It is apparent that the Federal Government and our elected officials are unwilling or incapable of limiting the growth of government and controlling spending. The Federal government cannot possibly need more revenues to execute its constitutional powers. Revenues have grown dramatically over the last eight years and still they spend vastly more than is brought in. So I pondered, how do we, the taxed, stop our government? Throw the bums out? Been there, done that. It didn’t work. Washington corrupts totally. Very few are elected and retain their integrity. The money, the power, it is just too hard to refuse.
It appears that our last hope lies with our state governors and governments. They must seize their rightful powers and not let the federal government usurp their state’s constitutional rights and obligations. There have been a couple of events in the last year which provide some glimmer of hope. I can only hope more states take legislative and legal steps to retain and regain their constitutional powers.
George Will wrote a column about Arizona’s The Freedom of Choice in Health Care Act , which was drafted to stop in state passage of state universal healthcare, can be a defense against nationalized healthcare. This is a good read and should be a reference for all state senators and representatives.
“Proposition 101 would protect Arizonans not only against abridgements of their liberties by their state government, but also perhaps against comparable actions by the federal government. Clint Bolick, director of the Goldwater Institute's Center for Constitutional Litigation, believes that if Washington were to enact a national health insurance program of prescriptive regulations, Proposition 101 would trigger an epochal constitutional clash ‘between state sovereignty and national power.’“

Second, a column by Walter Williams ( Oklahoma Rebellion ) about legislation passed in the State of Oklahoma demonstrates what should be the first step for every state in their battle to regain their rightful position in the United States. Reestablishing states rights to stem the growth of the Federal Government is a must. A quote from that article states:
The resolution's language, in part, reads: "Whereas, the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States reads as follows: 'The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.'; and Whereas, the Tenth Amendment defines the total scope of federal power as being that specifically granted by the Constitution of the United States and no more; and whereas, the scope of power defined by the Tenth Amendment means that the federal government was created by the states specifically to be an agent of the states; and Whereas, today, in 2008, the states are demonstrably treated as agents of the federal government. "Now, therefore, be it resolved by the House of Representatives and the Senate of the 2nd session of the 51st Oklahoma Legislature: that the State of Oklahoma hereby claims sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the Constitution of the United States. That this serve as Notice and Demand to the federal government, as our agent, to cease and desist, effective immediately, mandates that are beyond the scope of these constitutionally delegated powers."

So, states must act to protect their sovereignty and to limit the power and growth of the federal government. They must also use the court system to retain and regain their entitled powers in the Constitution. The question is “Do they want the power?”.

It is apparent that the Federal Government and our elected officials are unwilling or incapable of limiting the growth of government and controlling spending. The Federal government cannot possibly need more revenues to execute its constitutional powers. Revenues have grown dramatically over the last eight years and still they spend vastly more than is brought in. So I pondered, how do we, the taxed, stop our government? Throw the bums out? Been there, done that. It didn’t work. Washington corrupts totally. Very few are elected and retain their integrity. The money, the power, it is just too hard to refuse.
It appears that our last hope lies with our state governors and governments. They must seize their rightful powers and not let the federal government usurp their state’s constitutional rights and obligations. There have been a couple of events in the last year which provide some glimmer of hope. I can only hope more states take legislative and legal steps to retain and regain their constitutional powers.
George Will wrote a column about Arizona’s The Freedom of Choice in Health Care Act , which was drafted to stop in state passage of state universal healthcare, can be a defense against nationalized healthcare. This is a good read and should be a reference for all state senators and representatives.
“Proposition 101 would protect Arizonans not only against abridgements of their liberties by their state government, but also perhaps against comparable actions by the federal government. Clint Bolick, director of the Goldwater Institute's Center for Constitutional Litigation, believes that if Washington were to enact a national health insurance program of prescriptive regulations, Proposition 101 would trigger an epochal constitutional clash ‘between state sovereignty and national power.’“

