As an art project in a California school, the first grade students were asked to draw a magic carpet and say what they would do with it.  This is one child’s project.

This is the link to constitutingamerica.org, a website started by Janine Turner (formerly of the CBS series NORTHERN EXPOSURE).  The mission of the site is to reach, educate and inform America’s youth and her citizens about the importance of the U.S. Constitution and the foundation it sets forth regarding our freedoms and rights.  The site includes educational information on the U. S. Constitution and the Federalist Papers, scholarship opportunities for students, and all sorts of resources to learn more about the documents that laid the foundation for America.

Check out the site–it’s easy to get around and fun to explore!

Today’s Washington Times reports that President Obama and Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar will announce by April 30 whether or not backers of the Cape Wind Project off Cape Cod Massachusetts will be able to proceed with their project.

The project had been opposed by the late Senator Kennedy.  Massachusetts governor Deval Patrick supports the project, Senator Kerry has been publicly noncommittal, and newly-elected Senator Scott Brown says he generally supports wind power, but does not support Cape Wind. 

As a resident of Massachusetts who lives in an all-electric house, I have a few questions.  If this wind farm goes forward, how much of the electricity in Massachusetts will it provide?  How will it impact the cost of electricity for Masschusetts residents?  What impact will it have on fishing off the coast of Massachusetts?

This project was first announced in 2001.  It seems as if the answers to the above questions should be fairly easy to find, but when I did a ‘google’ search, I got a lot of entries and very little information.  One of the points I did find was that because the consumer would have to pay for the construction of the wind farm, electricity rates would actually go up.  I also learned that since only 3 percent of Massachusetts’ electricity is oil-generated, the wind farm will have no impact on oil imports.  I also came across an article that explained that Denmark, a leader in wind energy, is moving away from wind and considering nuclear energy.  Although wind energy is ‘green energy’ it does have some risks–there are concerns about how wind farms affect the bird population of an area.

It will be interesting to see how this turns out.  I really don’t think I have enough information to form an opinion at this point, and I suspect there are many other people who feel that way.

The Minnesota Star Tribune posted an article on Saturday about the three hikers who have been held prisoner in Iran since July 31.  Originally, Shane Bauer, 27, his girlfriend, Sarah Shourd, 31, and their friend Joshua Fattal, 27, were detained and put in jail for allegedly crossing an unmarked border.  Since then, the three have been accused of spying and placed in Tehran’s Evin Prison.

According to the article:

“Iranian officials initially said the hikers were detained after allegedly crossing an unmarked border. In the months since, several reports, including a BBC story April 9, have surfaced saying that the Iranian government had “credible evidence” that the hikers had links to U.S. intelligence agencies.”

Does anyone truly believe that?  Middle Eastern dictatorships have a track record of holding hostages for political purposes.  I suspect these young people are being held hostage as a result of Iran’s continuing its nuclear program and the United States objecting to that continuation.  I also think that some of the problem here is a President whose actions have made him appear weak in the eyes of many of our enemies.  When America has a President who appears to be weak, the enemies of democracy and freedom engage in mischief.  We may have to wait until 2012 to get these hostages back–just as we had to wait for Jimmy Carter to leave office and Ronald Reagan to step in during the last Iranian hostage situation.

Today’s Washington Examiner quotes Israeli President Shimon Peres as saying that Iran is a threat to the whole world–not just to Israel.  He made that statement while speaking at a memorial service for soldiers and civilians killed in Israel’s wars and terror attacks.

The Washington Examiner reports:

“Peres added that a threat to “the peace of the Jewish people always carries the danger of turning into a threat to the civilized world as a whole.”

David Aikman, former journalist for TIME magazine, is quoted as saying that Jewish communities everywhere in the world have often been known as the ‘canary in the coal mine.’  The way a government behaves toward Jews is the first sign of how it intends to treat all the people under its control.  We need to keep this thought in mind as we watch the nations of the world deal with the threat of Iran going nuclear.  Israel is not the only nation at risk, and if we ignore the risk to the entire world, we do so at our own peril.

