Fighting to Preserve Liberty in America
Photo by Neil T
I had no idea. I thought that runaway spending was a bad thing. I know that in business as well as in our personal lives when we borrow and spend far beyond the amount of money we take in, trouble comes calling. How did I get it so mixed up?
While we remember those who gave their lives for our freedom this Memorial Day weekend, let us not ignore the efforts of our own government to take away our rights under the Second Amendment.
I still find myself in awe of our Founding Fathers who created our form of government. The competing ideas that they sifted through to come up with our Constitution and the safeguards in it is wondrous. The designs upon it by the progressives is by equal measure disturbing.
httpvh://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U4KQUs9Xms4&hd=1
In a “lightening round” where Kirsten Gillibrand and her opponent Joe DioGuardi answered the moderator’s question with only a yes or a no, proved interesting. Among the things she revealed were:
Tomorrow is the New York State Republican Primary. We go to the polls to choose our candidates who will go up against the Democrats in November. This is an important election and an important turning point for our country. New York is a deep blue state and the Republican party seems to be part of the problem rather than part of the solution. The candidates that they often put forth are more likely to make Republicans throw up their hands and stay home on election day than turn out and vote.
We have seen the hope and change of the Obama administration and it scares the hell out of many Americans. The change we need is to turn out the “go along to get along” crowd and put in true reformers. At Tea Party meetings I encounter more and more New York conservatives who say they are tired of hiding their beliefs. They used to keep their political views to themselves because they feared repercussions from their employers, their customers, their schools, but they are tired of it. They tell me they are coming out of the closet.
We need to embrace this view. It may mean we lose some races like the special election in New York’s 23rd Congressional district, where the Republican bosses picked Dede Scozzafava, who after falling behind Doug Hoffman, the Conservative candidate, in the polls, dropped out and endorsed the Democrat. It is time to stand and be counted. Liberty’s Life Line makes the following endorsements.
New York’s First Congressional District
In New York’s First Congressional District, Liberty’s Life Line endorses Randy Altschuler. Randy came out early and often to challenge incumbent Congressman Tim Bishop and Speaker Nancy Pelosi on their reckless spending. He has articulated a conservative view on the major issues that we face and he is a free market conservative. Christopher Cox has a number of positions that are similar to Randy Altschuler, but instead of focusing on explaining how he would govern and why he is the better candidate, he chose the low road to attack his fellow Republicans in a mudslinging campaign that angered numerous voters. Mr. Cox also promotes a protectionist point of view, rather than a free market point of view and he seems confused about what the job of Congressman entails. In one of his ads he talks about putting Suffolk County taxpayers first. If he were running for County Executive, that would be fine, but a Congressman cannot put his constituents ahead of any other taxpayers. Federal tax laws should affect all Americans equally, and where they don’t they should be changed so that they do.
George Demos’ campaign is verging on the desperate. His positions on his web site are little more than platitudes and he has chosen to make the centerpiece of his campaign social issues that are not what the majority of the voters are concerned about right now. We are heading toward a debt crisis, and Mr. Demos oddly chose to run on an issue that will let the incumbent change the subject from the economy.
New York Senate versus Kirsten Gillibrand
Liberty’s Life Line endorses David Malpass for United States Senate for the seat currently held by Kirsten Gillibrand. Mr. Malpass has more experience at the federal level having worked in the Reagan administration. He also understands that New York has, for years, paid more money in taxes to Washington than New York has gotten back in government money. Yet every year Sentators Schumer and Gillibrand vote for more spending and more programs that New Yorkers will fund and others will reap the rewards. Mr. Malpass understands that the answer is not to fight for a bigger share of the pie for New York, but to shrink the pie and eliminate unnecessary programs and spending. Mr. Blakeman has relied more on imagery in his campaign and attacks on Mr. Malpass rather than focusing on how he would govern and therefore be the best choice for the Senate. Mr. DioGuardi seems to advocate the same old ways of doing business. For example, he advocates “Paygo” which was the tool Democrats invented to force tax increases as new programs were added to the economy and which the Wall Street Journal described as “kind of budget gimmick that gives gimmickry a bad name.” We need straight forward shrinking of government not better tools to monitor how badly it is being done.
