I saw this article about how a Philadelphia school district will be evaluating principles based on how many students take advantage of the school breakfast program. This story more than anything else highlights what is wrong with our public schools and the liberal (Obama’s) push to expand our saftey net into a welfare state. 

It seems it is no longer good enough to provide a free public education or a free anything for that matter, because if the students don’t take advantage/see the value in it, it is somehow the schools fault? Huh? Can we not expect anything from students or at least their parents, before we blame someone else? 

From voluntarily forfeiting responsibility, springs the rationale for forfeiting and later taking (parental) rights. Schools and students would do better if we simply encouraged personal responsibility rather than dependency to the state. It’s like when you give an engine too much gas, it will stall.  Too much help can hurt. This is a concept liberals never seem to grasp.

Remember the old saying, “You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t force it to drink,” well in welfare state I wouldn’t be so sure.  After all, if folks are not allowed to experience the inevitable consequences of their failures, how can we expect anything to ever be learned or get done?  If we are no longer responsible for doing what is basic because we will be rewarded whether we take initiative or not, then nothing will get done. Extrapolate this to the wider society, and at some point the result will be such shortages in necessary goods and services that inevitably, for the good of the state, the state will force us all to work and drink. Alas, the inevitable tool of any welfare state is force.  The inevitable conclusion is slavery.

 This is why I believe encouraging self-reliance and responsibility rather than dependency is good (better) for all people, and is what I think our Founders had in mind when they talked about promoting or providing for the general welfare.

I was reading the google translation of the Honduran Constitution from Spanish to English, and something didn’t look right with article 374:

 Article 374 .- It may be reformed, in any case, Article, this Article, the constitutional articles which refer to the form of government, the national territory, the presidential term, the ban to be new President of the Republic The citizen who has played under any title and refers to those who can not be President of the Republic for the subsequent period.

This is the original Spanish version:

ARTICULO 374.- No podrán reformarse, en ningún caso, el artículo anterior, el presente artículo, los artículos constitucionales que se refieren a la forma de gobierno, al territorio nacional, al período presidencial, a la prohibición para ser nuevamente Presidente de la República, el ciudadano que lo haya desempeñado bajo cualquier título y el referente a quienes no pueden ser Presidentes de la República por el período subsiguiente.

I’m thinking someone mysteriously forgot to place, or intentionally removed ”not” after “It may…” in article 374.

The Crucial Facts in Honduras

MSM Disregards the Most Crucial Facts in Honduras

Every time I read or view a story on the alleged Honduran coup, I want to pull my hair out (luckily I have very little to pull) because 9 times out of 10 they (MSM) completely miss the most crucial facts:

First, according to the Honduran Constitution, if the President violates the article against consecutive presidential terms or the article that limits a presidential term to four years, or even PROPOSES the reform of these articles directly or indirectly, then he is to immediately cease in his function as President, and is then unable to hold any public office in Honduras for ten years.  This provision was inserted into their Constitution to help ensure that no President would do precisely what Mr. Zelaya did, which was to try to amend a part of the Honduran constitution that according to that constitution cannot be amended. 

Second, the Honduran Supreme Court ruled that Mr. Zelaya’s actions (in regards to the referendum) constituted an attempt to propose a change to the presidential term limits which he cannot do without losing his position, and as such the Honduran Supreme Court found, in accordance with their constitution, that Mr. Zelaya was no longer the President of Honduras. Case closed.

 Here are is an overview of the relevent articles in the Honduran constitution.

Here is an English translation of the Honduran constitution.  See for yourself

Added note: Even w/o article 239, Mr. Zelaya’s actions caused him to lose his Honduran citizenship, as per article 42, which in effect disqualifies him to be the Honduran president according to article 238.

On a side note, we also have provisions in our Constitution that can’t be amended:  we can make any amendment provided “… that no State, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate.”

Notice this article of our constitution says “no State, without ITS consent, shall be deprived ITS equal suffrage as opposed to saying, “the PEOPLE or the ELECTORS of a State,” without THEIR consent shall not be deprived THEIR equal suffrage in the Senate.

