Political Violence? Conservatives Don't Throw Bricks.

I find it mildly amusing after decades of violence from the left over everything from war to the environment that they are so fearful of flag waving patriots at Tea Party Protests. There has been a concerted effort to liken Tea Party protests to the actions of an angry mob but those that have attended those rallies know who and what the Tea Party is. Most Tea Party groups know that the main stream media has been scouring these events so they can hand pick a few pictures of the more extreme protestors to impugn the movement as a whole and it would do well to treat those reporters with suspicion whenever they are present.

The power of the media comes into its own once they have an audio conversation of more than a few words. The less scrupulous of these media organs have absolutely no problem dissecting a five minute conversation and using snippets of your comments to craft a controversial answer to a question you were never asked. Those in the public eye know this and most are savvy enough to skirt these traps by crafting their answers to avoid particular statements that could be inflammatory when taken out of context. Still, a few slip through the cracks such as Sarah Palin’s comment on reloading or that she was putting a “sight” on Democrats she was “targeting” in the 2010 elections.

Sarah Palin was the subject of numerous jokes during the 2008 campaign because she is an avid hunter in her home State of Alaska. He references to weapons and hunting terminology was meant to be an “in your face” swipe at those who tried to use her love of hunting against her and rather than submit to the criticisms, she decided to wear it as a badge of courage. The left however, seized the opportunity to claim her statements were meant to incite violence against Democrats and attempted to link the post-healthcare bill brick throwing incidents at her feet and at the feet of her Tea Party followers.

I really do have to wonder about all these claims of violence anyway. During the heated healthcare debates in August of 2009, multiple windows at the Democratic offices in Denver Colorado were smashed adding up to more than eleven thousand dollars in damages. Since the windows that were targeted held posters praising Obama’s efforts to reform healthcare, Democrats were quick to accuse right wing zealots and Tea Partiers claiming they were trying to invoke fear and foment hatred against supporters of the President’s healthcare initiative.

Days later, Denver Police arrested 24 year-old Maurice Schwenkler for the attack but Schwenkler was neither a right wing zealot nor was he a member of the Tea Party. Schwenkler was in fact, a Democrat activist and a supporter of the Healthcare Bill. He had previously been arrested for misdemeanor unlawful assembly at the 2008 Republican National Convention in St. Paul, MN and had worked for the Democratic Party in the past. Schwenkler had also been paid five-hundred dollars by the Colorado Citizens Coalition, a non profit group that supports Democratic candidates, for his work in a door to door campaign to drum up last minute support for Barack Obama in the 2008 election.

While the motives for Maurice Schwenkler’s acts of vandalism were never disclosed, it is clear that this was not someone that had been angered over the Democrat’s push to pass Healthcare Reform. Could it be that this was an idea he and his other radical friends came up with to discredit Tea Party opposition to his beloved President? Could this have been a contrived act perpetrated with the hope that the Republicans and Tea Parties would be blamed?

One can never be certain but since their list of heroes include Marxists, Socialists and some very radical thinkers, it is a credible possibility. This is curiously reminiscent to the 1933 blaze that gutted the German Reichstag building. The fire was deemed arson and there was an outcry from Hitler’s loyal party that Dutch Communists were responsible. Several Dutch Communists were arrested but just one, Marinus van der Lubbe, would be tried and executed for the act. The fire was then used by Adolf Hitler to suspend many of the German Republic’s civil rights and to disperse the various Communist opposition Parties present in Germany at the time. It was not until years later that Gestapo Archives seized by Russian forces during World War II were rediscovered in Moscow. These archives show that the fire was actually the work of Hitler’s loyal SA or Sturmabteilung (Storm Troopers), the paramilitary arm of the Nazi Party. The work of several modern day researchers claim that the fire was intentionally set by SA commandos so that the Nazis, under Hitler’s command, could create a crisis that would radically broaden his powers.

The reality of the situation is there is an understanding among Democrats that most Tea Party activists are law abiding members of society that abhor violence and ignorance. I believe their hope is that if they can connect the Tea Party or Republican supporters with random acts of violence that it will fracture the Tea Party and render it impotent; that independents and conservatives will flee if they believe the Party has been taken over by dangerous factions.