New York Senate versus Chuck Schumer
Liberty’s Life Line endorses Jay Townsend for United States Senator for the seat currently held by Chuck Schumer. Both Mr. Townsend and Mr. Gary Berntsen have strong national security views, are for tax reduction and reduced spending. Mr. Townsend’s positions seem to be more thoroughly developed. For example, he is for the repeal of ObamaCare and in its place he supports some common sense methods to reduce the cost of delivering health care without spending $1 trillion. Mr. Berntsen doesn’t address health care on his website. Mr. Townsend also has pledged to ban all earmarks, which are basically the way incumbents bribe their constituents to send them back to Washington. Replacing Chuck Schumer will be a tough challenge so we need to put forth the best candidate we can.
New York State Governor
Liberty’s Life Line endorses Rick Lazio for governor. Although Carl Paladino has captured the anti-incumbent energy and had energized people to come out and support him, Rick Lazio has a concrete plan on how he would attack the issues. New York State government is so broken, Life Line could see that an outsider like Mr. Paladino could just be hamstrung and stalled by a legislature that is vehemently opposed to him. Think Arnold Schwarzenegger in California, who came in on a re-call election to turn things around but ended up being the one turned around. Mr. Paladino, as a CEO, is coming from an environment where he calls the shots, in Albany he will have to work with the legislature to get things done and it will take him a little while to figure out what buttons to push. Mr. Lazio has legislative experience as a Congressman, and has thought through his plan in sufficient detail that it might actually work. Mr. Paladino has moved the debate which is a major victory and if he loses the primary Life Line hopes he will support Mr. Lazio. Likewise, if he should prevail, we all must get behind him to defeat Mr. Cuomo in November.
In baseball they call it a brush back pitch, a high hard one. It lets the batter know that they don’t own home plate, and if they try to get too comfortable there they may be inviting a little “chin music.” Jim Bunning, Republican Senator from Kentucky and a Hall of Fame baseball pitcher with a perfect game on his resume, just gave the Democrats a brush back and they don’t like it one bit.
Out of Control Spending
You would have to be Rip Van Winkle not to know that spending is out of control and America is speeding toward bankruptcy. President Obama and Nancy Pelosi have tried to hoodwink the country by implementing what is called “Paygo” short for Pay As You Go. The idea is that you cannot spend money without first funding it either through cutting spending somewhere else or raising taxes. The last element is the real reason Democrats support it, so that they would be “forced” to raise taxes. Here is how the Wall Street Journal described Paygo back in June.
The truth is that paygo is the kind of budget gimmick that gives gimmickry a bad name. As Mr. Obama knows but won’t tell voters, paygo only applies to new or expanded entitlement programs, not to existing programs such as Medicare, this year growing at a 9.2% annual rate. Nor does paygo apply to discretionary spending, set to hit $1.4 trillion in fiscal 2010, or 40% of the budget.
The Democrats passed Paygo to appear fiscally responsible. Jim Bunning merely called them on it. He is not opposed to spending the money. He has the courage, though, to stand up and say, Mr. President we’re broke, and we are accountable to the American people to be good stewards of the money they give us to run this government.
“If we can’t find $10 billion to pay for something that we all support, we will never pay for anything on the floor of this U.S. Senate,” he said. – Jim Bunning, Floor of the U.S. Senate, 3/1/2010
Immediately was heard much wailing an gnashing of teeth, that the lone Republican, had the temerity to challenge the “flexibility” of the Democrats to apply their rules willy nilly to tighten their grip on their power while trying to appear like the kindly nannies they really are. Rules are passed to much fanfare in front of the cameras and then ignored with a scoff or a sneer, when they really mean something.
Gimmicks Instead of Guts
Democrats have proved incapable of controlling their spending. With the mad push of profligacy that came with winning the Presidency and both houses of Congress with large margins, they now find themselves unable to dial it back without an intervention or a rehabilitation program. So they pass Paygo, and ignore it; convene a debt reduction commission and name Andy Stern of the SEIU union to it. If that is not a clue to what’s coming I don’t know what is. What does a labor union president know about reducing debt? All they know how to do is take someone else’s money and put it in their own pockets, so you can bet their solution to the debt problem is taxing you to the eyeballs.
Rather than the scorn that is being heaped upon him, Senator Bunning deserves our thanks. Find the money first, then spend it. Enough of the IOUs. We cannot afford this liberal spending binge.