Meanwhile, the New York Times reported yesterday that Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates has warned that the United States does not have a policy in place for dealing with Iran’s development of nuclear weapons.  This may be one of the reasons that Iran was not discussed in President Obama’s recent nuclear summit–the Administration has no answer on how to deal with the problem.

The obvious answer to Iran becoming a nuclear power is to support the people who want to overthrow the current regime in Iran.  That would most likely end the country’s progress toward nuclear weapons.  However, President Obama’s unwillingness to at least verbally support the ‘green revolution’ in the past makes this solution unlikely.  The only economic sanction that would impact Iran would be shutting off its supply of refined gasoline.  Iran has a huge supply of oil, but no refineries to speak of.  The danger in this solution is that we might alienate the people involved in the ‘green revolution’ in the process and make things more difficult in the future.  There are also doubts that other countries would join us in this effort.

There are no easy answers here, but to do nothing is to accept the fact that Iran will join the ranks of nuclear nations.  Since Iran is the worlds greatest supporter of terrorism (Hamas, Hezbollah, and sometimes Al Qaeda), that is not a reasonable solution.

Yesterday’s Washington Post reported that President Obama has extended hospital visitation rights to same-sex partners.  Although this may surprise some people reading this article, I don’t have a problem with that–as long as he extends the same rights to heterosexual partners that are not married.  I don’t support gay marriage–I feel there is a potential that if gay marriage is legal, we will trample the conscience rights of pastors who believe in the Bible.  I do think, however, that compassion requires visitation rights to people who have lived together and made a commitment to each other–gay or straight.

The problem with legalizing gay marriage is the question of what happens when a pastor who believes the Bible condemns homosexuality refuses to marry a same-sex couple.  Does he have a right of conscience to refuse to perform that marriage?  Does a photographer who believes the Biblical position on homosexuality have the right to refuse to take pictures?  Could we honor everyone’s rights by allowing civil unions and not involving the church?  I don’t claim to have the answers to these questions–I bring them up simply to make the point that this is a very complex issue, and we need to find a way to protect the rights of as many people as possible.

Boston.com is reporting today on the efforts of Massachusetts to bring down the cost of its mandated health insurance.  The companies that sell health insurance in the state are beginning to sell policies that prohibit the insured person from using the more expensive (and popular) hospitals such as Massachusetts General and Brigham and Women’s for their care.  It saves money for employers buying insurance for their workers, and it saves money for the individual buying insurance, but is this really a good idea?

It would be nice to lower health insurance costs, but when the law required that insurance companies had to insure everyone who applied for insurance, costs were bound to go up.  The state interference in the healthcare insurance market has totally skewed the actuary tables.  Because people can buy insurance for a period when they know they will have major medical expenses and then drop the insurance, the previous actuary numbers no longer apply.  The insurance companies are trying to stay in business with a reasonable profit margin (yes, they are entitled to make a profit), and the state (which does not necessarily understand how health insurance works) is trying to control them.

It’s time Massachusetts realized that its universal healthcare plan was not really a good idea.  Affordable insurance coverage for everyone could be achieved by easier means.  Let’s begin with tort reform, high risk insurance pools, commerce across state lines, and tax deductions to buy health insurance.  Those things might actually work.

The March 2010 issue of Imprimis ( a publication of Hillsdale College in Hillsdale, Michigan) featured an article by Andrew McCarthy.  Mr. McCarthy was an Assistant U. S. Attorney in the South District of New York.  He led the terrorism prosecutiion agains Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman (and others) in connection with the World Trade Center Bombing.  Because of his experience as Assistant U. S. Attorney and his involvement of the trials of the World Trade Center bombers, he understands terrorism very well.

The article deals with the concept of habeas corpus, and Mr. McCarthy explains it in terms that people like me who don’t understand legal jargon can understand.  He points out that Article I, Section 9 of the U. S. Constitution states:

“The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be usspended, unless whne in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.”