We saw this strategy employed during the Tea Party protest that gathered in Washington before the final House vote on the Healthcare bill. Instead of entering the Capitol Building through their usual underground passageway, House Democrats lead by Nancy Pelosi challenged the crowd as they walked to the Capitol Building. There were reports that racial slurs were lobbed at black Congressmen and that some were even spat upon. Really? Well, despite hundreds of news cameras, microphones and security agents, not one of them actually witnessed these alleged events; there were no arrests made and none of the so-called victims of these horrendous acts would agree to appear on a single news show to tell America what happened to them.

Is that even possible? Do you doubt for one moment that if a Congressman were assaulted, threatened or spat on that the perpetrators wouldn’t have been arrested on the spot? The films I saw of the Congressional Democrats walking to the Capitol Building showed that their security people had cleared the path for them and maintained a comfortable distance between the crowd and the Congressmen. I clearly heard security personnel tell people to move back but I didn’t hear one racial remark. The cameras didn’t capture a single image of anyone spitting and neither did any of the other news networks that were present.

House Democrats equated their walk through the Tea Party protest with the historic civil rights marches of the 1960’s when in reality; it was far more similar to the marches staged by American Nazis, Skinheads and the Ku Klux Klan. Like those marches, this little walk was designed to challenge the protestors. They were hoping that someone, anyone, would do something that would bring shame and scrutiny upon the Tea Party movement. When they couldn’t incite the response they wanted, I believe they made it up as they went along. That is why none of them would appear on the news programs. It is one thing to have Nancy Pelosi tell us that she heard that this had happened, its quite another to convince someone to stand before news cameras and lie to the American people that you were the victim of an assault that never happened; an assault that not one of the hundreds of cameras that were present had filmed.

Now we have windows being broken again; a few Democrats here and a few Republicans there. Even though the perpetrators have not been apprehended, we are being told that it is the acts of right wing zealots and angry Tea Partiers again. Has anyone even asked where Maurice Schwenkler has been lately? No I don’t actually believe he is responsible this time but considering what did happen this past August and the unsubstantiated nature of the alleged assault on House Democrats earlier this month, I am more inclined to believe in Elvis sightings than I am in their claims that Tea Partiers are suddenly throwing bricks again. Let’s face facts. Acts of violence and vandalism are the calling card of the left; not the Tea Party. Conservatives don’t throw bricks and we don’t make pipe bombs. We don’t incite violence and we don’t get arrested at protests. In fact, we even pick up our trash when we leave, something that the left never does; ironically, not even at a protest for the environment.

Paul

It Must Be Pledge Week at the Southern Poverty Law Center

Apparently the Southern Poverty Law Center is feeling the pinch as the economy is still creeping along at a snails pace. Donations are falling for nearly every charitable and political organization and while many have made sincere pleas to their traditional supporters, the SPLC has chosen to cry “Wolf” once again and tell America how close we are to anarchy at the hands of the hateful right.

In an article penned by Mark Potok, he claims that the “radical right” has reared its ugly head once again and is breathing the flames of hatred all across the nation. His article states that hate groups stayed at record levels of roughly one thousand and that anti-immigrant vigilante groups have risen eighty percent; adding as many as 139 new groups in 2009 alone. If the name Mark Potok sounds familiar it is because he has also written for that other voice of Liberal reason, the Huffington Post. As much as the Huffington Post uses their pages to routinely bash Conservative values and has often sought to soften the jagged edges of violent radicals on the left, they usually don’t align themselves with single-minded conspiracy seekers.

Since defense is usually a trait of the guilty, I refuse to lend credence to Mr. Potok’s odd observations by wasting my time rebutting them line by line. I will however, delve into why Mr. Potok makes these charges so vociferously. Mark Potok has made a name for himself scouring the internet and airwaves looking for words and phrases to reinforce his notion that Conservatives in the United States are little more than a seething pot of zealots bent on the destruction of anything that is not white or Christian. Most of the “Hate Groups” that Mr. Potok refers to are phantom websites that are reflective of a very small minority and it takes a vivid imagination to claim that they are a product of the Tea Party or are representative of Conservatism as a movement.

In Mark Potok’s world, the populist movement that is calling for tax relief and a halt to Federal spending are simply hateful and dangerous. He has worked feverishly to take the isolated opinions of a few people living on the fringe of society and wrap the entire Conservative movement in a very thin veil he made though his efforts. The links he claims exist between the two would be laughable if he were not so sadly serious about them.