Stand strong, Senator, the Tea Party Patriots hear you and help is on the way.
This week we had President Obama hosting a seven hour talkathon on his stalled healthcare initiative. His purpose was to show his reasonableness and willingness to listen to Republicans. Republicans took the position that the Democrats couldn’t pass their bill despite having large majorities in both houses of Congress, so why not start over and be truly bipartisan? Doing so might actually produce some bipartisan legislation.
But this was not about bipartisanship it was about a performance. If the Republicans didn’t subscribe to the Democrats definition of bipartisanship (see previous post), then the Democrats would jam it through using a highly controversial technique. Although 60% of Americans oppose the healthcare plan, President Obama will ignore the will of the people because, “a majority vote makes sense.” (See video: Obama Defends Reconciliation: A majority vote makes sense). He is referring to the Republicans using the filibuster in the Senate to block the legislation.
That was Then, This is Now
But it wasn’t too long ago when Republicans objected to Democrats stonewalling President Bush’s judicial nominees. Republicans threatened to change the rules so that judicial nominees could not be filibustered. Now tradition holds that a President generally gets approval on his judicial nominees unless they are unqualified, even if you disagree with their judicial philosophy. For example, Ruth Bader Ginsburg clearly votes with the liberal bloc of the Supreme Court with regularity. The Senate confirmed her 96-3. Stephen Breyer, another solid liberal won confirmation 87-9. President Obama, the great uniter, while a member of the Senate voted against both John Roberts and Samuel Alito. So much for bipartisanship. So when the Republicans talked about changing the rules for confirming judges, not nationalizing 1/6 of the U.S. economy, Democrats had a very different view. (See video: “Nuclear Option” is Arrogant Power Grab Against the Founders Intent). Could there be a greater hypocricy? Biden: “”I pray God when the Democrats take back control we don’t make the kind of naked power grab you are doing.” Joe Biden, call your priest.
Americans are Disgusted
Americans are rightly fed up with Washington incumbents who are only interested in increasing the scope of their power and getting themselves re-elected. Their pompous arrogance borders on nauseating. They should all be voted out.
You hear a lot of talk these days about the Senate being broken because nothing can get passed with a majority vote. Everything has to get sixty votes to pass and that’s just un-American. Is it?
The House of Representatives
The Founding Fathers were brilliant in designing the government that has survived longer than any other, and it wasn’t an accident. The House of Representatives was designed to be the branch of government closest to the people. The members come from districts that are sized based on population. It is also in the House of Representatives that all revenue bills (i.e., tax increases) must originate. The Senate cannot create legislation to raise taxes.
The Senate
The Senate was designed with a different purpose in mind. In the form of federalism that they created, the Senate was supposed to represent the individual states. Originally Senators were appointed by the state legislatures and this continued until the ratification of the Seventeenth Amendment in 1913, which provided for the direct election of Senators by the people. The Senate was designed to be a check on the tyranny of the majority. In the House, populous states like New York, California, Texas and Florida, have a lot of representation. To prevent a handful of states from pushing around everyone else, representation in the Senate is the same for Rhode Island as it is for California, two each. In the House, California trumps Rhode Island. In the Senate they do not. Are you picking up the theme?
The Dreaded Filibuster
Being able to filibuster in the Senate is another way of allowing cooler heads to prevail. If legislation before the Senate cannot win over some reasonable number of Senators, then it’s probably not a very good idea for the country.
As proof that things are more partisan today, pundits point to how the number of filibusters has greatly increased over time.
In the entire 19th century, including the struggle against slavery, fewer than two dozen filibusters were mounted.
It is reported that things really took off during the Clinton administration. Hmm, what else was going on then… Hillary Care? We have also seen the out of control growth of the federal government’s involvement in almost every aspect of our lives, such as, how much we can be paid, how much a bushel of wheat should cost, how schools are funded; none of which is in the Constitution as powers the federal government should have. Those are all things that, according to the 10th Amendment, are the purview of the states or the people.
The Filibuster Fix
So if you don’t like the way the Senate is bogged down, instead of taking the brakes off the car, how about dumping the junk in the trunk? The less minutia the federal government gets involved in (let’s start with health care), the less reason, reasonable Senators will have to filibuster.
