I have never been a member of NOW (National Organization for Women), the largest organization of feminist activists in the United States.[1] Nor did I ever champion the Women’s Liberation Movement in the sixties and seventies when I was young and starting a career. I guess that I have always embraced people’s rights instead.

After watching the 2012 Republican National Convention, I became excited about the role of women in our country today, and where we are headed. I was thrilled that my daughter (who is a small-business owner) and my two granddaughters (who are bright, lively girls), as well as myself, can look up to a great array of positive female role models. Many of them spoke at the convention. They included: Condoleezza Rice, Nikki Haley, Mia Love and Susana Martinez. All possess qualities that I, myself, admire and would be honored to see exhibited in my daughter and granddaughters.

Life was not easy for the women who spoke at the convention. They actually worked hard to gain success and live a meaningful life. My daughter has also worked earnestly to make her business a success despite raising children, taking care of a home, fixing meals, etc. The government did not help these women become successful. They did it on their own.

I started thinking about the future of all women in this country. It seems that under the Obama administration, they would have little to look forward to unless you think that free contraceptives, high unemployment and an astronomical debt are gifts. I know that I want more than this for my girls and myself.

While the debt clock has passed the 16 trillion dollar mark, (it is still hard to wrap my head around all those zeros), the Obama administration is offering ways to make life easy for women while spending more of the government’s money which it does not have.

While we stand on the edge of a financial cliff knowing that we need to pare down, this administration is offering programs to facilitate a lighter load for women. They are all great ideas, but they continue to encompass government as a giant safety net.

Some examples of these programs/grants are:[2]

• Grants for Single Mothers
• Grants to Pay Medical Bills
• Grants for Home Improvements
• Grants for Women
• Single Mother Housing Grants
• Grants for Personal Needs

I have only listed a few of these programs. There are many more.

Yes, sometimes people need help. But should we encourage people to take the easy way out when our government has to borrow money to make this happen? Or should we scrutinize these programs to determine whether our tax dollars are being spent wisely? More importantly, should we continue to promote dependency rather than independence? It seems to me that dependency has kept women in bondage for far too long.

There is no denying that our country is in economic turmoil. You can’t deny the numbers. But I look at the hope my daughter and granddaughters can have if we elect someone who will focus on shrinking the government, help us become energy independent, reform healthcare and repeal Obamacare, dissolve the red tape that binds small businesses instead of expanding them, and insure safety, at all costs, for all of us.

This thinking and planning promotes independence, economic growth, healthy employment, solvency as a Nation, and strength in our National Defense.

I want a plan that will allow all women to thrive while pursuing true liberty. I want a platform that promotes less dependency on government and less debt for the future. A future where dreams can and will happen because our Nation has reshaped itself to be what it was originally intended to be.

My excitement started with the convention and grows deeper every day. I don’t feel that there is a war on women. I feel that the real war is women finding out what the real issues are and how to overcome them.

George S. Patton once said, “Better to fight for something rather than live for nothing.”[3] Let’s start fighting and look forward to a better future!

See how you, too, can get excited about real change for this country. Talk to your female friends. Allow them to see that they really can have an exciting future if we support a program where we attack the issues and provide solutions to move our country forward!

This is the second in a two-part series on growing threats and strategies in the Internet age. CyberSecurity at Risk Part 1: Growing Threats demonstrates the rising impact of CyberCrime on business and that CyberWarfare is a key military strategy our enemies are quickly grasping. CyberSecurity at Risk Part 2: Changing the Rules Again shows the national security strategies needed to protect our vital interests.

In the fast-changing CyberSecurity world, staying one step ahead of attackers has never been more challenging.

Recently, a virus that infected 30,000 computer workstations attacked the Saudi Arabian oil company Aramco. Aramco took their main website off the Internet for several days. Credit for the attack came from a group called the Cutting Sword of Justice.[1]

During 2009 and 2010, U.S. and Israel released the Stuxnet virus to secretly disrupt Iran’s uranium enrichment progress.[2]  Because Stuxnet is old CyberSecurity news – and as attackers catch up – we must change the rules of the game again.

Maintaining security in the Cyber world starts with the basics. However, stealing secrets is always easier if the front door is unlocked with nobody watching.

In February 2012, the hacker group Anonymous published 78 email addresses and passwords from the Syrian government: 33 of the 78 passwords were either “12345” or “123456.” On the same day, Anonymous leaked a series of emails from inside the Syrian government.[3]

Are we doing any better than Syria securing our vital national secrets? In 2011, Gmail experienced a phishing attack from China that targeted personal email accounts of White House staff. A phishing scam seeks to get people to reveal IDs, passwords, and account numbers. The attackers’ aim was likely to uncover official White House business or national security secrets being discussed in private email or on home computers.[4]  Due to the common practice of using the same passwords at home and work, did the Chinese actually find much more?

Failed CyberSecurity Strategies

How well has the Obama administration done defending our cyber borders and protecting business and trade?

In the last legislative year, the House and Senate voted on differing national CyberSecurity bills. The Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act, passed in the House, was co-sponsored by the Democrat and Republican senior representatives on the Intelligence Committee. Obama, however, threatened to veto this measure that encourages companies to share cybersecurity information. The CyberSecurity Act of 2012, openly supported by the Obama White House, was defeated in the Senate when the Senate split over mandating cybersecurity standards for private businesses.[5]

Despite this loss in the Senate, the Obama administration is pushing a Presidential executive order with key provisions from the failed Senate bill.[6]  Why would the White House deliberately go around the legislative process?

Rather than strengthening our defenses, the failed CyberSecurity Act of 2012 and likely Presidential executive order impose government oversight and interference, and add the following risks to businesses:

No protection from lawsuits – Information sharing is key to handling a Cyber attack. Leaked drafts of the proposed executive order do not include limits on companies being sued for sharing information about a cyber attack with the government. If companies need to frequently check with their lawyers on potential exposure to lawsuits, the timely flow of information will stop.[7]

Even by adding protection against lawsuits in the CyberSecurity legislation, businesses may still hesitate to share vital information with government and each other. Food safety may be one of the few examples where the government and business have established the practices to quickly share information.

Government mandated standards – The Administration’s executive order seeks to impose “voluntary” CyberSecurity standards on critical industries.[8]  Would businesses be slapped with lawsuits from customers or shareholders for failing to meet “voluntary” security standards?

CyberSecurity Leadership Agenda

So challenging is the Cyber threat that at the recent DefCon hacker conference, National Security Agency General Keith Alexander asked hackers to help make the Internet secure and defend privacy.[9]  While this might lead to interesting relationships with the hacker community, a strong CyberSecurity leadership agenda must instead be created.

We can no longer be satisfied being one step ahead of the other side as we were with Stuxnet. All it takes is one talented and motivated individual to penetrate our cyber defenses that cost billions of dollars to build and maintain.

Here are a few key issues we must address in a rapidly changing technical world:

Create a partnership between government and business –The need to build readiness extends to businesses such as banks, power companies, communications, and other utilities in partnership with government. We cannot wait until an attack to ensure communication lines are in place between business, government and military.

Cut through or eliminate the layers of bureaucracy – Due to privacy concerns, many government agencies can’t share information with each other. Sharing Cyber intelligence between agencies is critical to ensuring our nuclear program, military forces, and intelligence agencies can meet an attack with proper force. Furthermore, eliminating needless CyberSecurity mandates and regulations minimizes government overreach.

Continue investing in CyberWarfare capabilities – General Keith Alexander recently said the Department of Defense will reach full CyberWarfare readiness by 2014.[10] With the public sector in competition for prized talent in the private sector, adding the talent and systems to build readiness requires long-term funding, leadership, and discipline.

Define the rules of engagement – Our forces will only be successful in the case of a Cyber attack if the following questions are understood.[11]

• Who is the attacker?
• What is the immediate response?
• What command structure is in place to make the decision for a greater response?

In the Cyber world, the identity of attackers is easily covered up. Suppose the U.S. retaliated against an attack only to discover the real attacker cleverly pointed the evidence elsewhere?

Cyber attacks have not yet crossed over to the horror and cost of real-life warfare. However, our ability to defend our borders and protect trade is being challenged every day. It takes only one technically savvy attacker to cause serious damage. With our enemies now including rogue states, drug lords and Cyber criminals, we cannot be protected by Cold War strategies of the past.

With new CyberSecurity threats, we must demand that our government act with urgency to protect our vital infrastructure. Maintaining our competitive advantage and national security in a post 9-11 world depends on it.

For more solutions to the problems facing America in a post 9-11 world, go to truecapitalism.org

American citizen, by your vote, YOU have the power to decide which of the of the two competing paths before us our country will take:

1. Do you want a top down government managed society, with an ever bigger and more powerful federal government, and ever weaker and more dependent citizen/subjects, with a weak, government dominated economy, high taxes, high unemployment, and high debt?

2.  Or, do you want to restore the free society established by our founding fathers through the Constitution, with limited government powers, a free, vibrant economy, and strong, free and independent citizens who remain protected by a community safety net, not a containment net?

The choice is now before you on Nov. 6. Not to choose is to choose.  Your country’s future depends on you.  Where do YOU stand?

The American Vision

“…a wise and frugal government…which shall leave them [the people] otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned…this is the sum of good government.”

President Thomas Jefferson

First Inaugural Address, 1801

“The founding fathers established a nation under God, ruled not by arbitrary decrees of kings or the whims of entrenched elites but by the consent of the governed.  Theirs was the vision of a striving, God-fearing, self reliant people living in the sunlight of justice and breathing the bracing air of liberty.”

“…. Almost all of the world’s constitutions are documents in which governments tell the people what their privileges are.  Our Constitution is a document in which “we the people” tell the government what it is allowed to do.  “We the people” are free.”

“Government’s first duty is to protect the people, not run their lives.”

                                                                                                         President Ronald Reagan

The Liberal/Left Obamanation Vision

“…government, compassionate toward its subjects, provides for their security, forsees and supplies their necessities, facilitates their pleasures, manages their principal concerns, directs their industry, makes rules for their testaments, and divides their inheritances….”