Second, a column by Walter Williams ( Oklahoma Rebellion ) about legislation passed in the State of Oklahoma demonstrates what should be the first step for every state in their battle to regain their rightful position in the United States. Reestablishing states rights to stem the growth of the Federal Government is a must. A quote from that article states:
The resolution's language, in part, reads: "Whereas, the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States reads as follows: 'The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.'; and Whereas, the Tenth Amendment defines the total scope of federal power as being that specifically granted by the Constitution of the United States and no more; and whereas, the scope of power defined by the Tenth Amendment means that the federal government was created by the states specifically to be an agent of the states; and Whereas, today, in 2008, the states are demonstrably treated as agents of the federal government. "Now, therefore, be it resolved by the House of Representatives and the Senate of the 2nd session of the 51st Oklahoma Legislature: that the State of Oklahoma hereby claims sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the Constitution of the United States. That this serve as Notice and Demand to the federal government, as our agent, to cease and desist, effective immediately, mandates that are beyond the scope of these constitutionally delegated powers."

So, states must act to protect their sovereignty and to limit the power and growth of the federal government. They must also use the court system to retain and regain their entitled powers in the Constitution. The question is “Do they want the power?”.

Senator Obama’s rise to Presidential contender is a condemnation of our educational system. If today’s youth cannot see through the words to the truth we are certainly lost. If we have taught our youth that character doesn’t matter we are certainly lost. What do people see in this man that they would want him to be their friend, much less President of the United States? When the financial crisis leapt onto the stage, his response was “I told them to call me if they needed me.” It appears his party did not need him. His is his party’s leader is he not? Is this not odd that he didn’t lead them in the greatest crisis since the Great Depression? If Iran prepares to attack Israel will his response be “I told them to call me if they need me”? I believe there was no need for him in Washington because he had absolutely nothing to offer! He has no idea what to do to resolve this issue. Further, he and his party are much involved in issues which led to this meltdown. Obama’s campaign for change and saying McCain is just four more years of the same failed policies is a preposterous joke. Bush’s failed policy is excessive government spending. Federal revenues have increased under his tax cuts, so that certainly is not a failed policy. Obama is all about increasing federal tax revenues. Obama’s policy statements are to increase federal spending dramatically over their current (Bush) levels. So it appears he plans to adopt Bush’s policies of growing government spending. He has admitted if the economy were frail when he took office he would have to delay implementation of his economic plan. This reveals he knows his plan will be detrimental to the economy. He wants to wait until the economy is healthy enough to survive the implementation of his plan. Is this what he means by Hope you can believe in? Why would anyone have an economic plan they know will damage the economy? That is stupid! Why would anyone want that person directing the economic well being of our country? He further states he would cut investments in “unproven missile defense systems”, but would greatly increase investments (taxes, spending) in unproven alternative fuel and energy programs. Constitutionally the federal government has a responsibility to provide for our defense. I cannot find the area of the Constitution where it is called upon to direct our energy policy. People readily accept Obama would get our soldiers out of Iraq quickly and we would be saving that $10 billion per week we are spending on the war. And they were mightily happy. However, that is when most stop listening. They heard what they wanted to hear. But he says he would move them to Afghanistan, not bring them home. So they are still at risk and the spending continues. Is the rent cheaper in Afghanistan than Iraq? The man is an empty suit. His history of voting present rather than taking positions is very indicative of his character. He either didn’t have a position or didn’t want to publicly take a position which might prove unpopular and hurt his political future, or no one called him to tell him he was needed. “I told them to call me if they needed me.”

This is my first attempt at blogging.  Recent economic events and certainly the current campaign cycle both have me a little upset and concerned.  Thus my thoughts that perhaps blogging would be an outlet for my angst. 

I am conservative and did not support McCain in the primaries.  I must disclose I lived in Arizona for 15 years and supported McCain for Senator and he maintained conservative positions at that time.  When he lost to Bush he seemed to abandon many of his conservative ideals; can you say McCain-Feingold.  However, since he is the most conservative candidate I now must support him.

That is not the real subject of this entry to my blog.  We (Congress) have passed this enormous bailout and not only does Wall Street tank but so do all of the other markets as well.  They had good intentions.  And right on schedule, when throwing money at the problem did not fix the problem, throw more money.  They now feel more will be required.  They need to study the government actions taken in the thirties to see where this is going.  But again, I digress.

While they attempt to fix a problem they created but now blame on someone else, they have done nothing about the root problem.  The Community Redevelopment Act is still lurking.  The government will continue to pressure lenders to make these loans.  We will have same song second verse before we can recover fully from this one.