The anti-immigration vigilantes his article claims are so prevalent are also the product of his fertile mind. For an anti-immigration group to be considered “vigilante” it would have to necessarily follow a path of violence against immigrants; a violence that is curiously absent on the scale that he writes of. Of course if all of the mainstream media were involved in this grand conspiracy, then news of these violent incidents might go unreported. Considering that most of the mainstream media share Mr. Potok’s views of Conservatives and Tea Party members, the chances of vigilante violence against immigrants going unreported are statistically impossible.

Of course, the SPLC doesn’t have an issue with Potok’s crusade to uncover right wing conspiracies because it plays into their own reasons for existence; bashing the Conservative right and fund raising. The SPLC was founded in 1971 by two Alabama attorneys, Morris Dees and Joe Levin. Their stated mission is to track the activities of hate groups and bring legal action against them where feasible. Of course this mission seems to be overwhelmingly directed at so called “right wing” hate groups while the actions of the left and radical left are largely ignored. They are famous for overstating the membership and dangers posed by white supremacist groups; often launching ridiculous claims that “the heirs of Hitler” will soon be marching through the streets of America while trying to frighten donations out of elderly Liberals.

The SPLC spends twice as much on fund raising as it does on legal services and that may be the reason for the slant of the ink that finds its way to their paper. After all, liberals tend to be very generous when it comes to what they believe is social justice while Conservatives usually look for the truth in what they have been told before they will commit to spending their resources or time on any cause. Why do I believe this is more about cash than conscience? Well, co-founder Morris Dees’ one time business partner Millard Fuller once said: "Morris and I ... shared the overriding purpose of making a pile of money. We were not particular about how we did it; we just wanted to be independently rich."

Even former SPLC legal fellow Pamela Summers said in an interview with The Montgomery Advisor: "They're drowning in their own affluence…What they are doing in the legal department is not done for the best interest of everybody (but) is done as though the sole, overriding goal is to make money." "I think people associate the SPLC with going to court," added Summers. "And that's why they get the money. And they don't go to court." Curiously, there were several studies through the 1990’s that Dees and other top SPLC personnel earned disproportionately higher salaries than the top personnel of most non-profit organizations.

Of course that doesn’t explain all of their leftward tilt but Julian Bond does. Julian Bond, the NAACP’s current Chairman, was the SPLC’s first President and is still a member of their Board of Directors. Bond is fervent believer that America is a racist nation and has gone as far as saying that the Republican “idea of equal rights is the American flag and the Confederate swastika flying side by side.” Bond will never recognize that America has fundamentally changed since the civil rights struggles of the 1960’s because he refuses to accept the ascension of minorities into the power base that guides the nation.

According to Bond, blacks that espoused conservatism are not proof of America’s greatness, they are nothing less than traitors that had joined a vast right wing conspiracy plotting to reverse affirmative action, voting rights for minorities and public education reforms. Conservative blacks, according to Bond, are ventriloquist’s dummies that speak in the puppet master’s voice. In an even more bizarre twist, Bond equated Hitler’s relationship to Jews with Nixon’s relationship to Blacks and accused former National Security Advisor, Condoleezza Rice of being a murderer working for the Bush “oil cabal”. Bond had also suggested that Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice were both token black appointees that the Bush Administration was using as “human shields against any criticism of [its] record on civil rights.”

Bond may despise Conservatives and America but appears to have great admiration for Communism. For someone that is so unabashedly angry over his perception of racial injustice, Bond seems more than willing to ignore the ethnic cleansing that has punctuated the history of many Communist States. Bond praised longtime Communist Party USA leader James E. Jackson, Jr., an individual described by CPUSA Executive Vice Chair Jarvis Tyner as “a consummate teacher of Marxism-Leninism.”

Bond’s affiliation with Communism is not a new revelation. In 1965 Bond was elected to the Georgia State Assembly however, the Assembly refused to seat Bond, citing his endorsement of a Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee’s directive that urged young black men to illegally avoid the military draft. Bond won a second election, then a third, with the same result. In 1967 the U.S. Supreme Court, for the first time in American history, overruled a state legislature’s right to establish and maintain its own qualifications for seating members. During the period that he fought for his Assembly seat, Bond had become a celebrity. He was endorsed by the Communist Party, participated in Communist political forums, and campaigned for Communist and left wing politicians as he continued to urge blacks to resist the draft.

My father often told me that a “Fish stinks from the head down” and if the leadership of the SPLC is rife with such disgusting characters, then it is no surprise that they would attract people that are equally myopic. Mark Potok is only one of the conspiracy theorists writing for the SPLC but combined, their anger is clearly fueled by the despicable displays of Bond’s racial hatred and encouraged by the insatiable greed of Morris Dees.