“It does not break men’s will, but softens, bends and guides it; it seldom enjoins, but often inhibits action; it does not destroy anything, but prevents much being born; it is not at all tyrannical, but it hinders, restrains, enervates, stifles, and stultifies so much that in the end each nation is no more than a flock of timid and hardworking animals with government as its shepherd.”

                                                                             Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America, 1840

“In 5 days we begin the fundamental transformation of America.”

Barak Obama, 5 days before 2008 election.  

This is the first in a two-part series on growing threats and strategies in the Internet age. CyberSecurity at Risk Part 1: Growing Threats demonstrates the rising impact of CyberCrime on business and that CyberWarfare is a key military strategy our enemies are quickly grasping. CyberSecurity at Risk Part 2: Changing the Rules Again shows the national security strategies to protect our vital interests.

The digital revolution has turned mainstream. Just 30 years after the first PC, we celebrate progress with each new iPhone and iPad release. Facebook was the highly publicized initial public offering of stock for 2012. Mark Zuckerberg, Steve Jobs, and Bill Gates are household names.

Hazards of the same digital age have also gone mainstream as many of us experience identity theft, online scams, computer viruses, and online predators. With the growth of social media and mobile devices providing new opportunities for criminals to ambush the unsuspecting, the Cyber world is a dangerous place for our citizens and nation.

Cyber threats take on two primary forms:

CyberCrime makes big money from industrial espionage, fraud, spam, viruses, and more. Symantec estimates the cost of CyberCrime is $338 billion globally. Cybercrime is more lucrative than the drug trade.[1] There has been a dramatic rise in attacks on small businesses over the last six months while the attacks on large businesses have declined; 36% of attacks are now on small business.[2]

CyberWarfare has been on the rise more than a decade with the objectives of achieving a battlefield advantage and dominating covert operations. The U.S. and Israel developed the computer virus Stuxnet to secretly disrupt Iran’s uranium enrichment process. Stuxnet accidentally “escaped” due to a programming error and was discovered in 2010. In a New York Times article, author David Sanger disclosed strategies used by the White House to deploy Stuxnet.[3] The White House is under investigation by the U.S. Attorney General for classified intelligence leaks.[4]

Those seeking to exploit any weaknesses in our defenses are talented and motivated:

Organized crime syndicates – Russia leads in making a business out of CyberCrime. The breakup of the Soviet Union and their lax government oversight led highly motivated and talented former state-security operatives to join with organized crime. “They’re incredibly persistent. If it takes a year to set up their targets, then they’ll wait the year,” said Jose Granado, Ernst & Young’s information security practice leader.[5]

Rogue nations – A recent Department of Defense report stated, “Sensitive U.S. economic information and technology are targeted by the intelligence services, private sector companies, academic and research institutions, and citizens of dozens of countries. Chinese actors are the world’s most active and persistent perpetrators of economic espionage.” The “actors” – those who steal and disrupt – use a variety of methods to take intellectual property ranging from computer intrusions to more personal methods. Chinese intelligence services exploit people with ties to China to steal trade secrets using insider access to corporate networks.[6]

With Russia and China possessing the capability to push CyberWarfare forward, other nations are making strides. North Korea recently increased its CyberWarfare unit to 3,000 elite staff.[7] In an address to the U.S. House subcommittee overseeing CyberSecurity, General James Clapper was reported as saying Iran’s cyber capabilities “have dramatically increased in recent years in depth and complexity.” [8]

Highly-motivated individuals – It takes only one technically savvy criminal or attacker to cause serious damage.

Some prosecutors are learning to use the Internet to go on the offensive. U.S. Attorney Jenny Durkan told a press conference, “People think that cyber criminals cannot be found or apprehended. Today we know that’s not true. You cannot hide in cyberspace. We will find you. We will charge you. We will extradite you and we will prosecute you.” [9]

Our Nation at Risk

Our national infrastructure is susceptible to two types of attack:

• Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) attack – Shuts down computer systems by high volume of traffic and superiority of attack. For example, a DDOS attack in September 2012 disrupted at least six large U.S. banks. Security experts stated the Middle East group claiming credit, Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Cyber Fighters, must have had help. Senator Joe Lieberman, chairman of the Senate Homeland Security Committee, believes the attacks were sponsored by Iran.[10]
• Stuxnet-like attack – Stuxnet succeeded in covertly disrupting critical infrastructure inside Iran. The next Stuxnet may be pointed at the U.S. as a cunning means to disrupt operations or steal secrets.

President Obama recently wrote in the Wall Street Journal Opinion section that his administration made CyberSecurity a priority, since “the cyber threat to our nation is one of the most serious economic and national security challenges we face.”  He added, “So far, no one has managed to seriously damage or disrupt our critical infrastructure networks. But foreign governments, criminal syndicates and lone individuals are probing our financial, energy and public safety systems every day.” [11]

Have we succeeded in advancing the CyberSecurity priority? Three years ago, Stuxnet dictated new rules in CyberWarfare. Yet Stuxnet is old CyberSecurity news. As attackers become more sophisticated, we must change the rules of the game again.

The next article – CyberSecurity at Risk Part 2: Changing the Rules Again – looks at key CyberSecurity strategies taking us beyond the Cold War and to government’s role in protecting our vital interests.

For more solutions to the problems facing America in a post 9-11 world, go to truecapitalism.org

School lunches are now the hot topic as lunch trays are a bit lighter and calories are being limited. The so-called “nanny-state” has spread across America and into our schools as First Lady Michelle Obama, despite not being a nutritionist, has decided she knows what’s best for our children’s diets.

This is part of her “Let’s Move” campaign, and it resulted in the “Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act” which was passed into law by the lame duck, Democrat-controlled Congress in December 2010.[1] Now the frustrations that played out in the Occupy movement have moved into the hallways of our schools as our youth protest the reduced lunches that are making them go hungry.[2] [3]

New Rules

“Under the new regulations, cafeterias are required to serve twice as many fruits and vegetables while limiting proteins and carbohydrates. For an average high school student, that means two baked fish nuggets, a cup of vegetables, half a cup of mashed potatoes, one whole grain roll and 8 ounces of fat free milk is the fuel that served to get them through their last four hours of classes.”[4]

In one reported school district, the cafeteria staff are instructed to count out how many tater tots each student gets so they are in compliance with these new regulations.[5] Instead of making sure our children are fed, we are making sure we calorie-restrict them regardless of their weight, height, age and caloric needs. This is crazy!

From Riots in the Street to Riots in the Hallways

Students at Parsippany Hills High School held a strategy session in September to discuss a potential lunch strike over what they have called inadequately sized meals.  These students were so outraged they planned a cafeteria boycott that will cost the school money.  One noted comment echoes a perennial concern: these students want to know why they are paying the price for other people’s problems.  “If somebody’s obese why should someone like me who’s not obese have to suffer, and eat a small meal when I’d rather have a bigger meal?”[6]

As a health and wellness business owner, I certainly understand the importance of ensuring our children and students receive nutritious meals at school.  According to the Centers for Disease Control, childhood obesity has tripled in the last thirty years.[7] The answer to this issue is that we must start in the home by teaching our children the importance of an active lifestyle and healthy eating.   Parents and communities, not the government, should find common ground in empowering these children with the tools needed for a healthy lifestyle.

Where’s the Beef?  Not on Students’ Plates!

The result of this new school lunch law is that we end up with hungry kids.  The new high school lunch limit of 750 to 850 calories is simply not enough for growing kids.[8] Like adults, kids vary in their size, activity level and metabolism rate.  School athletes are finding that functioning in their athletic activities is becoming a challenge. I was an athlete in high school, and I remember walking that lunch line twice. I paid extra but my calorie needs were met.  The school made their money, and I was nourished to play a 2.5-hour competitive volleyball game after school.

Let’s Look at the Collateral Damage of this Bureaucratic Decision

Students and teachers are both suffering under this new rule. Many reports claim children are complaining they are still hungry after lunch, leaving teachers with the challenge of teaching hungry students.[9]

Growing government regulation also makes it more expensive for all parties.  This costs both the school more (even for less food) and the families more – the cost of school lunches has risen by $0.20-$0.25 per plate.[10]  No one is receiving a good value in the long run. To make matters worse, new government-required paperwork consumes so much of the employees’ time that it is driving up labor costs.[11]

Even more interesting, students have reportedly begun a black market bringing food to school and selling it to other students.[12] Apparently even students have a better understanding of job creation and free trade than Washington bureaucrats!

Kids being food-restricted at school will lead to them finding the fastest food items after school to replenish themselves.  If good nutrition choices do not start in the home, then children will follow their stomachs and find the quickest “pick me up” after school.  Whether they stop for fast food or overeat on “baked” potato chips, we are setting them up for unbalanced eating habits.  I can see government turning around and saying, “It’s ok, when you go to McDonalds just use thinner straws for your milkshakes.”

Beyond the classroom, the rapid expansion of government regulation is taking away freedoms from consumers like you and I. Do not forget New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who has banned large-sized sugary drinks and all but eliminated the use of trans fats in restaurant food.[13]

The Final Rule

Americans should be outraged. The school lunch mandate and the progression of many other red tape decisions by the Obama administration are only a small taste of what’s in store for America as he continues his agenda into a second term.  Quite simply, it’s none of the government’s business. Parents, not politicians and bureaucrats, should decide what their children eat. Right now it’s “too much turkey” in your children’s lunch.  What will it be tomorrow?   Just imagine…

What we are seeing is surely not leadership, it is slow control, and even with “the best of intentions” all roads lead to… well, you know the rest of the story.

Do you feel a change in the economy? Are you worried about your job security?  Major businesses like Medtronic and General Mills together laid off nearly 2,000 works to adapt to the current slowdown.[1] [2]  With so many unknowns today, wouldn’t it be nice to know why we’re slowing down?  The answer lies in following the Washington money trail.

At the time of this post the U.S. National Debt is $16.1 trillion with $1.1 trillion of our annual spending going on the government’s credit card (deficit spending).[3]

This deficit spending and massive debt puts our country in danger of going off a “fiscal cliff” when a number of tax cuts expire and government spending cuts go into effect at the end of 2012.  What’s worse is that many people don’t have enough skin in the game to fight to make sure we don’t fall off the fiscal cliff. Only 53.6% of our nation pays income taxes.[4]  What percentage of people who don’t pay taxes are concerned with our Nation’s fiscal problems?