I guess Mr. Zelaya must be a progressive too, as he favored the rule of the majority (democracy) over the rule of law (constitution) as did progressives in our country when they imposed the 17^th Amendment on us. (Just checking to see if anyone is awake)

(I originally posted this as a reply to another diary, but as I want to say more on this subject later I have chosen to make it a separate diary)

I believe our founding fathers would trade what currently masquerades as federalism in this country today for what they had under British rule in a second.

In 1994 we Republicans had the Contract w/ America, but what we need today is a 2nd Declaration of Independence.

Don’t get me wrong, I am not advocating anything as ridiculous as succession or the like, but rather a return to the federalism envisioned by our founding fathers.

I believe the common enemy of all Americans is the federal gov’t, and a more concerted fight to limit its powers over us is a fight that will unite all Americans.

Republicans could lead this fight, if we’re bold enough to take the challenge.

Returning decisions on church and State, abortion, schools, obscenity, and intrastate commerce to State and local gov’ts empowers us all, and if we don’t approve of the decisions, we can always move to a State or community that we find more acceptable, and anyways on these issues, I’d rather be a big fish in a small pond, than a small fish in a big pond any day.

Limiting the power of our national government to manipulate and control us on domestic/social issues would also remove a major impetus for its excessive spending and will thus give us all one more reason to support this cause.

He won’t raise taxes when we are on the verge of an economic depression.

He won’t tax your employer into cutbacks nor will he mandate your employer to death.

He wants to cut energy costs for you and your employer by expanding domestic supplies.

He wants to reduce your health care costs through increased competition and consumer involvement.

He wants to cut wasteful government spending so we don’t leave our children with bigger problems.

He won’t expand entitlement programs which only lead people to a life of dependency.

He wants to help people in hard times with their mortgages to prevent foreclosures.

He doesn’t socialize with people who have attacked the United States or Israel.

He doesn’t solicit (or maintain a system to obtain) illegal campaign contributions.

He is honest and keeps his promises with regards to campaign financing.

He has never befriended anyone who advocated a call for God to damn America.

He has never defended a group linked to voter registration fraud.

He has the experience and the sound and steady judgment to lead us in troubled times.

He doesn’t believe the goal of economic fairness justifies income redistribution.

He is the only candidate who has actually fought and who has actually been tortured for each of us.

Is this the America we have all loved and supported, and for which some have even fought and died?Obama Supports Wealth Redistribution

Is this where Barack AKA Captain Amerika and his Congress of the Democratic Suporter Majority will be taking us?

Are my fellow Americans so far gone that they are willing to trade their freedom from government for a free lunch from government?

Are we through then with notions of personal responsibility, and self-reliance? Are we trading them for self-gratification at all costs as long as someone else is picking up the immediate tab? Do they not see how such a collective approach will eventually lead to a loss of individual freedom and choice greater than a loss due to economic disparatiy?

Are they so short-sighted and ignorant of history that they can not foresee where this path will take us?

Will there even be an America worth fighting for after 8 years of their social engineering, or will all their new entitlements and programs be too entrenched to ever be pushed out of the way?

Call me a hopeless romantic, a consonant optimist, a glass half full kind of a guy, but I can’t help but feel that a lot of the recent polls are all wrong. These polls that show Obama with significant leads in States where Bush won big have got to be anomalies or outliers especially considering that polls there just weeks ago had McCain ahead, and considering that so few polls have actually been taken in those States. I can’t believe that such huge shifts have occurred in so little time. Maybe I’m in denial, maybe I forgot to take my medication this morning, but I sense a “Dewey Defeats Truman” moment here. The polls are wrong. I cannot believe that Americans have so forgotten their senses as to have soldout to the notion that opportunity should come in the form of a free lunch as opposed to the notion that it comes by way of freedom from government intrusion and social discrimination. I refuse to believe that Americans have foolishly bought in to the (Democratic party’s) idea that they are victims of exploitation, and thus need the government to intercede on their behalf in order to succeed. I guess I just have too much faith in the common sense and intelligence of the average American to ever believe that that kind of pitch would ever work on them.

Besides McCain’s plan to freeze government spending and cut taxes for everyone will cause an explosion of economic activity, and this recession will soon be a distant memory. I can’t wait for the capital gains tax to be halved. That alone will drive capital improvements and expansions in industrial and commercial enterprises resulting in more jobs being created and increases in consumption which will give this economy the shot of adrenalin it needs.

