“If you don’t know where you are going, you will probably end up somewhere else.”

Laurence J. Peter
US educator & writer (1919 - 1988)

Where are we going? What is the destiny of America? Who is responsible to save our nation?

It seems apparent that at this time in our history we are struggling to know where we should be going. Given the constant cries for a “bailout” for every form of financial crisis it seems that Americans have resigned themselves to government solutions to our problems. Many are now admitting that our financial crises have been contributed to (if not caused outright) by the government’s unnatural involvement in this economy. Despite this we do not seem to have the courage, or foresight, to address our problems in any other way but through greater government debt, guarantees, etc. Certainly, the endless piling on of debt onto the backs of the American people cannot continue indefinitely.

Is this the direction we really want to go in, or is there any alternative?

To answer this question, I am reminded of Benjamin Franklin. Mr. Franklin has been called “the quintessential American” of his time. He was self-educated and after studying printing in his brother’s newspaper shop he went off on his own to Philadelphia, where he started his own printing company. As reported at The Franklin Institute website:

His most famous publications were a newspaper called The Pennsylvania Gazette and his annual Poor Richard’s Almanack. He had many new ideas for publishing and he is known for printing cartoons, illustrated news stories, and letters to the editor. He believed in the power of the press, using his printing press as a way to bring the news to all people. He used cartoons and pictures so that everyone could understand the news, even people who had not learned to read.

Mr. Franklin was instrumental in bringing street lighting to Philadelphia. Ben also helped to set up the first postal system in Philadelphia. In order to make Philadelphia a safer city, he started the Union Fire Company in 1736. A few years later, in 1752, he set up America’s first fire insurance company. He even organized a Night Watch and Militia to help keep peace and safety in Philadelphia. While in Paris, Ben proposed the idea of Daylight Savings Time.

In 1731, Ben founded America’s first circulating library so that people could borrow books to read even though they might not have been able to afford to buy books to read. He discovered the conductivity of heat by color and established the first volunteer fire-fighting union (in the world!) and fire insurance company in Philadelphia.

In an incredible history of his life, The Real Benjamin Franklin, the essence of Mr. Franklin is revealed. I found it very interesting how creative he and his associates were. For example, he (and his “master-mind” team) had the idea of laying bricks on one city block of Philadelphia. At that time, no city blocks were paved in the entire city. Despite naysayers, they went at it and  successfully paved one of the city blocks. As a result, the citizens of Philadelphia became inspired and paved the entire downtown area. Mr. Franklin also devised the first lottery system in order to raise funds for the building of a church in Philadelphia.

He was instrumental in the implementation of a new money system for the colonies, including the printing of a new form of money, so the colonies would not be dependent on British notes.

Addressing other needs of his time he invented the lightning rod, through which he discovered electricity. He also invented the Franklin stove, which was a more efficient way to produce heat from wood (for which he refused a patent, as he stated it should be for the good of the people).

His other inventions include: bifocals, the glass harmonica, the library chair, swim fins, the long reach device, the catheter, and Daylight Savings Time.

It’s amazing how we take so many of today’s institutions for granted, such as the library, volunteer fire departments, insurance, etc. We often fail to understand that it was committed individuals, such as Benjamin Franklin, who looked problems in their face and asked “how can I help to solve this problem?” instead of: “government, solve this for us, please!”

As we see more and more of the failure of governments surface in the future, let us remember the greatness, the faithfulness and the true righteousness of men like Benjamin Franklin. Let us imbue into our soul their spirit of self-empowerment, and self-reliance. Let us have the courage to take back our sovereignty and our divine right of self government.

I have no doubt that we can save our nation, and end up where we want to go, if only we can remember who we really are.

No Comments »

It is interesting to consider the effect of the federal government’s involvement in the area of food choice and diet. I have previously stated that the founder’s were adamant that the federal government should not be involved in legislating food choices for our nation. No enumerated powers were given to the federal government in this regard. The 9^th and 10^th amendments clearly restrain any involvement in these issues. Despite these “chains of the constitution” we, the people, have sat back while the federal government goes merrily on dictating laws and choices for the American people.