Besides this troubling government overspending, many people are also concerned with the size of our government’s Bureaucracy.  The Executive Branch, led by President Obama, is made up of 15 cabinet positions, 32 Czars, and 479 Federal agencies.[5]  Add state agencies and the number grows to over 2,000. That’s huge, and growing!  What are the impacts of such an enormous Bureaucracy?

Difference Between Public Sector and Bureaucrats

Let’s start by distinguishing between the Public Sector and Bureaucrats.  The Public Sector consists of needed Government jobs for a working economy and our defense. These jobs might include the FBI, police, fire departments, courts, street lighting, enforcing property rights, military, and a few others.

Bureaucrats make up the largest percentage of our Government. A Bureaucrat is an employee of a government agency whose job it is to follow procedures and regulations.  They are rule creators and enforcers—-that’s it.  They don’t produce food, clothing, homes, technology, cars, or anything of real value.  They are “non-producing.”

Bureaucrats’ salaries and benefits are paid for by United States taxes collected from the private sector where food, clothing, homes, technology, etc., are produced.  Therefore, their survival is tied to collecting money from the taxpayers.

Bureaucrats Driven Towards Inefficiency

Besides not having to produce anything, what incentives are in place for a Bureaucrat?  Does a Bureaucrat want a larger salary, more benefits and job security?  Yes!  Who wouldn’t want that?

How do Bureaucrats go about getting more pay, more benefits, and greater job security?

• They lobby to obtain more benefits and public pensions.
• They create more rules and regulations to justify their existence. This adds people to government payrolls, but doesn’t add anything to production.
• Their budgets decrease if they don’t spend them, so they are driven to spend every dime that comes into their department.  (So much for being driven towards lowering costs.)
• If costs are higher, there are no consequences to their job security – the government will just raise more taxes or print money.
• If they trim costs by being more efficient they work themselves out of a job, so efficiency suffers.

In other words, bureaucrats are actually rewarded by spending more private sector dollars than they collect via taxes!  This explains at least one reason government spending has grown 40 times its size since 1960,[6] while the United States population hasn’t even doubled during that time period.[7] [8]

The larger Bureaucracy grows the smaller the private sector becomes.

The Private Sector Difference

The Private Sector is driven towards productivity and efficiency; creating more with less actually rewards the Private Sector.  If the Private Sector generates more income with less cost there is more profit left over for the shareholders. Intelligent business owners reward employees who trim costs as it is in their best interest to retain key employees.

In addition to producing goods and services, the Private Sector responds quickly to the demands of millions of consumers. In other words Private Sector money produces things of value and Bureaucratic money is non-producing and inefficient.

The 64,000-Dollar Question

What would give you an edge in a global economy?  Having the highest or the lowest possible amount of money going towards production?  Obviously, you want more money going towards production with the smallest amount possible going towards inefficient “non-production.”

This is why it is vital that we turn our economic ship around.  Eventually, with an ever-expanding Bureaucracy, the whole economy will be inefficient, “non-producing” money. There will be more people in the cart than are pulling it.

Eventually you reach a tipping point where you increase the non-producing part of the economy so much that it drags down the producing part to a point of no return.

President Obama has done nothing but increase the size of government non-production since being in office. It’s critical that we communicate to our friends the importance of putting an end to increasing government Bureaucracy and is critical if we are to save our nation.

Tough love. It can be hard to do but as mothers we know it’s needed at times. My children knew from a young age that I would not tolerate lies, and that the consequences of a “cover up” would be far more painful than “fessing up” with the truth. I wanted to instill in them that all meaningful relationships – from friendships, to marriage, to employee/employer – depend on honesty in order to thrive.

Our society depends on us raising children who understand the value of integrity, and when our children are among the soldiers and diplomats serving the U.S. overseas, we expect absolute integrity from our government when it comes to protecting them.

Safety First

Our Constitution very clearly states that one of the most important duties of our federal government is national defense. Our inalienable rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness require our leaders (political and military) to keep us safe. We as mothers take this responsibility very seriously, as it’s one of our jobs too. Just watch a mom jump into action when she thinks her child is being threatened!

In order to effectively keep our loved ones safe we must be aware of the facts and understand the truth in any given situation. When our teenagers want to go to a new friend’s house, don’t we “annoy” them with a rapid-fire list of questions? (Where do they live? Will there be adult supervision? Who else is going to be there?) We are trying to assess the environment in order to prevent possible harm.

Our national leaders must also be able to clearly evaluate the environment and accurately assess the world’s conditions in order to make the appropriate decisions for our citizens’ safety. Unfortunately, this doesn’t seem to have been the case in regards to our U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya. Four Americans were murdered there on September 11, 2012, a date that should have had every American leader on high alert here and most certainly abroad in the Middle East.

Yet it’s now been revealed that repeated requests by our Libyan Ambassador for extra security were denied or ignored even though there had been 230 security incidents in Libya in the 13 months preceding the attack![1] [2]

To make matters worse this administration initially blamed the murders, as well as other anti-American Middle East uprisings, on a “spontaneous protest” over an anti-Muslim Internet video even though evidence from the start showed that to be untrue.[3]

Mother’s Grief

Pat Smith, the mother of one of the 4 Americans murdered in Benghazi, has repeatedly tried to find out the truth about the death of her son. Even though many high-ranking officials, including President Obama, promised her that she would hear the truth no matter how painful, she had this to say in a recent interview on CNN:

“Everyone of them, all the big shots over there told me – they promised me, they promised me that they would tell me what happened… They haven’t told me anything. They are still studying it. And the things that they are telling me are just outright lies.” [4]

Thankfully the truth is starting to come to light in the congressional hearings taking place in Washington,[5] but why wouldn’t the Obama Administration just tell the truth from the beginning? Why blame a video that hardly a living soul had seen? Even if they didn’t have all of the facts yet, why blame someone or something else prematurely? Is it because of the upcoming election and the possible consequences of a failed foreign policy?

Mainstream Media A.W.O.L.?

Worse yet, where were our mainstream media investigative journalists when all of this was happening? Why weren’t they asking the hard, direct questions from the start? It was 9/11 after all. Do they really think the American people believe it was just a coincidence that this “spontaneous protest” just happened to occur on that date? Seriously? Let’s get a mom in front of the media microphones, especially one who has a child risking his life overseas in the military, and I can guarantee that she will drill the White House with a list of tough questions that would make their heads spin!

Remember as moms we know that those who lie and perpetuate a lie must be held accountable and face the consequences. At the very least, if the people in charge were telling the truth, but can’t accurately assess the dangers our citizens face, then these leaders are themselves a threat to our security and must be replaced.

It is my responsibility as a mother to keep my young children safe when they are in my care; and it is my responsibility as a citizen to make sure I hold our  leaders accountable to do the same for all of our daughters and sons, whether overseas or at home.

My father-in-law was a union meat packer back in the 50s when working conditions were truly deplorable and wages were far below what we would consider “liveable.”  From his stories I came to understand that unions could serve a vital need for laborers.

But today’s headlines involving unions – whether it’s the “Right to Work” debate or the teachers’ strike in Chicago or the resistance to Boeing’s efforts to start up a new plant in South Carolina – all strike me as “way off course!”  So I did a little research.

Unions’ origins are rooted in the guild system of Europe going way back to the Middle Ages. Guilds were made up of experienced and confirmed experts in their craft.  It was about rising to a level of mastery in one’s trade – progressing from “apprentice” to “journeyman” to “master craftsman.”[1]  Although Guilds served a purpose for their members and for consumers, they also “became intimately involved in regulating and protecting their members’ interests,” and “Guilds came to control the distribution and sale of food, cloth, and other staple goods, and so often gained a powerful monopoly.”[2]

Likewise, today’s unions can wield a great deal of power – recall Boeing vs. the machinists’ union right-to-work case[3] – and they are often more concerned with continued pay raises, ever-expanding benefits and job security than they are with maintaining expertise in their “craft” or competitiveness in the marketplace.

Understanding Today’s Unions

The state of modern unions can be traced back to the early days of the 1930s “New Deal.”  Beginning in the ‘30s up to the end of WWII, union membership rose dramatically to a peak level of 34% of the workforce.[4]  Why the incredible sudden rise in popularity?  Franklin D. Roosevelt’s administration believed the federal government needed to organize and control labor.  Under his term the National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA) was created in 1933. NIRA was the government’s attempt to regulate labor and competition.

Shortly thereafter, in 1935, the Supreme Court declared NIRA unconstitutional.[5]  One of the suggested reasons was that the Act promoted economically harmful monopolies.  But on its heels an even greater monstrosity was created: the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). The NLRA actually replaced the voluntarism of NIRA with mandates and new stronger enforcement mechanisms.

Under the New Deal, free competition was viewed as a destructive force that needed to be “both controlled and channeled through institutions that practice ‘fair competition’ under the watchful, mediating power of the government.”[6]  (As if Government knew best and there was a special breed of “Federal masterminds” qualified to rule over the “common masses.”)[7]

“Fair competition” became the standard bearer over “free competition.”  Corporations were to charge “fair prices” rather than competitive prices and they were to pay “fair wages” rather than competitive wages.[8]  Does this word “fair” sound familiar in today’s rhetoric coming from the White House?

Our Founders knew better than to give this kind of power to decide what is “fair” to the new Federal Government they were forming.  They knew about the corruption of power; they had just freed themselves from centralized tyranny.

The progressive ideology of increased government involvement created a playing field that is anything but level.  The social ethic proposed by this system is everyone working for the public good.  However, the end result has been much more self-serving, with unions aligning themselves with the politicians they help get re-elected.  We call this “Washington Inc.,” and it is not True Capitalism.

Where’s the Fairness?