An idea came to me last night, and maybe it’s just silly, but I think it might help us all keep our sanity over the next several days. I think all of us who post here at Redstate should commit (until November 5th) to posting only those diaries and articles that promote how John McCain’s plans will help our economy and Americans to prosper. We don’t have to be too strict as to completely ignore Obama and the Dems. For instance, in a diary entitled “McCain Trims Costs to Nurture Job Growth” one could still bash Obama simply by contrasting McCain’s plan to reduce energy and health care expenses w/ Obama’s cost-increasing energy and health care mandates. Stay positive.

There is no way Obama and the Democrats will be able to afford all their promises by raising taxes on only the top 5% of Americans. Just as Bill Clinton and the Democrats did before they will go back on their promise not to tax other folks. Scaling back their spending plans has never been and will never be one of their options.

Our government already spends way too much. We have a national debt of nearly $10 trillion, and Obama wants to spend more. He will either send us further in debt or will have to tax more and more people more and more.

Our economy is in no shape to bear the burdens of Obama’s extra taxes and debt. His plan for new entitlements, mandates, taxes, and protectionism will hit our employers hard, and there is no way that this won’t affect all of us. JOBS WILL BE LOST!

In one of our nations worst recessions Obama is obsessed with repeating the mistakes of the past: the mistakes of Herberts Hoover, and the mistakes of Europe where double digit unemployment and inflation are the rule.

McCain’s plan to freeze gov’t spending and reduce taxes for everyone will SPUR THE CREATION OF JOBS by giving consumers more money to spend and employers more money to expand their businesses.

Senator Obama criticizes John McCain’s economic plan as a phony plan that only helps the rich while neglecting the needs of the middle and lower classes. He criticizes it and mocks it, and calls it a trickle-down scheme. But the only thing phony here is (Senator Obama) his reasoning.

Senator Obama believes the best way to help people is to simply give them the stuff, but in order to afford all his promises and freebees, he’ll have to massively increase the burdens on those who provide most of the jobs in this country in a way that will suffocate business and kill jobs.

His plan is patently flawed.

His plan discourages job creation, real wage growth, and only encourages stagnation, inflation, and unemployment, as has been the case with all such socialist experiments.

He proposes hundreds of billions of dollars in new spending, and he unabashedly plans to raise taxes on what he calls the wealthy. Oh, but don’t worry, this is only affect the filthy rich, vile businesses and evil corporations of America. Someone once said, “My Daddy never worked for a poor man.” Honestly, I don’t know anybody who does. Translation: Obama won’t tax you, but your employer won’t be so lucky. Tell me how this is not going to affect you?

Obama’s plan, like he himself, is short-sighted, naive, and ridiculous. You can’t cut taxes for 95% Americans when only two thirds of Americans actually pay taxes, and you surely can’t help 95% of people by raising taxes on their employers. He’s either country’s biggest conman, or he’s the one who doesn’t GET IT. Those taxes will be passed down to the people in the form of cut backs, layoffs, and higher prices. He wants to help the people, but his plan will only (screw) hurt them.

Personally, I’d rather have good things trickle down on me, rather than the crap that will spew down from his plan. Clearly it isn’t only Obama, who is full of (sh)it, (but it is his plan as well).

Post Script: We must remind people that the damage Obama admits he will pursue pales in comparison to the what he will actually achieve if the Democrats obtain what is currently being forcasted to be a supermajority in Congress. Most of the Democrats in Congress spare no bones when talking about their spending and regulatory wishlist. We will see our first 4 trillion dollar budgets. To pay for it taxes will have to be raised even higher than Obama has suggested, and these increases won’t be limited to the rich as he has promised. Clinton promised the same thing and that promise was chucked too when he came to power.

Thank you Joe the plummer for saying it, you were the one, you did it, you finally got the message out. Many of us here have been beating this drum for a while now with no success, but you did it. For myself, I was starting to wonder if McCain had some sort of mental disability when it came to arguing for simple conservative economic principles, but thanks to you his disability is gone. Thank you!

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again the central issue in this campaign is not just the economy, but it is more precisely Socialism. It’s not Ayers. It’s not community activism. It’s not even Wright. It’s Socialism, Stupid!