9^th amendment: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

10^th amendment: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Thomas Jefferson once stated:

“If people let the government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls who live under tyranny.”

I had the privilege a few years ago to be a mentor at a local grade school in my home town. This program laudably has the intention of providing support and encouragement to children of single parents. In addition to helping a young 1st grader contemplate reading and how to kick a ball, I would often sit and have lunch with the students. I was appalled at the quality of the food that was being served to the students. I felt that the food was the most packaged, least healthy food any human being could eat. For example, the fried chicken “patties” were formed into hearts and other shapes, and covered with sugar sprinkles in order to encourage the students to actually them. Canned mushy carrots, along with other “vegetables” of the least nutritional content possible were served. Topped with “desert bars” that must have been manufactured by the millions and preserved with who knows what chemicals.

What does this have to do with the federal government, you might ask? Do you remember the food pyramid which was given to “enlighten” the American people as to the “healthy” diet we should all have?

I found the original FDA food pyramid in an article by Disabled World - 2007-10-20. As you may recall the FDA said: “You should center your diet around the foods at the base of the food pyramid, and eat less of the foods at the top.” Here is that pyramid:

Old food pyramid picture

As you can see, we were told to center our diet around bread, cereal rice, pasta, etc.

What’s wrong with this picture? According to Harvard scientist Dr. Walter Willett, the original USDA Food Pyramid is terribly misleading and flawed. He states that the Pyramid has not kept up with scientific nutritional research. The original food pyramid made a number of blanket claims supporting its food list, such as, all fats are bad; all complex carbohydrates are good; protein is protein; dairy products are essential; potatoes are good for you; and there was no recommendation for exercise. Among Dr. Willett’s criticisms include the blanket statement that:

“All complex carbohydrates are good.” Dr. Willet notes that six to eleven servings of carbohydrates are way too much, and that the Pyramid does not differentiate between refined carbohydrates, such as pasta, and truly complex carbohydrates, such as whole grain cereal and bread.

In an article published by NaturalNews.com, Mike Adams states:

A new study says Americans are getting fatter thanks to an increase in their consumption of carbohydrates. Women, the study reveals, are consuming 335 more calories per day than they did in 1971, and men are consuming 168 more. That may not seem like much, but it sure adds up quickly. An extra 335 calories a day packs on an extra pound of body fat every ten days.

The study says most of the increase in calories is from carbohydrates, but it leaves out perhaps the most crucial point of all: these are refined, processed carbohydrates — the very worst kind. From a nutritional standpoint, you can’t paint all carbohydrates with the same brush. Whole grains and carbohydrates with a low glycemic index are, of course, far better for you than refined carbohydrates like white flour and refined white sugar. I’ve seen far too many studies lump all carbohydrates into the same category without regard for where they stand on the nutritional scale.

You see the same thing in the Food Guide Pyramid, which puts grains, breads and other carbohydrates as the “eat most” category of foods. That leads most people to falsely believe that eating a dozen doughnuts is keeping them in full compliance with the food guide pyramid, since doughnuts are technically breads and grains.

To help explain how this correlates to food in school systems throughout America I am reminded of the “ketchup is a vegetable” controversy.

From Wikipedia:

(Ketchup alongside French fried potatoes)

The ketchup as a vegetable controversy or ketchupgate refers to a proposed United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Food and Drug Administration directive, early in the administration of Ronald Reagan, that would have reclassified ketchup and pickle relish from condiments to a vegetable, allowing public schools to cut out a serving of cooked or fresh vegetable from hot lunch program child-nutrition requirements. The Reagan administration was, in fact, responding to a Congressional cost-savings mandate. The White House Office of Management and Budget estimated a potential US $1 billion annual savings in the cost of subsidized meals for low-income students.

In reporting on the proposed directive Newsweek magazine illustrated their story with a bottle of ketchup with the caption “now a vegetable.” The proposed directive was criticized by Democrats and Republicans alike, and was never implemented.