As an entrepreneur who has built his own business, I have to ask the question, “Fair for Whom?”  I have no job guarantee, no tenure, no automatic annual built-in pay increase, and no pension other than the money I can scrape up to invest in my IRA after taxes and payroll liabilities.  For the last 5 years I’ve had to lower my prices just to stay afloat.  All Government has done for my business during this period is increase the burden of more time consuming and costly regulations.

As part of the private sector I’m left competing in a marketplace made uncompetitive by a government that continues to tax and spend our nation into historic deficits, while they trade favors for the union vote.  As of June 2012, state and local governments compensated employees an average of $41.10 per hour as compared to an average of $28.80 in the private sector.[9]   There is no way I can pay my employees wages and benefits like that and compete for bids in my market.

I find it interesting that there is only one arena where unions continue to hold steady at 37% of the work force.[10]  Which sector is this?  Government (public) employees – an arena where there is no competition and no drive for profitability!

Even a progressive like FDR believed that federal employees should not be unionized.  He understood that government agencies employing only union workers created a monopoly with no concern about competitiveness, efficiency or “keeping it honest.”[11]

Where Will It End?

Last summer San Bernardino became the third California city in a month to declare bankruptcy.  Facing a budget shortfall of $46 million and annual deficits over the next 5 years, they opted for Chapter 9 bankruptcy protection.[12]

California Governor Jerry Brown said he believes the public employee pension system is unsustainable and that it continues to gobble up larger shares of the state and local budgets, compelling offsetting reductions in other vital services.[13]  Many believe we are seeing just the tip of the iceberg, with many more defaults to follow.

Meanwhile, Gov. Scott Walker’s stand in Wisconsin showed us that tremendous budget shortfalls can be turned around quickly without massive layoffs.  In the spring of 2011 Wisconsin faced a $3.6 billion budget shortfall, largely because of excesses in public employee unions’ collective bargaining agreements.[14] Currently Wisconsin is projected to have a budget surplus by June 2013.[15]

I Want My Change Back!

The Economics of the New Deal have proven to be unfair to the private sector and unsustainable for our cities and states. It’s time for the Government to get out of collusion with unions and out of the business of regulating what is “fair” and  “competitive.”  Furthermore, unions need to be competitive in the free marketplace.  If unions’ highest goal was excellence in their trade I believe their products and services would be valuable, and they would welcome evaluation and improvement.

Workers should have the right to choose whether joining a union makes sense for them instead of being pressured to join.  States should have the right and freedom to choose whether unions or unionized companies make sense for them instead of having to fight both the unions and pressure from the National Labor Relations Board.

We need leaders who dare to face economic realities and are committed to live within balanced budgets.

In the wake of the brutal killing of our Libyan ambassador and three other Americans, questions are stirring about what the administration knew and when. Are we witnessing the unfolding of a cover-up with broader consequences?

The event timeline of these fatalities shows U.S. intelligence knew of terrorism ties within 24 hours of the attack.[1] The White House response? Carefully worded condemnations linking the attacks to an anti-Muslim video. U.N. Ambassador Rice spoke on the Sunday morning shows five days later saying the attacks, “…began spontaneously in Benghazi as a reaction to what had transpired some hours earlier in Cairo, where…there was a violent protest outside of our embassy sparked by this hateful video.” [2]

The administration’s story began to unravel eight days after the killings with answers to Congress by Mathew Olson, National Counterterrorism Center Director, saying the Americans “…were killed in the course of a terrorist attack…” Secretary Clinton later agreed. In his speech to the U.N., Obama continued to blame the video. Fifteen days after the attack, Press Secretary Carney was forced to switch his tune, saying Obama’s view was that this was a terrorist attack.[3]

Obama’s absence of forceful condemnation of the terrorist attack is an attempt to appease his voting base and radical Middle East leadership. Instead we are forced to endure statements like “bumps in the road.” Judgment and decisiveness are the first casualties of a weak leader.

Focus by mainstream news media was initially aimed at Romney’s response and the video. The toughest questioning of Obama came from Hispanic-oriented Univision.[4] Charles Krauthammer rightly points out the administration’s willingness to deceive after gloating over the killing of bin Laden, and the mainstream media not headlining the real story.[5]

Washington cover-ups should remind us of the 1970s Watergate era. Mainstream media’s tough questions compelled Congress to act, and a bad president was removed. There is nothing new about politicians playing by their own Washington Rules: Democrats and Republicans have done it for years. Why is today’s mainstream news media playing by Washington Rules to support another bad president? It is time for the new Woodwards and Bernsteins to challenge the rules again.

Paul Quanrud is a writer and blogger with American Citizens for Economic Freedom (http://truecapitalism.org/). 

An interesting thing happens each year with our tax dollars. The overall tax receipts (amount of tax dollars collected) always average around 18% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP).[1] GDP represents the total dollar value of all goods and services produced over a specific time period for the U.S. The relationship of taxes collected to GDP goes back at least 50 years, and has remained steady between 15 and 20% regardless of the overall tax rate or tax policies.[2]

The U.S. GDP is currently around $15 trillion per year. 18% of $15 trillion is around $2.7 trillion, which is close to how much the government collected in taxes last year. The budget for 2012 is $3.79 trillion.[3]  If taxes collected are again around 18% of GDP (or around $2.7 trillion), this leaves a deficit of over $1 trillion, which our government has to borrow to cover their expenses. (Read more here about how government creates money out of Thin Air.)

From time to time countries run budget deficits. Our deficit, however, cannot be overcome by everybody paying their “fair share” (as our President has proposed), since our deficit is now so enormous. To make matters worse, the federal budget goes up each year due to automatic budget increases.[4] On average the U.S. budget increases 8% per year automatically, with no oversight by congress.

As you can see we have a bit of a problem.

There is a term in the accounting world called ‘the rule of 72.’  This rules states that if you divide the percentage of increase (8% for our federal budget) into 72, you get the number of years it is going to take the original amount to double. In the case of our $3.7 trillion budget, it would double in 9 years (72/8=9) to over $7 trillion.

In order to pay for this $7 trillion budget, our GDP will need to be in the neighborhood of $40 trillion 9 years from now.  (Remember, the government will collect roughly 18% of that $40 trillion in taxes.) Forty trillion is roughly 2.5 times what the GDP is now, but over the last 3.5 years the U.S. GDP has grown very little, if at all.[5]  This is important because you as the taxpayer have to pay for the budget whether the economy grows or not.

Keep in mind that a 2-3% annual growth rate in the GDP is needed to cover government services (Medicare, Social Security, Welfare, etc.), and to keep up with inflation.  A 2- 3% growth rate in the GDP translates into an increase in jobs each year due to the implied increased productivity, which in turn boosts the tax base and allows the government to collect more tax revenue.

The benefit of this relationship between a growing GDP and increased tax revenue is lost when government spends money faster than they collect it. Each year now the government is spending over $1 trillion more than they bring in. The bigger the deficit, the faster we go into a hole that GDP growth cannot help us get out of. The only way out is to cut spending and shrink the rate of government growth.

Without sound fiscal policy we will be on the hook for trillions of dollars of government overspending. Can you afford to cover the government’s lack of fiscal discipline over the next 9 years?

If nothing changes, the budget deficit will eventually get so large that there will be no hope of paying it back. Currently we are spending 25% of our GDP to run the government ($3.79 trillion budget / $15 trillion GDP = 25%). The recipe for fiscal responsibility is to get the government operating on no more than 18% of GDP so that taxes collected cover the government’s expenses.

The election is only one month away.  It is critical that you know which candidates are absolutely committed to shrinking our bloated government and getting us on a path of true recovery.  This economic war is real and you are on the battlefield. Your vote is your weapon – use it wisely.

Our political leadership in Washington is seemingly developing a policy and strategy from a familiar position…from behind!  The cost of this will be measured in more loss of lives to be sure.  The cost is also measured in energy cost increases every American will feel.

Most of today’s oil is being pumped and sold through the Middle East from Islamic countries.  Radical Islamist organizations operate within the region and will do anything they can to attack America and our values.  The tool of war they are using through the riots and protests is an economic weapon…oil prices driven up by fear.

The fear that oil supplies could be cut or stopped is very real.  We have already seen gas prices in the USA jump since the first attacks.[1]  This is on top of the rising costs for gasoline this year.[2]  In fact, I personally saw gas spike to nearly $4.00 in my town in the days after the attacks started.[3]

America weakly warns countries and radical Islamists that we will not tolerate actions like this.  We bluster and threaten them while continuing to send them economic assistance, with rising gasoline prices immediately impacting Americans.

Energy Autonomy is the solution to restoring our economy and strengthening our national defense.  When we are not subject to radical mobs, when we have tapped our oil reserves in Alaska, the Gulf of Mexico and huge deposits on our mainland, we secure America.

The terrorists in the Middle East and Asia will lose a weapon of economic fear when we aggressively and strategically tap our oil resources.  Instead of having those who hate us controlling the cost of everything in our lives – food, water, transportation, jobs, etc. – America will be in control!

This administration has no credible energy plan and we all are suffering as a result.  Our embassies, our ambassadors and our values are being attacked.  We apparently pose no threat or raise any fear with the people and nations who are punching America “below the belt.”

Energy Autonomy is our weapon and our solution that will allow us to prosper as a nation.  A prosperous energy-autonomous nation will give us financial freedom to build our national defenses.  Energy Autonomy will cripple these enemies and strengthen our intelligence community’s assets around the world.

The President has no plan to use Energy Autonomy as an economic recovery lever and national defense weapon.  Until he understands that algae and solar power from Solyndra-type companies can’t power a warplane, we pose no threat to Middle East radicals and America is at risk as a nation.

Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness

I started the growth and expansion of my business at the start of the 2009 recession.  Americans, filled with fear, were becoming accustomed to the state of the economy and what had become our new normal.  The SBA (Small Business Administration) and banks drastically tightened their available loans.  In the first quarter of the 2009 fiscal year, the SBA’s 7(a) program dropped 57% compared to the first quarter of 2008! [1]  In fact, my loan and one other were the only two loans that were accepted in a local Minneapolis, MN bank in a period of 8 months!   