He points out that when our country is in danger, our Constitution adapts and imposes the laws and customs of war.  He also states that, “The Framers of the Constitution understood that the rights we cherish would be little more than parchment promises unless we could defend ourselves and defeat our enemies.”  Unfortunately, in recent history we have lost this principle. 

Mr. McCarthy concludes:

“The Constitution of Justice Jackson–like the Constitution of Presidents Jackson, Lincoln, and Roosevelt–is that of a free, self-governing people. Such a people does not surrender control of the most fundamental political decisions–such as those concerning national defense–to officials who are not politically accountable. Nor should our elected officials voluntarily surrender control of those decisions. We must reject the idea of entrusting our security to judicial processes or we shall eventually find ourselves neither secure nor free.”

Please follow the above link and read the entire article.  It is very enlightening.  This article was quoted by permission from Imprimis, a publication of Hillsdale College. 

Ed Morrissey at Hot Air posted an article today about the Democrat’s passage of the pay-go rules which require them to fund any new legislation they pass, rather than creating larger deficits.  Remember the celebrating in February when they passed the bill?  Well, since they passed it, they are 0-3 in complying with it.

Mr. Morrissey cites a Politico article in his post that states:

“The short-term unemployment benefits bill, which was headed toward final passage in the House on Thursday night, also includes the COBRA health program and a Medicare reimbursement adjustment known as the “doc fix.” The bill bypassed pay-as-you-go rules because it was designated as a temporary “emergency” spending plan.”

Mr. Morrissey points out that the Democrats will probably avoid the constraints of the pay-go rule in next year’s budget by not passing a budget.  They will fund the government at this year’s budget levels and then increase those levels after the 2010 elections either waiving pay-go or increasing taxes significantly.  Either way, the American people lose.  We need to remember as we plan for the coming year that the Bush tax cuts expire at the end of 2010.  The expiration of those tax cuts plus the tendency of the Democrat Congress to spend our money very freely does not bode well for the economic future of America.

I haven’t yet written about President Obama’s nuclear summit because I hadn’t found an article that summed it up for me.  Well, the wait is over!  Charles Krauthammer posted an article at the Washington Post today that kind of summed up my reaction.

Mr. Krauthammer points out in his article that the two major threats to the world in the area of nuclear weaponry were ignored at the meeting.  Iran was not on the agenda; as the world’s largest supporter of terrorism and racing toward a nuclear bomb, Iran should have at least receive a mention of some kind.  The other threat that Mr. Krauthammer points out is Pakistan, a country that is friendly to us, but is rapidly increasing its plutonium production, which is adding to the world’s stockpile of fissile material every day.  The government of Pakistan is not noted for its stability, and their status as a growing nuclear power could easily constitute a future problem.

Mr. Krauthammer points out:

“So what was the major breakthrough announced by Obama at the end of the two-day conference? That Ukraine, Chile, Mexico and Canada will be getting rid of various amounts of enriched uranium.

“What a relief. I don’t know about you, but I lie awake nights worrying about Canadian uranium. I know these people. I grew up there. You have no idea what they’re capable of doing. If Sidney Crosby hadn’t scored that goal to win the Olympic gold medal, there’s no telling what might have ensued.”

The Obama nuclear summit was another example of the charade this administration has become.  There was a lot of pomp and circumstance and very little substance.  Hopefully we can replace Congress and the President soon enough to prevent any permanent damage to our country or the world. 

On April 14, the Republicans on the Ways and Means Committee posted a chart of all the new taxes that have been enacted by the Obama Administration.  The chart is a pdf file that can be found at Republicans.WaysandMeansCommittee.  It details all the increased taxes passed by President Obama and Congress since he took office.  A look at the chart easily explains why the Tea Parties exist!  Many of these taxes will go unnoticed because they are placed on corporations.  Any tax placed on a corporation is generally passed on to the consumer in the form of higher prices for the product.  As consumers, we notice that the price of some things goes up, but we don’t necessarily understand that it is because of a federal tax.