As we can see the FDA issued specific “guidelines” (which were really mandates) around the foods that could be served to students, all tied to federal subsidizing of meals for low income students. These guidelines led our public school systems to legally adopt the serving of meals that were “nutritious” according to those guidelines. Unfortunately for the poor souls that ate this food, we now have a generation of obese, disease, and cancer ridden people.

(To complete the history of the original food pyramid on April 19, 2005, the USDA, now under assault from numerous scientific nutrition groups, launched their new food guidance system called “My Pyramid,” giving Americans a website to help them calculate their personal healthy food choices, based upon age and activity.)

Why are we continuing to go along with this ridiculous system? In contrast to us paying billions for this “enlightenment from on high” the free market is more than capable of offering real, up to date information, without being told to do so by some government. As one example among thousands, the website noted above (Naturalnews.com) has a service for you to “Stay informed, empower yourself.” Each weekday, they email you breaking news on natural cures, green living, disease reversal and more.

So there you have it. We can have a system that “empowers ourselves,” where we take responsibility for our own health and the health of our children and families; a system that gives us real opportunity for true wellness, long life and abundant health. Or we can continue to allow an unconstitutional, wholly ineffective, system warned against by the founders and specifically by Jefferson whom I must quote again:

“If people let the government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls who live under tyranny.”

Is it time yet for the Revolution?

No Comments »

This week has delivered to the American people the revelation of massive weakness in the financial solvency of our economy. Many of us were previously shocked at the size of the Enron bankruptcy. USA today reported that Enron was valued at over 61 billion dollars at the time of its demise. In contrast, Lehman Brothers’ value was over $690 billion dollars. This was followed by the AIG bailout, which reportedly had one trillion dollars in assets.

Given these crises and those that may follow, what specific steps can we as Americans take that are in line with the founder’s constitution and vision for America?

1. Insist on reform of the monetary system. Without the “fiat” money that is produced by the Federal Reserve Bank, the federal government would be unable to inflate the currency (which has been done since 1913). With a gold and silver backed currency as envisioned by the founders this would be impossible.

2. With the termination of the Federal Reserve Bank the dreaded income tax could eventually be eliminated. This is due to the fact that the income tax serves merely to pay the interest on the national debt. There was no income tax for over 100 years in this country and we had tremendous growth and prosperity. The federal government sufficiently operated on tariffs and excise taxes before the chains of the constitution were broken.

3. The founder’s constitution prohibited a “direct” tax without apportionment amongst the states. The income tax is a direct tax. They were intimately aware that a direct tax was the worse tax in that it “directly” took away from the fruits of the citizen’s labors. In effect it is a form of slavery. When this money is returned to be spent by the people, the economy will strengthen tremendously.

4. End the disastrous war on drugs. The effects of this war include financial incentives for the illegal drug trade, street gangs, and the required “amping up” of police forces to combat non-violent drug users. These officers would then be available to combat real criminals or we could simply reduce the number of law enforcement officers as crime decreases.

5. By simply treating “drug abuse” as a health problem instead of a criminal justice problem we could save billions that are required to incarcerate otherwise non-violent, non-criminal Americans. These Americans could return to being productive citizens, take care of their families and otherwise contribute again to the economy.

6. Return to the founder’s vision of America as a nation founded on peaceful relations with other nations. This would not only save us hundreds of billions of dollars a year, but would free other nations to take charge of and realize their own destiny. Instead of antagonizing citizens of other nations to remove us from their soil, we can concentrate on actually strengthening the defense of our nation at a fraction of the cost.

7. Return to the states, local communities, and parents their sovereign right to educate their children as they wish, without the federal government’s involvement. Once again, we would save hundreds of billions of dollars per year, resulting in a dramatic improvement in the quality of education for our children.