Things haven’t changed much.  As of March of this year, total SBA approved loan volume was down 35%, or $4.8 billion.[2] To make the situation worse, the day before I moved into my new and beautiful salon build-out, the entire business district across the street burned to the ground from a kitchen fire.  “Welcome to the neighborhood!”

Surviving

It’s been 3 ½ years since this journey began and we are fully staffed, producing products and surviving.   I am constantly taken back to the reality of the costs, regulation and taxes.  Just like parents never expect the real costs of having a family, a new business owner is never fully prepared for the financial burden.

Tax Time

One time of the year that is despised by many business owners is the first few weeks in April (tax time).  We break out the checkbook and submit a very hefty payment to Uncle Sam.  This is because most small businesses file as S-Corporations, so their business income funnels directly to their personal taxes.  When Congress makes changes to personal tax rates, it is a direct tax on small business.  In the current economic crisis, increased taxes alone can stifle and put small businesses out of business.   This will be especially true if the Obamacare Mandate “tax” is allowed to continue.

Note that the National Association of Manufacturers President stated, “Escalating health care costs are job killers, forcing manufacturers to pay more in premiums rather than investing in their business and creating jobs… it is essential that Congress repeal the law and replace it with reform that benefits manufacturers and their employees.”[3]

Small Business Tax: Hard Numbers

Here is an example of what a small business owner pays:

• 7.15% of ALL employee payroll for FICA (payroll tax)
• 36% of ALL profits (including employee wages) in Federal Income Tax
• 7.95% of ALL profits in State Income Taxes

This means that over 51% of all profits to a business owner are paid in personal taxes, and there are tons of taxes beyond this. MN has a sales tax, car tabs, licenses, industry licenses, shipping taxes on goods, service taxes, cost of goods, shipping fees, etc. “Get it?”  Increased tax costs for businesses restrict the ability to grow and create jobs.

Drop-Off Ahead – A Nail-Biter

As I grow eager to grow my business by hiring more employees, producing more products and eventually opening another salon, I am even more fearful than I was when this recession first started because of the fast approaching “fiscal cliff” – straight ahead.

Over 40 consecutive months of 8% or more unemployment has flattened hopes for the “Recovery” Obama has been claiming.[4]  The U.S. economy created just 96,000 new jobs during the month of August.[5]  Although the number of jobs needed to keep up with population growth is not easy to calculate, that number is easily well over 100,000 new jobs needed every month.[6]

What is even more tragic is that more workers joined the government’s disability program than got new jobs in the month of June.[7]  Obama’s administration may be blind to this, but the American people know it is definitely not a sign of recovery.

Struggling companies will continue to shed their employees through the end of the year.  The end of 2012 will also bring a flurry of federal tax increases as the Bush tax cuts and temporary payroll tax reductions expire.[8]  A number of major tax-and-spending changes will take effect unless Congress acts. To top this off, the looming Obamacare “tax” will be the largest tax American history has ever seen!

It’s a Spending Issue

Reducing federal spending is critical to businesses and to our nation’s future.  The President should be leading our country in the opposite direction by giving employers and individuals the assurance that these tax hikes will be halted in their tracks.  In contrast, Obama’s 2013 budget calls for another $2 trillion in tax increases![9]  It’s apparent he has NO plan.

We must act now; the longer Congress waits to prevent Taxmageddon, the more uncertainty there will be.  Policymakers must be held accountable – they need to act quickly to lower taxes on individuals and businesses, simplify the tax code, and reduce bureaucracy. It has become clear that the President cannot lead, and the Democratic-Party-led Senate will not act.  The House of Representatives has repeatedly voted to fix these problems to no avail.

If you are a business owner, know that this nation cannot exist without you!  Share this article with your friends and business network, and join ACEF to change the direction of the United States of America – one person at a time.

Under Obamacare, “federal tax-based subsidies will begin in 2014 to subsidize millions of private insurance plans that will cover abortion-on-demand, including some plans (‘multi-state plans’) that will be administered by the federal government.”[1]

That’s right your tax dollars will be funding abortions regardless of your stance on the issue. According to Life News, Obamacare absolutely uses tax dollars to fund elective abortions.[2] This is a violation of the “Free Exercise Clause” in the First Amendment. This clause states, “Congress shall make no law…prohibiting the free exercise {of religion.}”[3] Millions of Americans are anti-abortion due to their religious convictions. No exemptions are made for citizens who are anti-abortion where as religious exemptions are made for groups such as the Amish who object to purchasing any insurance.[4]

“Obamacare requires every American to purchase health insurance, it requires every state to establish health insurance exchanges, and it dramatically expands Medicaid. Each of these – private health insurances programs, exchanges, and Medicaid – can, and in some cases are required to, provide coverage for abortion. The result is hundreds of millions of dollars being funneled to the abortion industry every year.”[5]

Many people may not know they will be paying for abortions through enrollment in an Obamacare plan because the fine print regarding an “abortion surcharge,” which is included in their monthly premium, may go unnoticed. These “abortion surcharge” dollars go into an abortion fund to pay for abortions. Health and Human Services issued a recent rule that the “abortion surcharge” information need only be disclosed once, during the enrollment process.[6] In other words, people who do not read the fine print will unknowingly be paying for abortions.

Obamacare circumvents the Hyde Amendment, which prohibits the use of federal funds for any abortion, except in the case of rape, incest or saving the life of the Mother.[7]  We are required by Obamacare to purchase government approved insurance or pay a penalty. This is called the Individual Mandate. Government approved insurance includes elective abortion.

Obamacare also provides tax dollars for “School-based Health Centers,” which could be Planned Parenthood run clinics in public schools. Obamacare’s purpose for these school clinics is to provide “counseling” and “referrals,” which could include abortions.[8]  According to Alliance Defending Freedom, Planned Parenthood helped craft Obamacare. And will give children free contraception counseling, contraceptives, and abortion pills.[9]

In my previous article Planned Parenthood: From Eugenics to Safe Sex Mapping I point out that Planned Parenthood is being investigated for failing to comply with parental involvement laws. Do we really want our tax dollars being used so our kids can be counseled by an agency who clearly thinks they know better than parents about what is better for teens? Counseling teens regarding their sexuality without parental involvement is divisive and damages the integrity of families, putting teens at risk. Government subsidized agencies can never fill the spot of a family in a child’s life and has no business doing so. I am left wondering what the long-range impact of this will be on our society.

According to Daniel Harper of the Weekly Standard, Obamacare will cost an estimated $2.6 trillion in its first decade. This latest estimate is in stark contrast to Obama’s “promise” of $900 billion to a joint session of Congress in 2009.[10]  Obamacare has at least 21 new or higher taxes embedded in the law.[11] These tax increases, along with the violation of the Free Exercise Clause in our first amendment is why we must repeal Obamacare.

We must educate people on what Obamacare will do to our nation, failure to do so will have devastating consequences for our nation financially and morally.

Help us educate and train others through a donation to ACEF. Even $5 a month will help pay for plane tickets so our members can train leaders nationally in clear communication of the truth.

I work in a job where I get to deal one on one with people. It gives me a great perspective on where our nation’s thinking is today. From my unique position I have come to the realization that people have changed dramatically since I first started my customer-oriented job.

One particular situation occurred the other day that jolted me into reality. I offered bottled water to a client, and she replied that she would prefer coffee. Since we didn’t have coffee, I offered to go to a local vendor who wasn’t too far away and purchase this for her. She then stated that she only drank Starbucks coffee! This would have been a time consuming venture for me, and I decided that this client was going too far in her selfishness!

As I later reflected on how damaging selfishness actually is, I began to consider entitlement spending in our country and how it perpetuates self-seeking behavior.

How did we get to feel so entitled when our nation is headed toward falling off a financial cliff? Entitlement programs started with Franklin Delano Roosevelt and his New Deal and were later sustained by Lyndon Johnson and his Great Society. I was in high school during the early years of LBJ’s social programs, and I didn’t know anyone taking advantage of them. But now almost half of all Americans live in a household receiving some sort of government entitlement.[1] [2]

When did hard work and striving to provide for our families start to fade away? When did we start to think that everyone deserved a house even if they could not afford it? When did EBT cards become so popular? Today even cell phones are offered free to those who want them through a wasteful program that is costing you, the taxpayer, an unbelievable amount of money.[3]

Let’s not forget the folks at the federal government’s General Services Administration (GSA). They were basking in bubbles not too long ago in Las Vegas while smirking behind glasses of champagne. As they toasted with their drinks, do you suppose these government employees thought about the fifteen plus trillion dollar national debt?

It really is very simple. More spending equals more debt, and more debt means the government will be looking to you for more tax dollars.

The government needs to prove to the American taxpayer that our dollars are spent wisely and are not being abused. We can no longer afford to borrow money to pay for expanding programs in a too-generous entitlement system, or to support Washington abuse in the face of our exploding national debt.

Now is the time to hunker down and become accountable, and to move from thinking in terms of “me” to understanding that we are all in this together. We all must make sacrifices in order for our nation to become solvent again. Without this thinking, there will be no hope.

Moral courage is required to do what is right. Cutting back is not fun nor something to look forward to, but we must be diligent and elect those to public office who will do what is right (not necessarily popular) to reign in spending. Only this will restore our nation to its original standard.

It is not too late to change our nation’s selfish and entitled behavior. It is imperative that we do so or we will not survive as the exceptional nation that was built upon the principles of our forefathers.

Join True Capitalism in getting the message out to others. Time is short. Our nation’s future is at stake.

It took a while for some of these objectives, such as the right to vote, to be achieved for women but through perseverance and an innate sense of this being a just goal, we won that right.

How are we doing on the other objectives? Are we receiving equal pay as our male counterparts? Are we being oppressed simply because we are women? Or, should we be asking a far more important question altogether, such as: will any of these aspirations matter if our economy implodes and there are no jobs to be had? There is no difference in discrimination against women or men between the level of pay, oppression, and job opportunity for the unemployed. Women and men are equally terrified when they can’t provide for themselves or their families.