This is not a denial that racial prejudice exists in the country; I am sad to say it does. What Mr. Potok refuses to see is that the Conservative movement and the Tea Parties also treat prejudice with disdain. The hate groups that Potok speaks of are isolated and small cells of radical zealots that are no longer welcome in American society and for the most part, conduct their nefarious acts using pseudonyms to hide their identity while they spew their poison on the internet. I would dare to say there is more left wing hatred than there ever was on the right and while the left wing radicals threaten the existence of the United States, real Conservatives and Tea Partiers are raising their voices in support of the Constitution and that support shouldn’t threaten anyone that is not threatened by the Constitution itself.

Paul

Source material obtained from:
The Southern Poverty Law Center
Discoverthenetworks.org
The New York Daily News

A Message from Sarah Palin

Sarah writes:

"Mark my words - tomorrow is the game changer! Tune in to hear common sense solutions that bury the false accusations that conscientious members of Congress have no solutions to meet America's health care challenges. If you're like me, shaking your head wondering why all the miscommunication between Washington and the American people who have been saying, "Please hear what we're saying about our desire for health care reform," then tomorrow will be a refreshing time of clarity for all. All Americans, and especially colleagues of House Republican Leader John Boehner: please listen to tomorrow's weekly GOP national address.

Rep. Boehner will highlight a common sense alternative to Speaker Pelosi's 1,990-page government takeover of health care. I urge you to watch for it. For a preview, go to: http://HealthCare.GOP.gov You'll hear solutions. You'll hear of real choices based on America's proven free-market principles. You'll know once and for all what the GOP and Independents have been saying all along about alternatives to another big government take over.

After tomorrow, you'll know that accusations against the GOP and Independents for not providing solutions are false. Those claims are bogus. There are alternatives. Tune in to Rep. Boehner's address tomorrow to hear them. I look forward to the game changer!
Sarah Palin

With Sarah Palin becoming more involved on the important issues we are facing today, I do hope this spells out the birth of a new conservative movement within the Republican Party. It is painfully obvious that engaging in middle of the road bipartisanship with Liberal Democrats is futile and leads to policies that most Americans find absurd. "Socialism light" is still socialism and try as they may to convince us, that is not who we are as a nation. It is becoming increasingly difficult to get the message out that there are common sense alternatives to these massive healthcare bills being hand-trucked around the halls of congress. The mainstream media has become little more than the propaganda arm of the White House and if the White House says the GOP has offered no alternatives, then ABC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, et al, assume it must be true.

The fact is there were hundreds of GOP amendments to the legislation offered during the process and nearly everyone were shot down by the controlling party. The Democrats keep singing the same old song that Obama was elected because of healthcare reform but the truth is, his campaign promises on health care could be kept with seven minor pieces of legislation that would contain roughly ten to fifteen pages each. Obviously, the details hidden in this massive bill far exceeds anything Obama promised and actually breaks several of the specific promises made to you about what this bill would include and what this bill would not do.

This massive bill is designed wholly to force America into a government run, universal, single payer system; a system that America has said it does not want since the days of Teddy Roosevelt. I know the President has said over and over that if we like the insurance we have we can keep it. However, page 91 and 92 of the new bill spell out a transition period for people with non-employer provided coverage to be shifted into the public plan. Employer based plans can only earn "grandfather" status if they meet the criteria of an "acceptable plan" through standards set by this plan. For those of you that aren't familiar with "grandfathering", that simply means that you can keep your current employer based plan provided it is first acceptable to the government and secondly, provided that nothing in that plan changes. Well we all know that employer based plans are renegotiated annually so the most you can hope for is a year before your plan is no longer "an existing plan" under the terms of this bill.

The President promised that your taxes would not be raised "One Dime" under this plan. Understand that this President more that any of his predecessors is a master of semantics. He is correct that this plan will not raise your taxes one dime. The fact that your taxes will rise many thousands of dimes maybe be a deception but in his eyes, is not a broken promise. Private analysis has determined that premiums for private insurance will triple under this plan, taxes placed on medical device manufacturers will drive the cost of care even higher and payroll taxes on your employer may not be a direct tax on you, but those taxes will directly affect you. Those same private studies estimate that five million jobs will be lost as a direct result of the passage of this bill as employers make cuts to try and remain profitable under the weight of the new mandated taxes.