Meanwhile, according to The Hill yesterday, the President joked at a fundraiser that the Tea Parties should be thanking him for his tax cuts.  There are an awful lot of people who just filed their tax returns yesterday who might not agree with that statement.

This is a crowd shot of the Worcester Massachusetts Tea Party.  There were approximately five thousand people there.  The number of people who are concerned with the growth of our government and the increases in the amount of taxes many Americans will be paying in the future is growing.

This is a picture from today’s Worcester Tea Party.  The coffins were marched to the podium to the sound of a bagpipe playing “Amazing Grace.”  The coffins represent the death of the American Dream, financial stability, the individual, the U. S. Constitution, free markets, and our children’s future.  The message of the Tea Party was that everyone needs to be involved in our government and that the American people need to hold their elected officials accountable for their actions.

This is the face of the Worcester Tea Party 2010.  Her shirt says, “Born in Taxachusetts.”  There were five thousand or more people in attendance.  Some of the candidates that are running in the Republican primary elections for Congress in the district that includes Worcester were there. 

The crowd included people of all ages–parents, students, children, and grandparents.  One of the speakers was a college student whose family had immigrated to this country about ten years ago.  He expressed his parents’ concern that America was moving toward the type of government they had fled in Russia.

The headline at the Newsweek website today is “Today Is The Best Tax Day Of Your LIfe.”  The article is written by Robert Samuelson, who points out that because of growing deficits, increased healthcare spending and the baby boomer generation beginning to retire and collect Social Security, the amount we pay in taxes today may be the lowest amount we pay for a long time.  According to the Tax Policy Center of the Urban Institute and Brookings Institution, 47 per cent of American households do not pay any taxes.  Among the elderly, 55 percent pay no income tax.  Among households with children 54 percent don’t pay taxes.  Among married couples filing jointly, only 38 percent don’t pay taxes.  Until the tax burden is somehow spread evenly among the people, there will be no incentive to cut spending and reduce taxes.

The article points out:

“To which (increased federal spending and endless budget deficits) there’s at least one obvious solution: raise taxes. By all estimates, the budget outlook is daunting. The latest projections of the Congressional Budget Office reckon the cumulative deficits under President Obama’s policies to be $12.7 trillion from 2009 to 2020. In 2020 the estimated annual deficit will be $1.25 trillion, or 5.6 percent of the economy (gross domestic product), despite assumed “full employment” of 5 percent. And the deficits get larger with every succeeding year. Given unavoidable uncertainties, these precise projections are likely to prove wrong. But their basic message seems incontestable: there’s a large and growing gap between the government’s promises and the existing tax base.”

 

Please read the entire article to see the full picture of where we are and where we are going.

Has it occurred to anyone that the answer to the problem may be to cut the size of government?  The biggest mistake America ever made was to air-condition Congress.  If it were not air conditioned, we could send them home when the weather got warm and they would be forced to live as ordinary Americans for the summer!

Yesterday’s Boston Herald posted an article about the Tea Party Express (featuring Sarah Palin) visit to Boston yesterday.  Her basic message is simple–lower taxes so Americans can keep more of what they earn and “drill, baby, drill.”  The Tea Party Express began its journey across America on March 27th at Searchlight, Nevada, and will conclude today in Washington, D, C.  Their basic goal is lower taxes for Americans.  As they tour, they highlight those Congressmen in Washington who have voted to increase taxes and government. 

The basic message on the Tea Party website, Tea Party Express, is “Just Vote Them Out.”  That’s not a bad place to start, but I think the real solution to the current American political morass is term limits.  Congressmen should be sent home after one of two terms and forced to live under the laws they pass.  They should not be exempt from any legislation they are responsible for.  The Founding Fathers envisioned a ‘citizen legislature’ that would serve the public for a short while and then return to their previous occupation.  Unfortunately, too many people in our government today have no previous occupation and do not understand how the laws they pass impact the average American.

