America is in deep trouble on almost every front and sadly most of the focus by the Main Stream Media, politicians and public are “hot button issues” which often divert attention from the dire straits this country is in overall.  I care about all the issues or most of them but I care about America more than I care about winning a battle on any isolated “hot button issue”. 

It seems, to me, that each time we begin to make progress on bringing to the light the plight of America with regard to National Defense, the Economy, Constitutional Rights, the Federal Budget and Deficit, Immigration, etc. there is a new scandal, hot button issue that diverts our attention from the whole to the isolated.  Frankly, I have come to believe that is by design and both parties are complicit in this excursion in to deception.

We have over 92 Million workforce age citizens not participating in the workforce in this country.  Even when we discount those who are retired and truly handicapped and unable to work we find that there is, in reality, at least 15% unemployment and most honest analyst and statisticians believe it is over 20% in real unemployment picture.  That is a problem of major proportions and is largely ignored today by all politicians.  It is not ignored by those in that situation who WOULD WORK if they COULD FIND WORK.  Sadly, there is a significant portion of the unemployed who NO LONGER WANT TO WORK.  They are satisfied to receive a handout rather than a hand up and find it more lucrative to sit idle than to work 1-3 jobs to make ends meet.  I can understand but cannot condone their choices and that is a problem in America.

Our National Defense through the systematic weakening of our military is worse than it has been in decades and possibly ever.  I resist declaring that this administration wants us open to attacks but if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, swims like a duck and looks like a duck it just might be a duck.  We have consistently alienated our friends and long term allies and aided those who openly declare “Death to America”.  That is unconscionable to me and should be to any American who loves liberty and having a free constitutional republic in which to live and work.  Our borders are so porous that anyone can virtually walk across unchecked and unimpeded.  That means that terrorist have open access to our borders especially our southern borders and can and possibly have smuggled in weapons of mass destruction ready to use on our sovereign American soil.  That is a problem of epic proportion.

The assault by this Administration on our Constitutional Rights and Liberties including speech, religion and the constant press to regulate to a dictatorial degree our right to keep and bear arms should be a concern.  It seems that if you are a follower of Islam you have a right to demand that federal prisons serve what you want to eat, provide you with all the tools to practice your religion but if you are a Christian operating a business you have no rights to follow your religion’s beliefs and obey your conscious.  No, your rights are subordinate to the declared rights of those who practice lifestyles or religions contrary to your beliefs.  We are in grave danger of pastor’s being ordered to conduct same sex marriages in violation of their convictions or face imprisonment.  That should be of major concern to everyone regardless of your religious or lifestyle views.  If they can do this with in one area what is to prevent them from making broader and more sweeping rulings that strip every one of their constitutional unalienable rights?

We have an administration that has and is using various federal agencies as a virtual Gestapo and targeting all who hold differing views ideologically.  This has been done in violation of law, the Constitution and moral reason and the elected officials, main stream media and many within the public simply yawn or wink at it and say, “Oh well.”  No it is not “Oh Well, it is a road to Hell” for the nation and we must become alarmed and refuse to lose focus.

We have a debt and spending problem in America that cannot be resolved in our lifetime and is a threat to our grandchildren and all future generations.  It is not an easy fix and cannot be resolved by increasing the entitlement spending and freebies politicians are so prone to offer and press for.  Allowing our votes to be purchased is literally taking the hammer and driving nails in the coffin of the Republic.  Somehow many are so deluded and in such a state of denial they do not think this house of cards will crumble in their lifetime and seem to have little concern about future generations.  That is not the America or the American spirit which birthed this nation and has made her great for generations. 

Benghazi is important, illegal emails are important for they speak to character.  The IRS, Planned Parenthood, Fast and Furious, Unconstitutional Executive Fiats, Veteran’s Administration, Bergdahl, Iran Nuke Deal, Obamacare and more are all critical issues but individually they are not the Big Picture and we must keep the Full Picture in mind when we decide who is to represent us as President, Senator, Congressman/woman, Supreme Court Justice, etc.  America is dependent upon her patriots to rise to come to her rescue and if we fail the America our Founders gave us, and we have known will be nothing more than a memory.

Will you become distracted and caught up in “hot button issues” or will you stay focused on America and steer her on the right course for Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness?  God bless you and God bless America!