What many do not realize is that the public plan will have a means tested premium structure. Those that earn more, pay more and in fact, will subsidize those that earn less. By the definition in ever dictionary I looked in, that is a tax and that tax begins at 140% of the Federal poverty level which is itself a scale starting at $10,400 for a single person and ending at $35,600 for a family of eight. It looks like an awful lot of people under $250,000 will be paying these premiums that are in essence, a tax. Congress wants to make sure the President can keep his promise of not raising taxes so the bill has an innovative way to accomplish that. All they had to do was include language that said that taxes collected under this plan will not be called a tax. See that was easy! We'll just call those taxes something else and the President has kept his promise.

The President also promised he would not sign a bill that was not budget neutral. In other words, all of the tax increases and spending cuts would have to be equal to the overall cost of the bill. Well, Congress has neat trick for that too. This bill collects revenues and imposes cuts five years before the first expenditures are made. The idea that it represents a ten billion dollar savings in the first ten years would tell anyone that the next ten years should be five-hundred billion dollars in the red and that is if the cuts actually take place; something the Congress has never, ever done in all of the previous bills where cuts were promised.

If the bill passes, insurance and healthcare costs will rise; there will be massive tax increases, private insurance will be forced out of business; not everyone is covered and it will add trillions to the column of unfunded government entitlement program liabilities that is already over one-hundred trillion dollars. So why are we doing this? Because it is not about lower costs for you. It is not about the uninsured. It is not about healthcare at all. It is because Federal entitlement programs are bankrupt and without massive new revenue sources they will cease to exisit. Those revenues are only possible if everyone is in those programs at one level or another. Those revenues are only possible if we are foolish enough to let our freedoms dwindle away one government program after another.

Paul

Was Reagan the Real President of Hope?

There are so many assaults on one’s senses today, where can you reasonably begin without feeling that you’ve left something out? For a President that promised hope, I don’t think I have ever seen an atmosphere as thick with hopelessness as I see in America today. Even during the darkest days of the Carter administration when American hostages were being held in Iran and the economy was in turmoil, people still believed there was something that could be done with the right leader at the helm.

Maybe that is where Reagan really made his mark. People not only believed in his abilities, but because of his inspiration we could believe in our own abilities as a nation again. The hostages held in Iran for nearly four-hundred and fifty days were released as Reagan took the oath of office which we took as a clear indication that the world knew this President was not going to allow America to be disgraced by petty dictators and radical theocracies. The economy rebounded as Reagan released the restraints of regulation and the shackles of punitive taxation; the military took on the shine and precision of well oiled and meticulously cared for machine and our cities began to shed the decay after decades of neglect.

Critics would later criticize Reagan for quadrupling the National Debt but the numbers speak for themselves. Under Reagan’s policies, revenues to the Treasury had tripled. Not because of tax increases but because of the economic expansion brought on by tax relief that rewarded entrepreneurs for the risks they took reinvesting in America. The debt did quadruple but only because of congressional fiscal mismanagement which according to OMB records, spent $1.34 for every new dollar in revenue the treasury collected. Reagan continually asked for the line-item veto to enable him to eliminate the pork that bloated every spending bill but that was something Congress would not grant to Reagan. In the end, if Reagan wanted the appropriations he felt were critical to the nation’s well being, then he had to sign the bills and accept the additional spending Congress had irresponsibly sewn into them.

The line item veto was eventually granted to President Clinton in the Line Item Veto Act of 1996, which he signed into law and put to the test at least eighty-one times throughout eleven pieces of legislation. We will never know the full value of the line item veto as it was struck down by the United States District Court for the District of Columbia in February of 1998. That decision was upheld by the Supreme Court in June of that year. Similar legislation was requested by President George W. Bush in 2006 but failed to pass a vote in the Senate. A recent move to reinstate the line item veto was begun by Republican Senator John McCain and Democrat Senator Russ Feingold in 2009, but it is unclear if this will gain the support it needs to proceed as well. So much for the conscience of Congress.

After Reagan’s second term, the National Debt had climbed to $3.2 trillion dollars which represented 55% of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP). However, inflation had dropped from 13.9% under Jimmy Carter, to 4.67% when Regan left office in 1989. When 1990 began, we had a six-hundred ship navy, an air force that guaranteed superiority in any theater it would be tested and the best equipped and trained military that the world had ever seen. The economy was vibrant with every indicator showing steady gains. The Soviet Union was straining under the weight of trying to compete with capitalism in an open arms competition and would fail only a year later. From every gauge I use to measure success, it appears that America got an awful lot in return for its three trillion dollar investment.