On a personal note, through a series of unplanned events, I heard Sarah Palin speak in upstate New York last year.  My husband and I were there for a family wedding and just happened to stay in a hotel across the street from where she was speaking.  She is a charismatic speaker who draws a large crowd.  Sitting next to us was a group of college students who were totally impressed by what she said.  I feel that the media has attempted to do a hatchet job on her personally and that they have been somewhat successful.  I am not sure what impact that will have on any political plans she may have for the future.  She was a successful governor of the State of Alaska and a successful small-town mayor, and I feel that she has a contribution to make in American politics.  She stood up to oil industry special interests as governor of Alaska and seems to have a good understanding of how energy policy works.  I’m not sure she is a viable candidate, but if a Republican becomes President in the near future, he (or she) would be smart to include Sarah Palin in his Cabinet.

This is a picure taken in Reykjanes, Iceland.  What you are looking at is the place where the North American and Eurasian tectonic plates meet.  (If you look closely toward the middle of the bridge, you will see a white spot–that is my hat!  The picture was taken in February 2007.  Please note the gray quality of the ground–it is lava rock occasionally covered by moss.) These plates are drawing apart at the rate of approximately 2 centimeters a year.  Iceland is a breathtakingly beautiful island build over a volcanic hot-spot in the Mid-Atlantic Ridge and is used to an occasional volcanic eruption.  The latest eruption was Wednesday under the Eyjafjallajokull glacier.

Yesterday’s Washington Post reported on the eruption.

According to the article:

“The Icelandic Civil Defense Authority ordered 700 people to evacuate their homes and said melting ice from the glacier had caused big floods that threatened to damage a highway and several bridges, an official told Reuters.”

The danger to the population in the area of the eruption is flooding as the ice from the glacier melts.  The civil defense people in Iceland are digging holes to attempt to take the pressure of the flood waters away from the bridges in the area.

Iceland is an amazing country.  They have truly discovered ‘green energy’.  Because they sit on a volcanic hot-spot, they use the heat of the volcanoes to produce energy.  When we stayed there, the hot water in the hotel came from the volcanoes and the cold water came from the glaciers.  The floor of the hotel was hot-water heated, so you never stepped out onto a cold floor in the morning.  However, you never knew when you stepped into the shower how strong the smell of sulfur would be!  We saw greenhouses everywhere–again the electricity to heat them was inexpensive and ‘green’.   I am hopeful that the two recent volcanic eruptions are not an indication of things to come.  The people of Iceland are wonderful, and I wish them safety as they deal with this recent event.

Yesterday, Dick Morris posted an article at The Hill opposing the current financial reform bill in Congress.  If passed into law, the financial reform bill that passed the House last year would give the power to the President and the Treasury Secretary to take over any financial institute that they deemed “too big to fail.”  There is no judicial review written into the process, and there is no level of evidence required to trigger a takeover.

After the government takes over a company, it has the right to fire the board of directors and the management, wipe out the stockholder equity, and sell off divisions of the company.  It seems to me that this is more than a little unconstitutional. 

Mr. Morris points out that the bill contains consumer protection provisions that he supports, but no one is paying attention to the federal power grab in the other parts of the bill. 

The problems that caused the financial crisis that led to the housing bust had more to do with federal intrusion than bankers’ failures.  The pressure on banks to make sub-prime loans caused the banks to find a way to offload questionable assets.  Eventually the whole house of cards collapsed.  The way to avoid a repeat performance is to let the banks make wise business decisions rather than forcing them to make risky loans.  One of the banks in the area of Massachusetts where I live came through the mortgage meltdown beautifully.  They had very few foreclosures and were secure.  They then got a letter from the government criticizing the bank for not lending enough, slapping it with a “needs to improve” rating under the Community Reinvestment Act (see rightwinggranny.com article of March 20, 2009).  Business does better with less regulation–not more!

America is a nation of immigrants.  Many of our leaders in science, industry, and entrepreneurship have been new Americans or first generation Americans.  I believe in immigration.  I believe in legal immigration.  I also believe that our current immigration laws need to be looked at carefully and updated to reflect the world in which we currently live.