8. Insist that the federal government stay out of non-enumerated areas, and return the sovereignty of these areas to the states or to the people. We were never intended to be a nation that is so dominated by the federal government. The founders wanted 50 (at least) experiments going on based on the states’ right to make their own decisions on their form of agriculture, medicine, education, etc. As relative success (or failure) occurred, society would evolve as the cream would naturally rise to the top.

In conclusion, I am reminded by a statement made by Dr. Ron Paul this past year. He stated that no matter how bad things got, as long as we returned to the principles of freedom we could rise up again and be prosperous. I have no doubt that he is correct. My only real concern is that we are able to recognize what those principles are and what direction we must go in order to return to the founders’ vision of a free and prosperous America.

No Comments »

James Madison, the father of the US Constitution, stated:

If tyranny and oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. Of all the enemies to public liberty, war is perhaps the most to be dreaded because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few. The loss of liberty at home is to be charged to the provisions against danger, real or imagined, from abroad.

We are all aware that George Washington issued a warning in his farewell address against entangling alliances with other nations and cautioned us explicitly to pursue the opposite of war as our fundamental foreign policy.

If possible, Thomas Jefferson was even more opposed to war as an instrument of effective policy. Among the many times he spoke on this subject he stated:

“I love peace, and am anxious that we should give the world still another useful lesson, by showing to them other modes of punishing injuries than by war, which is as much a punishment to the punisher as to the sufferer.”

“War has been avoided from a due sense of the miseries, and the demoralization it produces, and of the superior blessings of a state of peace and friendship with all mankind.”

“Having seen the people of all other nations bowed down to the earth under the wars and prodigalities of their rulers, I have cherished their opposites, peace, economy, and riddance of public debt, believing that these were the high road to public as well as private prosperity and happiness.”

“I abhor war and view it as the greatest scourge of mankind.”

“War is an instrument entirely inefficient toward redressing wrong; and multiplies, instead of indemnifying losses.”

The founders were intimately aware of the corrupting influence of power and the endless examples in history of rulers taking their nation to war for improper reasons. These reasons included personal glory, revenge against insult or simply a conquest of other lands for the natural resources that said lands possessed. It is a truism that the people fight the wars while the leaders reap the political benefits of conquest.

The concern for the corrupting influence of power was later warned against by Dwight Eisenhower who stated in his farewell address:

“In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.”

Eisenhower’s warning was from one who had personal knowledge of the culture of war given his position as the Supreme Commander of the Allied forces in Europe during World War II, the first supreme commander of NATO and our 34^th President.

Today, America has become a nation dominated by a “military industrial complex.” The Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation, February 20, 2008 reports:

• U.S. military spending accounts for 48 percent, or almost half of the world’s total military spending.
• U.S. military spending is more than the next 46 highest spending countries in the world combined.

In an article entitled The Billions For “Defense” Jeopardize Our Safety, Center For Defense Information, March 9, 2000 reported:

The lion’s share of this money is not spent by the Pentagon on protecting American citizens. It goes to supporting U.S. military activities, including interventions, throughout the world. Were this budget and the organization it finances called the “Military Department,” then attitudes might be quite different. Americans are willing to pay for defense, but they would probably be much less willing to spend billions of dollars if the money were labeled “Foreign Military Operations.

Given where we obviously are today is there any possibility that America could return to the peace loving nation longed for by the founders? The venerable Benjamin Franklin was once quoted as saying: “He who shall introduce into public affairs the principles of primitive Christianity shall revolutionize the world.” The originator of that primitive Christianity Jesus of Nazareth (also known as the Prince of Peace) once said: “Put up again thy sword into its place: for all they that take the sword shall perish by the sword.” Matthew 26:52.

No Comments »

Americans are justifiably alarmed by the disclosure that every family in America owes approximately $563,000.00 in debt to the government. The federal government debt now stands at almost $10 trillion dollars, with another $50 trillion dollars in unfunded future obligations. What does this fact portend for the future of American taxpayers?