Economic Tailspin

Our country is in an economic tailspin. Our national debt is nearly $16 trillion,[2] our economy grew at an anemic 1.5% rate in the second quarter of 2012,[3] and the real unemployment rate (U6) is 15%.[4] Add to this list of misery, the cost/taxes of Obamacare (at least 20 of them),[5] the massive increase of Federal regulatory burdens on businesses, the war on fossil fuels, and you can fully expect these figures to get worse. Businesses fold, move over seas, and stop hiring under these types of conditions. This is truly oppression and hardship of a magnitude we have not seen in decades.

Women in business have made great progress over the years in their efforts to start and operate their own businesses. As of 2007, the U.S. Census Bureau estimated there were almost 8 million non-farm businesses owned by women, an increase of over 20% from 2002.[6] However, what good is this achievement when the Obama Administration has consistently instituted  business regulations and policies that hinder the growth and very existence of these much-needed companies?

It should be no surprise to President Obama that the number one concern of most Americans (women and men alike) since he took office are jobs and the economy. So why hasn’t he met with his Jobs Council in the last 6 months, when during that same time period he attended over 100 fundraisers for his reelection?[7][8] It appears that there is one job he’s very focused on and it’s his own.

“You Didn’t Build That” (The Government Did)

In a speech President Obama let his true ideology come through loud and clear when he said, “If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that.”[9] He communicated that if you have succeeded as a business owner the government gets the credit and the thanks. Never mind the fact that without a thriving private economy to tax, there is no government revenue. Business owners all over the country were in an uproar over this statement, and justifiably so. They know who put in the hard work and risked the money to get these businesses up and running; it certainly wasn’t Uncle Sam!

Should we thank the government for the highest corporate tax rate (39.2%) in the world[10] that pushes companies to expand overseas in order to compete, costing us much needed jobs in the process? Every dollar taken by the government in taxes is less money that companies have available to reinvest and grow their businesses. No growth, no new jobs.

The added cost of the medical device tax (one of many) embedded in the 2700 pages of the Obamacare law has already forced many healthcare businesses to cancel expansion plans.[11] [12] People in communities all over the country who waited expectantly for a chance at those new jobs are having their hopes and dreams crushed.

Should we be grateful to this administration that implements costly, not to mention unreasonable, regulations on the fossil fuel industry even though America’s very foundation, and thus every business and household, is dependent on oil and gas to survive? Could an electrical grid blackout occur in large areas of the U.S., the way it recently did in India,[13] due to the expected closures of many of our coal-powered electrical facilities? It’s a very real possibility, thanks in large part to the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) hostility towards the coal industry.[14]

Government Red Tape

Are business owners thanking this administration for the nightmare of red tape (i.e. regulations) they must wade through, costing them valuable time and money that forces them to increase prices to consumers? There has been a 52% increase in regulations under this President and more regulations are on the books than ever before in the history of our nation.[15]

Are you aware that the Obama Administration wrote over 80,000 pages of new regulatory law last year? The Federal Register currently has hundreds of thousands of regulations![16] [17] Can you imagine a teacher inflicting an outrageous number of rules like this onto our children and expecting them to be able to know and accurately follow them, much less to thrive? How many businesses have been “closed” before they ever open due to this type of oppression?

An April 2012 U.S. Chamber of Commerce poll of small-business executives with 500 or fewer employees found that concern over government business regulations top the list of impediments for hiring and expanding their businesses. The July 2012 survey added the Obamacare tax and penalties to that list of obstacles.[18] Since small business is the backbone of our economy, this survey is alarming.

So there you have it. Whether you are a female business owner or a woman desperately looking for a job, you are the one being oppressed under this administration. But, hey, at least as the economy continues to decline, jobs become scarcer, the business revenues shrink (thus tax revenues), and the cost of everything continues to rise, women and men will be equally oppressed, if that is any consolation to us.

It’s not a consolation for me and I hope it’s not for you. We can change things though, through our hard work and perseverance. We can get informed about the economy and understand why the things the Obama Administration has been doing have been dangerous. Like spending trillions more than you take in does not make for a balanced budget and stable economy (every mom running a household knows this one). We can also get involved at the local level in our communities by connecting with other grassroots conservatives, by joining our school boards, and by supporting political leaders who support true capitalism.  Don’t wait for someone else to challenge the progressive policies that  are driving our country over the fiscal cliff.

 

Someone recently asked me if I knew how many people in America are on food stamps, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).  I had no clue so I went to the internet to find out…the numbers are stunning and frightening.

According to the Wall Street Journal, nearly 15% of the U.S. population relied on food stamps in August 2011, as the number of recipients hit 45.8 million.[1]  The same article reported that in the state of Mississippi a staggering 21% are on the program, and in another 4 states – New Mexico, Tennessee, Louisiana and Oregon – 20% of the population is on food stamps.

The Food Research and Action Center (FRAC) publishes detailed information about participation in the SNAP program.  According to FRAC, nearly 46.5 million Americans were on food stamps by May 2012, over 1 million more people than in May 2011.[2]

Should we be concerned about why over 46 million people are on food stamps?  Is this Entitlement program out of control?

According to the USDA, in 2007 there were over 26 million people receiving food stamps.[3]  This means a more than 75% increase in recipients since 2007!

Food stamps were first introduced in 1939 and became permanent with The Food Stamp Act of 1964.[4]  So what does this program cost citizens in America?  In 2010 the program cost U.S. taxpayers $68 billion, compared with $250 million in 1969.[5]

Have you ever seen a government Entitlement program, once it has started, suddenly shrink itself?  Entitlement programs always grow and politicians then take money from hard working and productive workers to ensure their program survives.

Give a Man a Fish

“Give a man a fish and he eats for a day, teach a man to fish and he eats for a lifetime.”  Seems like it’s an instinctive concept to all of us.  However, this does not seem instinctive to government.  The continued growth of programs like food stamps is clear evidence of the insatiable desire to spend as well as keep people dependent on government as the solution.

The government can help states temporarily in natural disasters such as floods, hurricanes or tornadoes so that people get their basic needs met.  Ongoing programs for affected people have proven to be best run by non-profit organizations or charity groups, not governments.[6] [7]

If these Entitlement programs are threatened, what do we hear from politicians and Progressives?  People will starve, kids will go hungry, families will be destroyed, and it’s the wealthy against the poor.  These are very simplistic and politically charged accusations. Why do I say this is political?

Consider the consequences to the next election in November 2012 from food stamp recipients.  If half of the 46.5 million recipients vote and are feeling threatened by cuts or caps to spending for food stamps, whom would they vote for?  Do food stamp recipients vote for the party that promises more spending for them, or for those speaking about responsible caps and cuts?

Does this sound like votes are being bought through food stamps so that those benefiting from the program continue to benefit by the hands of politicians who feed them?

Clearly the state of the economy under the Obama administration has suffered because of job losses and lack of job creation in the private sector.  More people are out of work; businesses are fearful of another 82,420 pages of regulations[8] they must conform to and more taxation to pay for Entitlements.  The size of government and Entitlement payments are not shrinking.  The Obama administration must do something to stay in power and attract votes, and Entitlements might be their ticket!

What is the Solution?

• Create conditions where jobs can grow in the private sector so that the welfare roles are not growing.
• Place limits on welfare so as not to encourage or breed lifetime dependence on the system.
• Stop the annual budget increases made to Entitlement programs.
• Remove barriers for people to start their own businesses with far less government regulation and taxation.

True Capitalism IS the Answer

This is the year, this is the time, and this is the election to solve the problem created by the Liberal and Progressive agenda.  Politicians who continue to support government Entitlement and regulatory growth need to be voted out.  Candidates must be judged against their actions to create smaller government, fewer Entitlements and less dependence on government.

Your friends and neighbors need to be made aware that they can make THE difference in 2012.  Judge whom you vote for based on their actions: Do they see reducing the size and spending of government as a solution?  Do they have a proven record in creating jobs in the private sector?  Do they see true capitalism as something that will save our economy?

Become involved with ACEF as a contributor of articles or monthly funding, and help us change the course of America and the world forever.

This summer has been warmer than average.  Midwesterners are known for having to tolerate all kinds of weather, but this summer has been unique due to the severe drought.  One of the hardest-hit commodities, corn, plays a critical role in our food supply, and now, even more so in our pocket books.

I am a city gal who grew up in a small farming community in Minnesota and when I dial back home, many farmers are in fear wondering how long last year’s corn yields will last due to this summer’s brutal drought.  This year’s crop yield is on track to be the worst in 15 years, and corn prices have already hit record high levels.  The drought has destroyed one-sixth of the country’s expected corn crop for the past month.[1]

Abusing Bureaucracy

Did you know that Congress is on the brink of passing a “pork”-filled farm bill? A farm bill is legislation used to shape America’s farm and food policy.  In the current bill, bureaucracy and special interests are sneaking in disguised as representing the best interest of farmers, but in reality this one is not a farm bill for the farmers after all. If this farm legislation is passed, the real drought will be forced on taxpayers with a trillion dollars worth of bad agriculture policy, while locking in increased food stamp spending.[2] 

That’s right, food stamp spending. Did you know that 80% of the current proposed farm bill is made up of entitlement spending on food stamps?  I do not see how this helps the farmers, drought or not!  With government dependence at an all time high – nearly 45 million people on food stamps[3] – this “farm” (food stamp) legislation will not help any American citizens.

Taxpayers cannot afford an expansion of federal government’s role in the business decisions of agricultural enterprises.  As a small business owner, I can’t imagine being encouraged to engage in expansion or risk in this economic climate, and then expect the taxpayers to bail me out if I fail.  This is “Kleptonomics”—not True Capitalism.

Enter The Renewable Fuel Standard

The EPA is now responsible for ensuring that transportation fuel contains a minimum volume of renewable fuel.[4] President Bush signed a Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) mandate with the Energy Policy Act in 2005.[5]  This RFS was expanded in 2007 in the Energy Independence and Security Act.[6] The expansion was an effort to reduce dependence on foreign oil, promote biofuel use, stabilize transportation fuel prices, and reduce greenhouse emissions, among other goals. The mandate requires “that increasing amounts of biofuel – 36 billion gallons by 2022 – be blended into transportation fuel.”[7]

Government Creating Value… Corn for Cars

Ethanol (ethyl alcohol) is a renewable energy biofuel often used as an additive for gasoline. The ethanol movement has been glorified and positioned as “greener” – a way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and reduce our use of imported oil.  This is foolish considering the amount of land used and energy consumed growing and processing biofuel crops.[8]  Furthermore, scientific research suggests that some corn-based ethanol production may actually increase carbon dioxide emissions rather than reduce them.

