, much to the annoyance of Chambers of Commerce in the Palmetto State.

"I gave a speech to 400 Chamber members and everyone was for Ex-Im Bank," he says. "So I asked them: 'How many of you would sign your own name to this loan?' Not a single hand went up." Mr. DeMint says he voted as he did because he's concluded that "we've created a culture in Washington that has almost every major business in the country with its nose in the trough."

That includes the sugar lobby, which last week narrowly defeated a bipartisan attempt at reforming its egregious quota program that gouges American consumers to benefit a mere 5,000 or so farmers. The Senate voted 50-46 to table Senator Pat Toomey's reform bill, but the reform would have passed if not for the votes of 16 GOP Senators. (See the nearby table.)

The usual sugar beet and sugar cane state suspects dominate the list, but one name leaps out—Mr. Rubio, the freshman from Florida who won his seat in 2010 while running as a tea party favorite in opposition to the crony capitalism and government meddling of the Obama Administration.

Mr. Rubio nonetheless voted against consumers and for the big sugar-cane producers, including Florida's Fanjul family. Mr. Rubio thus voted to the left of the 16 Democrats who joined 30 Republicans in supporting sugar reform. Unlike Mr. DeMint, the Floridian was not a profile in courage on this issue, or even a profile.

The political habit of favoring big business is bipartisan, as the sugar and Ex-Im Bank votes show. If Republicans want the political credibility to reform middle-class entitlements, they had better be prepared to eliminate corporate welfare too. Kudos to Mr. DeMint for understanding this.



  1. I've always liked Marco Rubio, but I am beginning to have some doubts about him. Last week he voted to confirm Aponte as the Ambassador to El Salvador. If you remember, there was some speculation about her affair with a Cuban spy. She is also hated by many of the people in El Salvador because of her positions on social issues. They do not want her as their ambassador. Rubio voted for her confirmation with eight other Republicans. Sorry to say, John McCain and the others are not conservative Republicans, and in my opinion most of them are not even moderates. Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire was supposed to be a conservative, but that has not been reflected in some of her recent votes.

    Keep your eye on how Rubio votes.


  2. Doug - the Ex/Im vote was very telling. Too many in House and Senate are lured to crony capitalism / corporate welfare so they can get reelected. Some do come in believing in free market capitalism but become corrupted. I sense that many of these lack confidence and conviction. That is a damn shame. One solution that may help is term limits. Too bad this lost steam. We need confident leaders who will come in from private sector and represent us for 6 years only (Senators) and 4 years (2 terms for House). Longer than this and one looses touch with private economy reality. Our Founding Fathers did not envision career politicians. It is rare to find a politician today that states "I will only serve one term; I will not take money from lobbyists. I will do what is best for free market capitalism and for the economy. Then I will return to work again in the private economy".

    Yes - again we need a grass roots drive for a constitutional amendment for term limits. Let us persuade state legislatures to take this up ASAP.