The Brookings Institute in a 2007 article entitled America’s Economy: Headed for Crisis stated that “Raising tax revenues to cover projected government spending would require today’s tax levels to increase by a third to a half by 2030”. (I would note that since 2007, projections have gotten much worse.) How in the world are we, the people, going to handle dramatically increased taxes when we are already severely over taxed? Is there ANY solution to this problem other than increased taxes?

Fortunately, there is a solution; if only we had the understanding, conviction and mutual resolve to implement it. That solution is the U.S. Constitution.

We, the people, allow the federal government to spend hundreds of billions of dollars to regulate American society in areas that the federal government was clearly not intended to have ANY area of influence. Any rational review of the effects of the federal government’s involvement in areas such as education, agriculture, energy policy and criminal justice will reveal that the fed’s involvement has dramatically DECREASED the quality of every area they reach into.

I have previously written about the effects of the federal government involvement in education. Today I would like to discuss how just one area of infringement into regulating what farmers can grow as crops has hurt, not helped, our country.

In an article published on July 15, 2008 NaturalNews.com reported on North Dakota hemp farmers filing suit in the U.S. Court of appeals to overturn a federal ban on the production of commercial hemp. After years of watching Canadians expand their hemp production to 30,000 acres and import the product into the United States, North Dakota government officials petitioned the federal government for an exemption from federal law. But, because federal regulations still prohibit state-regulated hemp farming, North Dakota farmers Dave Monson and Wayne Hague filed a lawsuit on June 9 to overturn this ban.

The United States is the only developed country in the world that outlaws the growing of this crop, despite the 20,000 commercial uses of its plant products. Among its many uses, hemp fiber is reported to be the strongest natural plant fiber in the world. Its oil can be used for food and is an excellent source of bio-fuel, the fiber is ideal for rope, clothing and even building houses. The market for hemp products (genetically distinct from its’ THC laden cousin) is growing world-wide. If allowed to be grown, farmers could produce a crop that requires no federal subsidizing, requires little pest control or fertilizers, and could significantly lessen our dependency on foreign oil. Due to the strength of its fibers it is superior to wood as a source of paper, thereby saving our forests and preserving our environment.

The bottom line is that we are spending (and borrowing) billions of dollars every year to prevent the natural, positive evolution of our society.

This article is only one of hundreds that could be written detailing how the federal government’s improper involvement has hurt our economy and our country. When will we say enough is enough, and demand the end of the unconstitutional, improperly delegated powers now arrogantly flaunted by the feds?

If we remember that we, the people, are the source of all of the power and that no power is delegated to our government servants without our consent there is no question that together we can save this country.

2 Comments »

It is amazing how far away we as a nation have strayed from the original vision of the founders with regards to the proper role of government. We have, in fact, devolved 180 degrees from that original purpose. Government was intended to be the protector of the rights of the people. Every individual was to be free to pursue his idea of happiness, as long as he did not violate the rights of others to do the same. Government was to step in only when one’s “liberty interest” was violated to “restore” the victim. This was called the restorative justice principle. In fact, there was no “crime” other than treason against the people as a whole, unless there was a victim. No fines were paid to the State. The sole purpose of the law was to restore the victim. Today, we have a vast assortment of “crimes” where the de facto purpose of the law is to collect “fines” for the State. It is, in fact, another tax on the people. As an attorney who practiced criminal defense for many years, I can assure you that the victim (when there is a real crime committed) is rarely restored, and is often left out of the proceedings.

On the other side of the coin, because we have allowed government to pick and choose who obtains the favors of government, government is now used to protect those who destroy the rights of others. Federal and State regulations are issued that protect and “exempt” industries from the violations they cause to others. The inevitable abuse of power by government was the principle reason why the founders said NO power should be given to the federal government to even be involved AT ALL, unless those powers were specifically enumerated in the constitution.