According to a study published in Science by the Nature Conservancy and the University of Minnesota, many biofuels emit more greenhouse gases than gasoline. According to the researchers, the production of some biofuels may produce “17 to 420 times more carbon dioxide than the annual greenhouse gas reductions that these biofuels would provide by displacing fossil fuels.”[9]

Let’s be clear on the renewable fuel standard – nearly 40 percent of the corn harvest is consumed by making ethanol[10] to meet Obama’s “green” strategy and to win votes.  Once again, the taxpayer suffers in the form of higher grocery bills and our tax dollars going to questionable subsidies.

Another Layer Wrapped in Green Red Tape

The ethanol industry claims that the Renewable Fuel Standard minimally impacts corn and feed prices.[11]  Livestock producers claim just the opposite, as their feed-corn cost increases are rampant due to the drought and the mandated diversion of corn to ethanol production. These livestock producers are asking the hand of the EPA and Government to unlock and immediately consider waiving the RFS ethanol mandate to help ease the pressure it is placing on the feed corn they must purchase, and to help reduce costs that are passed on to consumers when costs go up for livestock farmers.[12]

Taxing Refiners and What These Programs Are Costing You

Pressuring the biofuel market, EPA renewable fuel standard is forcing refiners to pay a fine for not achieving cellulosic ethanol targets even though this type of ethanol is currently unavailable.[13]

Refiners were required to pay about $6.8 million in penalties for not blending cellulosic ethanol into gasoline in 2011.  How absurd, given cellulosic ethanol does not currently exist on the market. And it doesn’t stop there; the EPA has mandated that refiners blend even more cellulosic ethanol – 8.65 million gallons – into gasoline and diesel in 2012 or pay the EPA millions of dollars in fines.[14]

Who picks up the rewards of this bureaucratic punishment?  The EPA wins this one by setting an unrealistic requirement, and then bringing in money through the fines it demands.

So ethanol mandate is one more bad idea – government manipulation “run amok” – that benefits politicians and corn growers but does little of value for you or I, the consumers and customers.

Shucked Corn Trade

One of my clients works with Minneapolis based Cargill, a global grain-trading powerhouse.  She has been predicting unbalanced trade in corn import/export for some time, as her global co-workers joined the chorus that the U.S. government should temporarily curb its ethanol quotas. To make the trade situation worse for the U.S., our agricultural companies are importing corn from Brazil for the first time.[15]  This greatly hurts America’s position in global trade.

“Countries such as Japan, Korea and Taiwan are looking elsewhere for new [corn] suppliers because of skyrocketing prices and tight supply. America exports 50 million tons of corn – 15% of its crop – and Japan is America’s top buyer, importing 14 million tons, followed by Mexico, Korea, Egypt and Taiwan.”[16]  Now, between the drought and the ethanol mandate, these countries will have no choice but to turn to other corn producers such as Brazil, South Africa, China and Argentina to get their corn.

“[Cargil]l CEO Gregory Page said on CNBC that the U.S. biofuel mandate ‘needs to be addressed’ through existing policy tools, becoming the highest-profile executive to call for some relief from the Renewable Fuels Standard that requires that over a third of the corn crop is made into fuel ethanol.”[17]

When will our government stop trying to pick winners and losers?  Much like the alignment with Solyndra and other green companies, Obama is in the business of propping up the democratic vote by joining King Corn in a struggling economy.

From Burnt Corn Field to Level Playing Field

Congress needs to put agriculture and energy on a level playing field by killing unnecessary subsidies and backdoor regulatory mandates, while the Farm Bill needs to be “SNAPED” in half to remove it’s 80% earmark for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) – the new name for food stamps.

We have a summer storm of invested political interests, the most severe drought since the 1930’s, shifting U.S. trade balances, and unnecessary mandated restrictions when it’s clear the nation’s corn crop is in a state of crisis.  Corn prices have gone from about $2 a bushel in 2005, when the first ethanol mandates were put into place, to a drought-induced $8 today.[18]

Obama’s energy agenda is the same as the Global Warmists: drive down the use of petroleum-based fuels by making them more expensive. This, however, raises the cost of living for all of us and is too much for our economy to bear.

Crisis or not, the market cannot work when big government mandates are in place. That’s what we call “Washington Inc.” and it is a manipulation of the markets.  We cannot stand for this bureaucracy as congress is ramping up to finish out the year and Obama plays more “executive order.”

Read more about Energy Solutions that will drive America back to greatness and into autonomy.

The Obamacare Individual Mandate, is it a tax or isn’t it? President Obama emphatically denied, prior to Obamacare’s passage into law, that it’s a tax. He even got a bit testy during a TV interview when a dictionary definition of “taxes” was read to him which made his mandate sure sound like a tax.[1] However, when the constitutionality of this health care law was argued before the Supreme Court, Obama’s own Solicitor General, Donald Verrilli, said it could be looked at as a tax (especially if it helped him win in court, I suppose).[2]

Now that the Supreme Court has ruled that Obamacare is a tax, the Democrats who supported The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), are now calling it a penalty – for not obeying the law.[3]

So where does this leave us in the midst of all of this semantic bickering? Playing a very “taxing” game of Hide and Seek (politicians hide the taxes and then hope we won’t find them).

Our federal government, with the help of a Supreme Court that seems to have forgotten about our Constitution, just inflicted another law full of “hidden” taxes and is now hoping you and I won’t notice – especially during this election year.

Embedded in Obamacare are at least 20 new taxes, most of them set to hit American families and small businesses, the very backbone of our country.[4] [5] To make matters worse Obamacare is being implemented during one of the worst economic times since the Great Depression.

Surtaxes on investment income, increases in Medicare payroll taxes, excise taxes on medical devices (think braces, wheel chairs, etc.) and caps on Flexible Spending Accounts (FSA) contributions[6] are just a few areas targeted to bring in over $500 billion needed to help pay for this program. Some estimates say Obamacare could bring in as much as $1 trillion in taxes.[7]

Considering the number of taxes we already are forced to pay, both hidden and seen, Obamacare is one that is likely to financially break us as a nation. We are already close to being $16 trillion in debt and it’s recently been discovered there is a $17 trillion spending gap in Obamacare.[8]

Have you ever taken the time to research or make a list of all of the taxes paid in America? Many taxes such as income, sales and property are imposed on the majority of us and are easily seen on our paystubs, receipts or property tax bills. They may be plain to see but they are painful to pay, as their sums are substantial. (I often dream about what I could use that money for if the government didn’t confiscate it).

But what about the “hidden” taxes, can you find them? I did an online search and was shocked to find a list of over 200 taxes paid by Americans![9] Okay in all fairness some were labeled as fees, but lets face it, it’s just that semantics game again. Either way it’s our money, and the government (federal, state and local) is forcefully taking it. This list does not even include the extremely concealed taxes that come in the form of higher priced goods and services. After all, every business is taxed as well and they ultimately pass those taxes onto the consumer in the form of higher prices.

After researching this list of taxes, everything from taxing rainwater runoff to marriage license taxes to death taxes, I’m wondering what’s next? Will they tax us for the air we breathe and for being alive? Oh wait, they just did! Obamacare! If you are a living, breathing human, you must now get health insurance or pay a tax… or is it a penalty? Either way, the Supreme Court ruling just opened the door to allow the Federal Government to force you to buy anything and if you don’t obey, you’ll pay.

Regardless of the label, enough of our hard earned money has gone into politician’s coffers. Too much of our money has been spent irresponsibly and used to buy votes. Milton Friedman, a brilliant economist, once said,

“One of the great mistakes is to judge policies and programs by their intentions rather than their results.”[10]

I couldn’t agree more as we only have to look at the gaping, unfunded hole of Social Security to know just what will happen to all of the tax money collected for Obamacare.[11] There may have been good intentions when Social Security was implemented but the reality is it became a slush fund for Washington Inc. and there is no reason to think things will be run any differently with our healthcare money.

Are you tired of this “taxing” game? I know I am, as we are losing at every turn. So let’s change the rules of the game. The only answer is to get government out of our lives and wallets as much as possible, and allow real free market solutions to be implemented for issues such as healthcare. Find out how by reading the book, The Golden Rules of Economics: The Real Way Out of America’s Economic Crisis and then by voting for candidates who will follow through and enact these real “game winning” solutions.

On April 2, 2012 President Obama gave a speech in support of redistribution of wealth where he quoted from the Bible story of Cain and Abel saying, “I am my brothers keeper.” [1]  President Obama misquoted the scripture he was referring to and took the phrase out of context to validate his agenda. Obama was trying to push the virtue of “being your brother’s keeper” by referring to Genesis 4:1-15.  In that story Cain had jealously murdered his brother and attempted to hide it from God. When God asked Cain where his brother was, Cain defensively asked, “Am I my brother’s keeper?”

So Cain’s sin was murdering his brother and covering it up. Obama’s sin is the same as the founders of what is known as the Social Gospel – they twisted scripture to manipulate people for their own political agenda.

What is the Social Gospel?

The Social Gospel is a Christian theological teaching that applies Christian ethics to social problems.[2] Its proponents use Biblical scripture as a means to influence people to support governmental interventions as a solution to economic and social problems. The Social Gospel has at its core a belief that people must overcome attachments to private properties and be devoted to public welfare.[3] Early Social Gospel theologians asserted that government, because of progress, was now in a position to bring about an earthly utopia in the form of the modern democratic state.[4]

What are the origins and implications of the Social Gospel?