Today, The Hill reports that Harry Reid wants to tackle immigration reform this year.  The political pundits in Nevada point out that mobilizing Hispanic voters could mean an election victory for Reid in November.  I guess I’m just cynical, but I don’t have enough confidence in the wisdom of Harry Reid to want to see another 2,000 page bill that no one has read passed this year.  The article at The Hill points out that conservative Democrats do not want to deal with this issue right now.

At some point we have to reevaluate our immigration rules.  The idea of immigration is that you want people to immigrate who will contribute something to the country.  Many of our ancestors were dirt poor when they arrived here, but they were willing to work, and in doing so contributed greatly to the country.  I am willing to let anyone come here who is willing to work and wants to be an American (learn the language, assimilate, etc.).

On a personal note, through a series of events a number of years ago, I found myself in a church service with a group of Russian worshipers.  Very few of them spoke English.  As we mingled after the service, through some of the bi-lingual people there, I learned that some of these people had been scientists, engineers and highly skilled workers in Russia.  Now they were doing factory or assembly jobs.  Because they had not (for whatever reason) learned English, they were not able to use their gifts fully in the American economy.  Forcing someone who is in America to learn English is not mean–it will open doors of opportunity for them that nothing else will.  We need an immigration policy that draws people who want to work and want to be part of this country.  Seeing a pro-immigration protester flying a Mexican flag does not encourage me.

According to the website Gene Expression, in 2002 the population replacement rate in the USA was 2.1.  Unless we want to be a nation of old people (not that there is anything wrong with old people), we need to consider how to change our immigration policy so that it meets both our needs and the needs of the people who want to come here.

On Monday, the Wall Street Journal posted an article about the coming shortage of doctors.  According to the Association of American Medical Colleges, at current graduation and training rates, the nation will face a shortage of as many as 150,000 doctors in the next fifteen years.  We are facing a shortage of Primary Care Physicians, doctors whose role will in patient care will grow under the new healthcare reform bill recently passed. 

According to the article:

“The U.S. has 352,908 primary-care doctors now, and the college association estimates that 45,000 more will be needed by 2020. But the number of medical-school students entering family medicine fell more than a quarter between 2002 and 2007.”

Currently, there are efforts being made to solve this problem.  There are incentives in the healthcare reform act to encourage people to become doctors and there is a 10 percent Medicare pay boost for primary-care doctors.  There have also been some new medical schools opening around the country.  There is, however, a bottleneck in the planned growth in the number of doctors–there is a shortage of medical resident positions.

According to the article:

“There are about 110,000 resident positions in the U.S., according to the AAMC. Teaching hospitals rely heavily on Medicare funding to pay for these slots. In 1997, Congress imposed a cap on funding for medical residencies, which hospitals say has increasingly hurt their ability to expand the number of positions.”

There is a map at the bottom of the article showing the number of doctors per patient in each state.  Please follow the link above to view the map. 

This problem is not totally the result of the new healthcare reform bill, but because of the number of people who will suddenly be insured and seeking primary care physicians, the healthcare reform bill will make the doctor shortage more obvious more quickly.

Today’s Washington Times has an opinion piece by Wesley Pruden on the coming Supreme Court nomination by President Obama.  President Obama has stated “that in a democracy powerful interests must not be allowed to drown out the voices of ordinary citizens.”  (What does he think the SEIU does???)  Mr. Pruden points out that powerful interests should not be allowed to drown out the voices of ordinary citizens, but that didn’t used to be the concern of judges.  The job of a Supreme Court justice is to uphold the Constitution.  That is supposed to be the basis of his decisions. 

Mr. Pruden points out that because the Democrats have 59 votes, they will probably be able to confirm pretty much anyone.  However, the Republicans have 41 votes.  With their 41 votes and a spine, the Republicans could turn this nomination process into a teachable moment.  Now is the time to ask the questions that will let the American people see what is happening to our Republic.  If the Republicans ask valid questions that educate the American people, they could accomplish good things for themselves and for our country.