Despite the obvious abuse of power, there are those who still have faith in the government, if only “their” people would be elected into office. “Put good people in and we’ll be okay”, they say. “Elect the representative from my party, and all will be put right” they contend. The two party system is the perfect cover for the abuse of power, as it gives us the illusion of choice. The vast system of bureaucracy continues despite whoever is in office. The big multi-national corporations almost always “donate” to both parties to cover their bases. They will continue to do so as a “cost of doing business” as long as the power to give favors exists. I can assure you that all forms of financial contributions will magically end (without the need for campaign finance reform) if the 10th amendment was restored to its original intent.

Our system of government was unique in history in that it at least attempted to prevent the possibility of abuse of power by TAKING AWAY the power that had throughout history had always been abused. We were given the freedom formula by the founders who did everything they knew how to protect us. It is WE THE PEOPLE who have allowed the abuses to reoccur and it is only WE THE PEOPLE who can possibly restore the constitutional protections.

No Comments »

What do the Olympics have to do with foreign policy?

According to many commentators today, America’s standing in the world has declined to perhaps the lowest level in our nation’s history. While there are many reasons stated for this decline, I believe the adoption of the preemptive strike doctrine as our nation’s “right” can be seen as the fundamental cause of this decline. Dr. Ron Paul has stated that this doctrine is the “greatest moral crisis of our time”. Why is this a moral crisis and what would the founders say about its adoption? And, what can the Olympics teach us about foreign policy?

The founders were uniform in their desire for America to refrain from “entangling alliances with other nations.” They envisioned our foreign policy to embrace “peace, commerce and honest relations” with all of the other nations of the earth. They were all too aware of the history of wars being foisted upon the people by over-zealous leaders, who sought personal fame and fortune and the conquest of other lands. They were also very aware that governments could be improperly “influenced” by “special interest groups” who coveted the natural resources of other lands and who would use their influence to persuade the leaders of their nations to commit the military to strike at other peoples. Of course, the people themselves rarely understood or desired to go to war, unless they were persuaded by their governments that they were being threatened, or were being attacked. It would certainly help if the people of the other lands were “demonized” in some way, including implying that they were “evil” or that their religion was “evil”.

It is interesting that when Russia recently invaded Georgia on the same day as the start of the Olympics, the leaders of China called for a cease fire, as the tradition of the Olympics was to have peace among nations during the Olympic festivities. I am confident that I am not the only one who felt great empathy for the athletes from other nations even while they competed against the athletes from America. More than once the thought came that “why should we be fighting the peoples of other countries when we can clearly resolve our differences by peaceful means?”

I believe the founders understood that cultural exchange, private associations, free trade and travel amongst the people of various nations would lead to lessening of tensions and increased harmony between nations. Naturally, these close associations and increasingly personal relationships would make it more and more difficult for those who would prefer these people to be demonized in the eyes of the people.

I remember reading an article a couple of years back that there was one day when the violence in Iraq had been reduced to zero. How can this be? It was a day when soccer tournaments were being held between the Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds. Even at the height of tensions between these factions the bringing together of the people for peaceful, sporting activities led to peace.

It is not surprising that the nations that are isolated from contact with other nations, such as North Korea and Iraq (under Saddam Hussein) are the ones we justify demonizing, leading to war or endless military involvement. We, as a people, must acknowledge the role our foreign policy plays in “creating enemies”.

I believe the day will come when the people of America will realize that it is their foreign policy and not the foreign policy of the “government” that is important. We will take responsibility for ensuring that all of the people of the world do not fear us (via the preemptive strike doctrine) but “know us” as a peaceful people who have only good will towards them. One of the last things Christ said was, “peace on earth, good will towards men.” I believe he was giving us (the people) a formula for peace: engender good will towards others, and you will have peace.

No Comments »

Firstly, I would like to apologize for sending this newsletter late
this week.  I was out of town on business.  Our regular Newsletters
will resume on Thursdays.

What role was the Federal Government to play in Agriculture?

As we all are aware, the federal government now plays a dominant
role in agriculture in America.  The government picks and chooses
as to which types of agricultural choices receive subsidies.  Many
recent articles have been written as to how small farmers have been driven out of business by the billions of dollars that are given to huge farming operations.  The political clout of big agriculture
continues to ensure payments are made to them, despite market
prices rising ever higher for their commodities.