I truly believe that Ronald Reagan will go down in history as one of the greatest Presidents this country had ever had the good fortune to elect. That is, unless the same revisionists that have slandered Thomas Jefferson and Christopher Columbus have the opportunity to re-write his accomplishments as well. Beyond the economic and military legacy he left, I still insist that his greatest gift to this nation was the faith he instilled in us. He spoke from the heart and I can’t remember a time that I had cause to question his words. He was truly, the “Great Communicator”. Is there anyone under the age of forty that doesn’t recall the challenge he shouted out in Berlin? “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall” echoed through the hearts and minds of the world. Is there anyone that doubted his sincerity as he eulogized the crew of the ill-fated Challenger spacecraft? For all his critics, was there anyone that has ever doubted his loyalty and love for the United States?

What has changed? I remember when I was a boy, we went to the World’s Fair and the biggest attraction was the “World of Tomorrow”. We clamored for a glimpse into an amazing future and the wonders that technology and innovation promised us. We saw the Space Program grow from a single man perched precariously atop what was in fact, a ballistic missile, to the towering Saturn V rocket that brought America to the moon and back. Movies like “2001 a Space Odyssey” took us to explore the outer planets and Carl Sagan’s documentary “Cosmos” introduced us to the wonders of the Universe. Technological advances had taken the cords off our phones and put the power of computers on our desk tops. To all appearances, the promises of the future were coming true. But what did we give our children?

It began with the television shows of the late 1980’s. As if Hollywood were revolting against Reagan for ruining their vision of utopia as capitalism rebounded and communism fell, the youth were targeted with one show after another. Father didn’t know best anymore, now parents were portrayed as witless idiots while their children kept the family on track. Actually, that began back in the ‘70s but those shows were directed at adults in an attempt to show them the evil of their bigoted and selfish ways. This was different. These were shows for kids, about kids. Then the disaster movies came; the post apocalyptic adventures of Mad Max and Robo-Cop. One film after another that told our young adults that their future would be a barren wasteland in which survival itself, was their only job. Now we have the “environment-gone-wild” movies where the adults have finally destroyed the planet and now mother earth was revolting against us.

No wonder our kids are disillusioned. No wonder they have no interest in school or responsibility. After all, why bother? The earth is doomed and according to the latest big screen calamity, we won’t make it past 2012 anyway. Now they are completing the picture by telling school children that the earth is in peril because of global warming. Oops! I meant Climate Change. Ever since the data has been showing a cooling trend they changed the name or people might actually question the science behind the claims. Why would anyone want to do this to our children?

The only reason I can think of is to complete the work of demoralization that began decades ago. Those misguided students of socialist doctrine that have now become the teachers, still believe that utopia lies just beyond the greed of capitalism. If the youth can be shaped early enough then it isn’t just a thought, it is a core belief; nearly a religion. The climate crisis is being presented to them in such a way that we don’t have the luxury of thinking about what to do. We must follow the only clear path and that is the complete reversal of our industrial society or we face certain doom. I intend to take that apart tomorrow piece by piece but first there is a more pressing need.

Despite everything we are being told, there is hope. Sane and reasonable actions can bring America out of financial crisis but it will take hard work, a lot more Reagan Republicans and solid capitalistic principals. We can ill afford more progressives in our government regardless of whether their names are suffixed with a “D”, an “R” or an “I”. Those principals have already given us a national debt that is about to top twelve-trillion dollars, which is 98% of the GDP. For perspective, the next largest debtor nation is China and their debt is at 23.5% of their GDP. Our greatest challenge is that the progressives in Congress coupled with the Marxists in the White House have placed America up for sale. It is critical that nothing passes this legislative session until the system of checks and balances are safely restored.

Most important is the time you invest with your children. Restore their sense of wonder for the future and encourage a courageous desire to explore the unknown. Give them the knowledge and hope that their future is not written for them but by them. Empower them with free thought and for God’s sake, break down the rote memorization of social doctrine that the left has been brainwashing them with. Be understanding; they have been using our children’s worst fears to obtain their devotion. You must be their “Reagan”. You must give them the hope and faith that Reagan gave you and your words must have the same weight of truth because above all else, that is really what made Reagan the great communicator.

Paul