In the world of politics the past is used as a negative or a catalyst to advance an agenda, spin a narrative or make a particular politician or party more palatable than the other.  If the candidate or party’s past on any point is negative they attempt to make it inconsequential and suggest there were any number of mitigating circumstances that the general public either could not understand or is not privy to.  If there is even one time in their history where they were on the positive side of an issue that is a hot button to the voters they tout that one instance as the entire history of their past ignoring the other times they sidestepped or hurled missiles at the issue shipwrecking or hindering it.  The politics of the past for politicians is to spin the spin they desire the voter to remember and focus on.  Politics of the past for those of us who are deeply concerned about America should provide a plethora of information to enable us to question, investigate and focus on where we believe that candidate or party will take us in the future.

In the world of politics the present it is difficult for a candidate or party to ignore but as in the politics of the past they attempt to diminish the negative while enhancing the positive in the minds of potential voters and contributors.  The present is a result of the past and sometimes it appears we forget that reality.  My past has shaped my present and that is true in politicians, political parties, nations and peoples.  If our history is one of taking positions contrary to the constitution of the United States, advancing agendas that restrict, diminish or repeal the rights and liberties of the citizenry the present will be reflective of that as well.  When a candidate is auditioning of a political position they attempt to change the spots of the leopard and virtually become a Chamaeleon adapting to the particular crowd, ideology or environment in which they find themselves.  Their antics and spin are often an insult to the intelligence of any voter who exercises their cognitive abilities and think.  If we view the present through the lens of the past we will often find that we have a better grasp of present reality without being deceived by the veneer often offered.

In the world of politics the future is more often than not a fictional presentation designed to garner votes and dollars rather than a genuine commitment.  Politicians frequently want us to ignore the past, disregard the present and drift into a world of fantasy as in the “Hope and Change” mantra that has been anything but positive for our nation.  The future is a reality achieved from the events of the past and the actions of the present.  What I have done in the past has led me to my present and how I handle my present will determine my future, at least in the immediate.  I never fail to acknowledge that God can and will make our future bright regardless of the past or present if we turn to Him but that is generally not the world of politics.  Politics is often a presentation of a future that is not remotely consistent with the history of the past or the reality of the present.  It is a promise designed to propel them into the position they seek not a commitment to serve the voters or honor the constitution.

In today’s America we have a significant number of people willing to ignore the past, disregard the present and dream of a future as presented by politicians without attempting to connect the dots, weigh the information or consider the possibilities or probabilities of their promises.  It is a mistake to assume that a politician, person or political party cannot and does not change, they do.  It is a mistake to assume that a mistake in the past did not provide the necessary lesson to alter the ideology or agenda for the future.  However, if we examine the past in light of the present and seek to determine if any change in the present is truly ideological or only an attempt to persuade potential voters and contributors we will better determine the future with that politician or party.

I would hope that every voter invests the time and resources they have to examine the history of the politician and party, review their present position and actions asking why the change or when the change occurred.  If I know where a candidate has stood and what they have done I can evaluate where they now claim to stand and what they are now doing in a better light enabling me to predict their political course in the future.  Therefore, it is important that we review the past, examine the present and consider the future as honestly and realistically as we can.  That is why I attempt to uncover the voting record, public positions and associations of the past as well as examine any shift in the present.  When did they modify their position and what prompted that modification or shift?  Was the change prior to announcing their candidacy or has it evolved during their pursuit of the nomination?  What were their associations of the past? What are their associations of the present?  Those will help me to identify the probable associations of the future.  Leopards do not change their spots and although people do change their views, birds of a feather typically continue to flock together.  Therefore, if a politician has changed their position I desire to examine their actions in the newly identified position as extensively as I can to determine if the change is genuine or politically motivated.

America’s future hangs in the balance and if we want the America envisioned by the founders and afforded by the Constitution it is imperative that we examine the past, acknowledge the present to gain a realistic view of the future.   It is up to us to reclaim this nation as a Constitutional Republic but that will require much work and an unrelenting commitment.  Are we willing to make that commitment?  America’s future is at stake.  What say you?

God bless you and God bless America!

I am aware that the current president has claimed to be a Constitutional Law scholar and having taught Constitutional Law.  Therefore, I cannot but wonder if his skirting, ignoring the constitution and attempts at rewriting the American Constitution are due to a lack of knowledge or arise from a more sinister position and ideology.  Either conclusion is bad for America but one could be somewhat excused the other is treacherous and could even be called treasonous.

Recently this president spoke at a fundraiser for the Democratic National Convention which was promoted as a “LGBT Gala” in New York City.  It was scheduled in conjunction with the president’s appearance at the United Nations and he had some disturbing things to say to Christians in America.  The quote of what he said is: “We affirm that we cherish our religious freedom and are profoundly respectful of religious traditions, but we also have to say clearly that our religious freedom doesn’t grant us the freedom to deny our fellow Americans their constitutional rights.” 