Who receives what subsidies is clearly controlled by the political
and monetary clout of the various producers.  I can assure you that
the “little guy” has little chance of “equality” in this process.
For example, the small, local organic producers of vegetables that
are now so highly prized by the consumer for their superior quality
receive no benefit whatsoever from the government.  In fact, the
government has done everything possible to stack the deck against
these type of producers, all at the prodding of big agriculture.

The Food and Drug Administration allegedly exists to protect the
people, despite the known practices of big agriculture improperly
influencing and controlling the process of what is “approved” by
the government.   The relatively recent “rubber-stamping” of
genetically modified seeds as “the same” as what nature created is
an example of how the process actually works.

Without the government’s involvement, the people’s choices
themselves would govern which products the producers produced.  A free market, governed by supply and demand, and protected by the civil justice system is far superior to any government’s decision
making process.  It literally costs we, the people, billions upon
billions of our dollars every year that we pay to run these
unconstitutional bureaucracies so that we, the people, can suffer
from their unending consequences.  If one subscribes to the concept of “do less, and accomplish more,” all we would need to do is to return to the founders’ constitution, eliminate these improper departments and consequently save billions every year while dramatically improving how agriculture works in our country.

I believe the fundamental error in how this has all been created
actually resides with the people.  We collectively have lost our
understanding of the role of the people, vs. the role of the
government.  We have succumbed to pleas from politicians that they will solve our problems for us, if we would only “trust them”.  It is said that you get what you deserve in life.  I would like to see us “deserve” something better than paying dearly for abuse heaped upon us from false “saviors”.

No Comments »

No Comments »

It goes without saying that there is a momentum that has built up over the years that is now culminating in the pending implementation of some form of national health care. It appears we as a nation are going to succumb to an endless barrage of propaganda on how we are somehow “entitled” to some form of “free” medical care.

How does the Constitution speak to this subject? First of all, it is quite clear there is no specific enumeration of powers given to the federal government to be involved in health care. This is also true of such subjects as agriculture, energy policy, and education. For over one hundred years, the federal government abided by the Constitution and the people were protected from the dictates of the federal government in these areas.

As I have discussed in previous newsletters the founders were justifiably concerned that if power were allowed to re-accumulate in the federal government in non-enumerated areas, those with the most power would end up controlling policy. This would enable the powerful to command obedience from the people in ways that favored their particular interest group.

The FDA, for example, now functions as an arm of the pharmaceutical companies. Despite the fact that we the people are told that the FDA is there to protect our interests, evidence shows that officials ignore scientific findings about serious side effects of drugs they are asked to give their seal of approval. It is only after hundreds of thousands of people suffer extreme health problems and death that the FDA might intercede and “withdraw” their support for a particular drug.

The problem with a “national health care” system that is mandated on employers, self employed individuals, and private citizens, is that no one knows what “health care” will receive the seal of approval by the government bureaucrat. Do you believe for a minute that powerful interests will not be seeking to have their “preferred” medical treatments sanctioned for acceptance in this system, while also seeking to disallow their competitors? What if you were facing a serious medical problem and, after extensive research, wanted to employ an “alternative” solution to your problem? Would you be forced to pay into the system that the government says is legitimate, and also pay for the treatment you prefer?

We have seen a dramatic increase in the cost of medical services, AFTER the government became involved. Obviously, very few question invoices that are going to be paid by “insurance” or the “government.” A true free market based on an informed and self-responsible citizenry would be vastly superior to any “government” mandated program.

These are many of the reasons why the founders (and the people) were adamant that the federal government should play no role in these most important areas of life. In future newsletters I will continue to discuss how the involvement of the federal government (against the prohibitions of the Constitution) have dramatically decreased the quality of life in America, all as predicted by the founders of our nation. I will also discuss how easily we could implement non-government (”bottom-up”) solutions that would dramatically improve the lives of Americans, while saving us billions in tax dollars.

1 Comment »