The Social Gospel movement developed in the late 1800’s when a split from orthodox Christianity occurred related to the theory of evolution. The Christians who left orthodox beliefs mixed the theory of evolution with their progressive ideology and Christianity. Social Gospel followers saw evolution as the divine plan for rational social advancement. They believed this advancement would best be accomplished by a large central government that ultimately could bring about utopia on earth – a key progressive belief. The Social Gospel has been referred to as Marxism in Christian clothing.[5]

The message the Social Gospel preached was that citizens must release all attachment to private enterprise. So, for many Progressives, the state became a “god” to whom citizens must give all they have.[6]  Bible quotes were used out of context to stir guilt, fear and emotion in the people in order to control them. Religion became a political tool to further the Progressive agenda. There is a “strong religious current that runs through much of progressive thought.”[7] Early progressive ideology saw God gradually revealing himself through human history and the ultimate goal as a divinely inspired democratic state.[8] Therefore early progressives believed the state “was a god to which all citizens owed their undivided devotion.”[9]

While the Social Gospel does address legitimate areas of concern such as oppression of women and blacks, child labor concerns, troubled youth and oppressed workers, socialistic solutions are touted as the only answer to these problems.

Manipulation and Spiritual Abuse

President Obama used Social Gospel tactics at the 2012 National Prayer Breakfast when, in order to manipulate thinking regarding higher tax rates for the wealthy, he said, “For me, as a Christian, it also coincides with Jesus’s teaching that ‘for onto whom much is given, much shall be required.’”[10]  I think President Obama may have the scriptures mixed up with the story of Robin Hood, as nowhere in scripture does it say to steal from the affluent to give to the poor.

The Social Gospel was a tactic both Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson used to lay the foundation for the use of religious abuse, superiority, and Socialistic goals that we hear from Progressives today.

Theodore Roosevelt, who was an early Progressive, used this tool at the Progressive Party convention in 1912. He is quoted as saying, “Our cause is based on the eternal principles of righteousness; …We stand at Armageddon, and we battle for the Lord.” Roosevelt, playing to the emotions of the crowd, succeeded in having the convention crowd wave Bibles and sing Onward Christian Soldiers as they adjourned. [11] With all the emotion that generated and what it implied spiritually, who could disagree with Teddy?

Woodrow Wilson, a renowned Progressive, grew up in a religious family.  His upbringing proved to be quite dangerous when mixed with his narcissism and socialistic ideals. Wilson is quoted as saying, “Remember that God ordained that I should be the next President of the United States. Neither you nor any other mortal or mortals could have prevented that.”[12]  In stating this, Wilson set himself up as the mouthpiece of God. This is a form of spiritual abuse as it scares and manipulates people into wanting to please God, as expressed through their President. Wilson’s statement was a misuse of power, which is innately abusive.

Woodrow Wilson was a big proponent of redistribution of wealth for America.[13] He also implemented a progressive income tax during his presidency.[14] Between 1916 and 1919 total government expenses went up 1,709%[15] and the national debt rose from $3.6 billion to $27.4 billion![16] Tax rates, which ranged from 1% to 7% in 1913, jumped in four years – with the war as an excuse – to at least 2% with the top rate being 67% in 1917.[17] By 1920 the top rate was 73%,[18] with a new goal for America: redistribution of wealth. This is not surprising as Wilson saw little difference between socialism and democracy; he wrote in 1887 “that in fundamental theory socialism and democracy are almost if not quite one and the same.”[19]

Keep in mind the Social Gospel mentality is about curing society’s ills through Socialistic ideals such as redistribution of wealth. Redistribution of wealth is a primary principal of Progressivism, and President Obama has made it a pillar in his campaigning and Presidency.

More Social Gospel Tactics by Obama

The use of Social Gospel tactics by Obama to convince Americans that raising taxes on the rich will solve our economic problems is a political maneuver to “give voters the impression that the Republican refusal to tax the rich is the main cause of the deficit and thus the main obstacle to solving the fiscal crisis.”[20]  It is false that a tax increase on the rich will solve the federal budget deficit problem. Raising taxes on the wealthy will barely make a dent in the deficits.[21]

If the Federal government took 100% of the taxable income from the top 1% of taxpayers it would only cover seven months of the budget shortfall.[22] The truth is that raising taxes on the rich is likely to hurt the economy. Research done by former Obama advisor Christina Romer and her husband David shows that tax increases reduce economic growth and have a negative impact on economic output.[23]

Obama set the 2012 Federal budget at $3.7 trillion. That means we are spending $6.9 million every minute, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Clearly, spending is the problem.

President Obama takes the focus off our economic problems when he implies wealthy taxpayers can rescue us from our out-of-control debt and economic crisis. We must not allow the truth to be distorted by misuse of the sayings of Jesus or any other spiritual leader.  Beware of the guilt and deception this creates and search out the truth. Fiscal conservatives are stereotyped by Progressives as heartless people who do not care about starving children and the poor in our nation. Nothing could be further from the truth. These and similar statements are political tools in the hands of Progressives.

Stand Strong

Don’t get distracted by character assassinations, emotionalism and the twisting of scriptural principles. Look at the real source of America’s economic problems, such as Washington Inc. (collusion between the government and business), and a welfare state where both the rich and poor are in cahoots with the government to rip off their fellow Americans.[24] Solutions such as curtailing bureaucratic spending and immediately stopping automatic budget increases in the public sector are vital to economic recovery.

You wake up and hear on the news that the Government is going to start powering their Navy ships with $26-a-gallon biofuel.  Then you read that the EPA is fining oil refiners for not using a “green” additive that hasn’t been produced yet. You check the calendar to make sure it’s not April Fools’ Day.  Nope.  It’s true.  You couldn’t make this up.

At a time when budget cuts are hitting our military, the “Great Green Fleet” will be using a green biofuel that costs $26 per gallon compared to the standard fuel price of $3.60.^[1]

A spokesman for Navy Secretary Ray Mabus said, “Investments in biofuel will produce a competitively priced — and domestically produced — alternative to conventional fuel. Such investments help the Navy and the nation become less dependent on foreign oil and thus less subject to volatility in oil prices that directly affect our readiness.”^[2] 

If we want to lessen our dependence on oil from volatile foreign nations while maintaining affordable oil pricing, we should develop our domestic energy sources.  Why did the Obama administration tighten rules on fracking, a proven new technology?^[3] Why does this administration and the Democratic party always block the use of new oil field possibilities?[4]  Could it be they are waging war against the very industries that can provide national security? Slow approval of new sites, endless environmental studies (Keystone Pipeline), investment in costly alternative ideas (Solyndra), and business-killing regulatory laws against existing energy sources are the real “policies” of the liberal/progressive Washington Establishment.

At a time when America is in an economic crisis, the bureaucrats continue to play April Fools’ Day jokes on the public.

Nonsensical Regulation

How many of us expected a Federal Regulation that would demand “oil refiners use millions of gallons of a substance, cellulosic ethanol, that does not exist?”^[5]  In 2005 the government set out requirements to blend this ethanol and created guidelines on its usage.  They assumed someone would make it, but its now 2012 and no one has developed it.

As you might expect, being forced to use a product that doesn’t exist has caused considerable frustration among oil refiners.

What is the driving force behind such nonsense policy?  Charles Drevna, president of the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufactures (AFPM), made this statement recently, “RFS2 (Renewable Fuel Standard) was really conceived at a different time in the nation’s history even though it was only a few years ago. There was a thought permeating through Congress that we were eventually going to run out of natural resources. Since then, as a nation we fully understand we’re not an energy poor nation, we’re an energy rich nation with the advent of fracking and horizontal drilling.”^[6]

The American Petroleum Institute notes that the United States has enough oil and natural gas to power 65 million cars for 60 years and heat 60 million households for 160 years.^[7] Beyond this, it’s important to remember the history of the private sector in solving large-scale problems when a need arises. Brian Lee Crowley, Managing Director of the Macdonald-Laurier Institute, made these comments:

“… human intelligence and ingenuity have consistently and repeatedly unlocked technological and scientific advances that have raised the standard of living of each generation compared to its predecessor…

The reason why the ecosystem hasn’t collapsed, why we haven’t run out of oil, why we are still successful in feeding ourselves, why incomes are rising and health status improving around the globe is that the doomsayers have completely misunderstood the way the world works.

Of all their misunderstandings, two stand out. They don’t understand what natural resources are. And they don’t understand that the greatest natural resource of all is the human mind.”^[8]

Whether natural energy resources are infinite or not is not the real issue.  Our instinctual drive to create, invent and find new ways to solve problems is the way to energy security, not government driven policy.

If You Think Government’s Problems are Bad, Wait Until You See Their Solutions

Let’s look at what happens when government creates a “solution” to a problem.

As part of the push to create biofuels, an American company called Range Fuels began construction on a commercial cellulosic ethanol plant in November 2007.^[9]  Remember cellulosic ethanol, the government mandated “green” fuel additive?  In January 2011 the Range Fuels plant in Soperton, GA was shut down!^[10] As a matter of fact Range Fuels went into foreclosure, shutting the doors on the new plant without producing one drop of the ethanol. For that effort Range Fuels received a $76 million grant from the U.S. Dept. of Energy, $6 million from the State of Georgia’s taxpayers, plus an $80 million loan guaranteed by the U.S. Biorefinery Assistance Program.^[11]

What did the taxpayers get for their Government supported project?  Nothing.  Taxpayers, private investors and the California state pension fund lost big.^[12]  $162 million down the Government sector drain.

That, however, has not stopped the EPA from fining oil refiners $6.8 million for not using the cellulosic ethanol.^[13] And do you know who actually pays that bill?  We do, the consumers!

A Return to Common Sense

What has happened to the people in Washington that good ole’ common sense doesn’t exist?  Does a new biofuel that costs over 700% more than what the Navy is currently using really seem like the best solution to our dependency on foreign oil?  What about the EPA fining the oil refineries for not using an additive that doesn’t exist – does that make sense?

What’s next? Will bureaucrats believe the smart way to proceed is to insist that every American own a unicorn, and then charge you a penalty for not acquiring one?

If you are outraged at the lack of common sense in Washington, join us in getting smarter about the economy.  Help your friends and family to understand what kind of lunatic ideology is running our Country.  Help us wake up the people and get them out to vote…

If we don’t get involved now, you may wake up on November 7 and find out that it truly is April 1st and we are the fools.