Let me ask a few questions regarding that statement.  Mr. Obama do you mean that the rights or desires of the LGBT trumps religious convictions and freedom for all other Americans?  Since you are a Constitutional Law Scholar are you attempting to declare that “same sex marriage” is a constitutional right?  Where exactly in the constitution does it address marriage?  If two people of the same sex choose to live together and even have a ceremony deemed as a wedding they have that right.  Is there a constitutional mandate that demands any or every clergyman, business and institution recognize and participate in the advancement of that lifestyle choice?  Is there a constitutional mandate that declares the federal government can legally instruct churches as to what they can or cannot believe?  The Constitution, as far as I can discern, does not address marriage and therefore the Supreme Court has no legitimate authority to weigh in on this matter.  The issue should be left to the individual states and thereby the peoples of the state.  I personally hold convictions based on my understanding of the clear wording of biblical passages and do not believe the federal government has a right to mandate I alter my conviction.

Mr. President those of us who are Christians and hold conservative views do believe in the Constitution and Article III, Equal Protection and the 14th Amendment.  We also believe in the other Amendments and if there is an Amendment we believe should be changed we are willing to go through the constitutional process of amending the constitution and see it ratified by the states.  You seem to be averse to that process and somehow believe you have the right to use Executive Fiat to achieve whatever ideological purpose you desire.  If you are truly a Constitutional Law Scholar you should know better and I believe you do so why are you taking this action?  Therefore, I must wonder if his statements and actions based on a genuine belief that constitutional rights are being violated or is it an attempt to subvert traditional family and biblical values in America.

Does Mr. Obama truly believe that there should be no borders anywhere in the world or only in America?  If he truly believed in global citizenship surely he would be verbally addressing every other nation including the Muslim nations to remove their borders and allow whomever was present within those borders to legally and openly participate in their legislative, social, political and economic processes.  Is he calling for open borders worldwide?  NO!  He is only calling for the elimination of our borders and especially our southern border but why?  It cannot be that he believes the Constitution grants citizenship, without reservation or restriction, to anyone who shows up on our shores legally or illegally.  If he were truly a global citizenship proponent he would be laboring for an erasure of borders worldwide.  It could be argued that he and the United Nations are doing that but Mr. Obama’s direct attack is on America not the world.

The Constitution of these United States of America was developed through rigorous debate, dialogue and discussion and has been amended through the prescribed process.  The Constitution was to be a safeguard against despotism and tyranny.  It was designed to provide checks and balances between the three detailed and designated branches of government.  Mr. Obama lamented that the American Constitution was a “Charter of Negative Liberties” in which the founding fathers filled with constraints.  He lamented that previous administrations and Supreme Courts could not successfully reframe the American Constitution into a redistributive document.  He advanced the Big Government mentality saying, “The Constitution says what the states can’t do to you, what the federal government can’t do to you, but it doesn’t say what the federal government or state government must do on your behalf.”   Mr. President, the founders did this for a reason and that reason was to prevent a wannabe dictator from emerging and imposing tyrannical rule in America.  It was a safeguard against the overreach of government or was supposed to be.  You sir should understand that since you are a Constitutional Law Scholar.

May the God watch over this nation and bring forth those statesmen, patriots and leaders who will lead us from the wilderness of Big Government to the Constitutional Republic the founders envisioned and implemented.

            God bless you and God bless America!

In the Presidential Election campaign rhetoric of 2008 Barack Obama offered slogans and catchy sayings.  Many who were following the rhetoric knew it was largely fluff but it caught on and for many reasons millions bought into the “Hope and Change” mantra.  They believed that by electing America’s first black president, the catchy sayings and image he was purporting would allow his promise to “fundamentally transform America” to be a good thing.  Now seven years later much of the hope has evolved into cynicism as millions have realized that the fabrications and illusions of political rhetoric and demagoguery will not produce positive change.  The most transparent administration in American history has swiftly become the most opaque, divisive, dismissive and destructive in modern American history.  Hope has changed to cynicism!

I do not recall every truly trusting the federal government but it is a relatively new condition where many believe that the federal government is America’s enemy not her defender and protector.  In my youth we viewed threats to America as largely external until Vietnam.  With Vietnam there was the rise of Bill Ayers, Bernadine Dohrn and the Weather Underground who wanted to systematically destroy America and kill 25 to 50 million Americans they deemed detrimental to their agenda.  These are friends of the current president.  They are unrepentant and when the charges against Ayers were dropped he flaunted his success in the face of America saying, “Guilty as sin and free as a bird.”  He has, in the past few years, declared that he only regrets he was unable to do more damage.  Birds of a feather flock together and since Barack Obama aligns himself with despots around the world and people like Ayers and Dohrn is it any wonder that cynicism has replaced the “Hope and Change” mantra for many?