This is a chart that was posted at Fox News yesterday.  The title of the article was “Obama’s Secret Power Grabs.”  The chart shows how the Obama Administration has by-passed Congress when Congress was not going to vote the way President Obama wanted it to vote.  One of the interesting things to me is the recess appointment of Craig Becker, which will probably result in the loss of the secret ballot in union votes.  Recess appointments have been used before to place people who were not confirmed in specific positions, but I don’t believe a recess appointment has been used before to push through a law that Congress would not pass.  If this trend continues, our democracy will be endangered.  There is a ‘working model’ of this chart at Americans For Prosperity which explains each section as you click on its box.  Please visit their website for further details.

Yesterday Hot Air posted a story about a slight oversight in the new healthcare reform bill.  Evidently there is something in the bill that forces Congress to leave the federal employees healthcare plan and be part of the insurance exchange programs that will begin in 2014.  Unfortunately, the way the law is understood, Congress will be required to leave its current healthcare plan immediately to take part in the exchange programs (that don’t begin until 2014).  I realize that this is a silly little thing, but it is an example of what happens when a very large bill is passed without giving anyone the time to study its implications.

The article concludes:

“I’d call it comedy gold if not for the obvious point raised by the Times: “If they did not know exactly what they were doing to themselves, did lawmakers who wrote and passed the bill fully grasp the details of how it would influence the lives of other Americans?””

I think that’s about right!

Star Parker has posted an article at Townhall.com today entitled, “Why I’m Running For Congress.”  Ms. Parker has worked for urban renewal and to fight poverty for a number of years. 

In her article she states:

“All of this effort has been aimed to deliver one basic message. That the barrier between America’s chronically poor and the American dream is the welfare state socialism which was supposed to be our answer to poverty.”

She recalls being on welfare as a young woman and describes it as, “A dehumanized culture of dependence and irresponsibility that encourages behavior exactly the opposite of what a successful life demands.”

She further points out that fifty years and more than a trillion dollars after President Lyndon Johnson began the War on Poverty, the rate of poverty in America is unchanged.

She states in her article:

“As I wrote a little over a year ago: “I thought we were on the road to moving socialism out of poor black communities and replacing it with wealth producing American capitalism. But, incredibly, we are going in the opposite direction. Instead of poor America on socialism becoming more like rich America on capitalism, rich America on capitalism is becoming like poor America on socialism.” “

Please follow the above link to read the entire article.  She explains the issues that have caused her to decide to run for Congress in detail. 

We have fought the war on poverty for almost fifty years now; and we have obviously lost.  Our government has funded and subsidized behavior that leads to the continuation of poverty, not the end of poverty and the beginning of success.  When the government pays people who do not work and takes money from people who do, there will be fewer people who are interested in working.  The fact that almost half of all Americans now do not pay income tax further complicates the problem–they have no reason to care if people who work pay more taxes. 

I wish Ms. Parker well in her campaign.

Today’s Washington Examiner posted an editorial on how we got to the subprime mortgage mess.  This subject is also explored in a YouTube video called “Burning Down The House”, which I have linked to in previous posts.

The Washington Examiner points out that the mismanagement of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac combined with the obstruction of Congressional regulators played a major role in creating and bursting the housing bubble in the early 2000’s. 

The article points out:

“Rather than offer a serious discussion of how to reform the two government-sanctioned enterprises (GSEs), however, President Obama and the Democratic leadership in Congress are only offering legislation to punish bank CEOs and stiffen regulations for private sector banks.”

The problem had more to do with the government interference with borrowing standards of the banks than it did with the banks.  When community organizers began showing up at meetings of bank stockholders to protest that not enough money was being lent to people who could not pay it back, the problems began. 

The article concludes:

“So now the question is whether the FCIC (Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission) will name names in its forthcoming report of those in Congress and the executive branch who protected and advanced Fannie and Freddie, at grievous expense to American taxpayers.”

 

Every American was affected in some way by the misbehavior of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and its Congressional overseers.  It would be nice to see the truth come out!