In the remaining weeks, the Republicans must make the people aware of what we stand to lose if Obama wins. Obama can say he doesn’t support radical change, but even if we can trust a man who has no real record to back up his words one way or another, he won’t have the final word on what happens if he wins. Democrats are already set to gain in the Congress, but if Obama wins as well, then socialism won’t just be a Democrat’s long held wet dream, it will be a reality.

Obama admitted as much the other day here.

Read More →

It appears that the rumors of Obama’s true socialist intentions were not exaggerated. SEE LINK FOR DEATILS Don’t worry folks, Joe Biden assure us that spreading the wealth around is completely patriotic.

I was watching the Simpsons earlier today, and caught the episode where Homer runs for the Sanitation Commissioner. (Trash of Titans - season 9) Anyway, I couldn’t get over the striking similarities between Homer and Obama’s campaign strategy. Homer’s slogan was “Can’t Someone Else Do It”

I recommend every Obama voter, and anyone else for that matter take a look if they’re wondering what an Obama administration will look like in the unfortunate event that he pulls one over on the American people.

Obama is the classic tax and spend liberal, but his message of change is even more socialist than previous Dems. McCain needs to hammer this point home with the American people, because based on the polls our fellow Americans either aren’t getting this message and/or they have conveniently forgotten over 200 years of American history, and are thus prepared to trade tried and true American principles due to the recent economic crisis.

IMO McCain can bring the American people around to their senses and win this election, if he can (I’m not sure he believes it though) say THIS:

Read More →

Mrs. Palin, what experiences do you have that qualify you in the area of foreign affairs?

Why is this question so hard for everyone? Does everyone including Sarah Palin and the GOP have some sort of mental problem or block when it comes to coming up with a common sense answer to this simple question?

What the H#ll is wrong with everyone?

Sarah Palin has a great answer if only she’d think about what foreign affairs actually involves. All she has to say is the following:

As both a mayor and a governor I have handled contentious situations, arbitrated disputes, and negotiated between competing interests, and in these interactions I believe I consistently conducted myself with confidence in a principled yet respectful manner.

I would have to say that working with people in difficult situations is one of my strongest points.

I also have a solid command of our commitments abroad, I am very aware of the threats we face there, and I have a firm understanding of the history that underlies each.

True there are many who have met, shaken hands with, and kissed more foreign leaders, and even visited more foreign countries than I, but this, in the absence of real policy accomplishment or conflict resolution, hardly makes them qualified to manage and conduct foreign affairs.

Barak Obama and the Democrats attack success as if the only thing they have to fear is success.

How dare you have too many houses or make too much profit?! The reason they get so outraged is because they have rather a juvenile concept of wealth: they honestly believe there is only a set amount of wealth in the world, so if you or I get more, they must get less, how childish.

What they don’t understand is that wealth is not static, it’s endlessly being created by people, and it is only limited by the extent of their imagination and labor. A rock is just a worthless rock, unless you convince someone differently. It could be an arrowhead, a bed-warmer, or an exciting paper weight, but only if someone has the imagination and labor to make (and market) it so.

Most people who have a better than a two-year-old’s understanding of economics know that the more people are rewarded for using their imagination and labor, then the more they will make the things we need and want.

Barak Obama on the other hand wants to penalize success, so that no matter how hard your family works and how little someone else does, there will always be a level playing field. He’d rather reward failure. As he says, “let’s build ladders for success for those trapped in holes of crime and access,” but alas he doesn’t GET IT. He doesn’t understand that rewarding failure only encourages more failure, and it encourages more people to do less, which will only results in less (of what we want and need) getting made.

Of course the government can never permit this(less getting made), but where is a superman when you need one? Where is the chosen one, our savior? In a world where success is hunted down and killed, and failure is so celebrated in a cult of victimhood, we’ll need someone to take command of our economy, someone to make sure the things we need and want get made, someone to allocate our resources more fairly, to tell us what to do, and how much to make? We Americans like to be told what to do. Don’t we? What is freedom worth, when you’ve got the OPPORTUNITY for a free lunch? Obama answers: Not much.

Still don’t GET IT? Well, imagine you are back in school, and you and your classmates are told that each of you have to write three research papers in order to pass and five if you want an A. Imagine that you are also told that if anyone does not have at least three papers, then they can take a paper from anyone who writes more than three as long as they leave him or her with at least three.

How many papers would you write? How successful would you be in that class?

Welcome to the Democratic Party’s socialist vision for the American economy.

This is why the Soviet Union lost the cold war and their economy collapsed, but is it really the change we need, or can afford?

My friends, Senator Obama and I have a fundamental difference of opinion when it comes to individual rights, economics, and the role of government.

I believe the government that governs best is the government that governs less.

He believes in big government solutions because he thinks the government knows better than you, or at least under him it knows best.

I believe the national government should NOT use its resources to meddle in areas of our lives that are constitutionally reserved to the people and their local governments.

He believes they can’t be trusted in these areas.

I believe you’d rather be a big fish in our own pond.

He wants you to be small fish in his pond.

I believe that IF the words of the Constitution meant something when they were written like “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except for punishment of a crime … shall exist,” THEN those words should mean the same thing today.

He believes judges can change the meaning of the Constitution to suit their own prejudice.

I believe the right to own and bear arms shall not be infringed.

He supports bans and excessive ammo taxes.

I believe in the inherent rights of all human beings, born and unborn.

He believes in letting even newborns die for the convenience of others.

I believe in personal responsibility, self-reliance, and that all people should be striving for this.

He believes in excuses, victimhood, the blame-game, and compelling the innocent to make amends for the sins of others and those long passed.

I believe the recent economic crisis is evidence that our capitalist system needs to be better regulated.

Many of his friends and closest supporters see this crisis as a perfect opportunity to impose revolutionary changes away from capitalism.

I believe in the inherent good of free markets with an efficient safety net.

He believes in income redistribution, government handouts, and a welfare state.

I want to help the poor and lower classes and empower them to rise out of their poverty.

He wants to enslave them in a growing system of entitlements and dependency.

I believe in sensible regulations and low taxes for everyone which have always resulted led to job creation, economic stability, and growth.

He wants to raise taxes and mandates which have always burdened employers, killed jobs, and chased money and investments out the country.

I want to teach people to fish; he wants to give them a fish everyday!

I want to help people afford health care by reducing health care costs by empowering consumer involvement and fostering more competition.

He wants to subsidize health-care with the government mandates and cash, which have always driven up costs and reduced quality and access.

I believe the best way to help people afford energy is to lower energy costs – by expanding supplies, and encouraging conservation, and promoting the use of alternatives of their choice.

He wants to cut fossil fuel supplies to raise energy costs to force people to conserve and to use the alternatives of his choice.

I want to protect the environment too, but unlike him I don’t want to screw the people in the process.

I want open and free trade because I know fair competition only makes our workers and industries stronger, more efficient, more productive, and innovative.

He wants trade barriers and protectionism because he has no faith in the American worker. He doesn’t believe they can compete. Why else would he support barriers to fair competition and pander to the complacent and lazy?

Did you ever notice how Democrats like to vilify guns, religion, and corporations for political gain?

Since when have any of these things ever been responsible for harming anyone?

It’s like those people in Scranton, always say, “Religion doesn’t kill people. People kill people.”

I suggest Democrats get a clue and focus on the real problems, which are those aspects of human nature that leads us to harm ourselves and others, maybe then they might be able to come up with some ideas that actually work.

Joe Biden said Thursday that paying more in taxes is the patriotic thing to do for wealthier Americans.

Is that it then, patriotism is all about dollars and cents and how much you pay, because if it is, then I think these people have done enough. They’re already paying for more than 75% of our government’s bloated budget. Is that not patriotic enough?

Biden might as well have told the mother depicted in “Saving Private Ryan” to suck it, Jimmy’s not coming home either.

If it’s all about dollars and cents, then what does this say about the 40% of Americans who don’t pay taxes? Joe, are they somehow unpatriotic? Gosh, I’ve been very partisan over the last month, but I wouldn’t go there. I mean Joe, for you to bad mouth your own base with such an unfair insinuation, that’s really ballsy, or cuckoo.

What I want to know is, if paying ZERO isn’t unpatriotic, then how are they (the 40%) proving their patriotism, or are we giving them a pass on that too?

If patriotism is all about dollars and cents, then I never heard a stronger argument for a flat tax.