I recall the words of Nikita Khrushchev, “We will bury you.”  He later explained that the USSR would not bury America with shovels but with their own working class.  He was identifying an internal collapse in America politically, socially, economically and morally and he was prophetic it seems.  We knew that the Soviet Union would, if it could determine a method without destroying themselves, crush America.  We knew that other despotic regimes around the world hated us and would topple us if possible.  We did not fear the Islamic world greatly but now we have a president who downplays the real threat Islamic jihadist pose and has become an apologist for them while apologizing for America.  He has openly been critical of Christians while lauding Islam.  With this in view is it any wonder that Hope has become Cynicism for millions?

There are over 94 million Americans not participating the Labor Force and yet the unemployment rate reportedly at 5.1%.  How is that possible?  Today many small businesses are struggling to keep their doors open, there is an open assault by this administration on the fossil fuel industry, guns, fundamental traditional values, American sovereignty and more is it any wonder that the Hope has been transformed into Cynicism?

I desperately try to be optimistic and constantly battle cynicism in the political arena.  Sadly, politicians on both sides of the aisle have demonstrated a propensity for Big Government, an insatiable appetite for Big Spending and an unwillingness to truly represent WE THE PEOPLE.  They spin the spin, spew forth the rhetoric, make the promises and then abandon principle for promotion, position and power.  Am I being cynical?  Yes they have transformed my Optimism and Hope into Cynicism and a growing Pessimism regarding politics and politicians.

However, I still believe and cling to my HOPE that there are enough patriotic freedom loving American citizens who will awaken from slumber and rise as a champion of liberty deposing dispelling those who would “fundamentally transform” America into something other than a Constitutional Republic.  I pray that God help me and America to have a renewed sense of Hope and a renewed commitment to Liberty and Freedom.  May we return to our moral moorings and reclaim our Constitutional Republic thereby restoring HOPE and dispelling CYNICISM!

God bless you and God bless America!

How did the Left gain control of the discussion and definition of “Civil Rights?”  They did it because those in leadership on the Right have been either too cowardly to advance a biblical, constitutional and conservative definition or they agree with the Left.  Either way the discussion has been placed squarely in the hands of the MSM, the liberal Democrats, and various activist to the detriment of our societal evolution and constitutional government.

I agree with Mark Levin that I it is disgusting to have the likes of Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Luis Farrakhan, LBGT, NAACP, Media Matters, Planned Parenthood, etc. tell us what a civil right is.  My blood boils when I hear people like the sitting president tell the world that “Climate Change” , “Amnesty” or “Income Equality” is a civil right.  Everything that the liberal left advances camouflages their agenda as a “civil right” packaging and selling it to their followers who heartily echo AMEN!

Civil Rights properly understood is about liberty, faith, family, freedom, national sovereignty and a constitutional republic.  In simple terms, it is about “Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.”  A civil right is a right in which everyone receives ‘equal’ treatment without discrimination.  There is a confusion of ‘civil rights’ and ‘civil liberties’ and most of the left incorporate both as Civil Rights.

The sad thing that in today’s politically correct world if one is a homosexual the charge is their civil rights are violated if any person or business does not accommodate their preferences.  Their civil right trumps the constitutional right (civil right and liberty) under the 1st Amendment’s guarantee of Religious Liberty and Freedom.  The government’s mandate that a business, service a person in an act that violates their conscience and usurps their religious convictions.  If a homosexual has a ‘civil right’ to practice their lifestyle, marry, etc. why is it not a ‘civil right’ for another to practice their faith and beliefs without interference from the government?

The Declaration of Independence mandates that we recognize all men as being created equal and that assertion is backed up by the Constitution and Bill of Rights.  Have we failed, at times?  Most assuredly and we will in the future but when the definitions become so corrupted and politicized as they are we can never have a serious discussion on “civil rights” or “civil liberties.”

Civil Rights or Unalienable Rights should be understood as rights fixed by the Creator rather than the government.  That makes them permanent not at the disposal or whim of elected officials.  They are absolute rights which we have been ‘endowed’ meaning they are cannot be separated from us and are part of our humanity.  Simply, the government did not grant them only recognized them and therefore has no right to diminish, rescind or suppress them.

The Bill of Rights issued a guarantee to protect every citizen’s God-given unalienable right to Freedom of Speech, Religion, Press, Conscience and Self-Defense to name a few.  If a right us unalienable or inalienable it is “incapable of being alienated, sold or transferred.” Those rights are not capable of being surrendered or transferred without the consent of the one possessing the right.  The government can “secure” not “grant” or “create” those rights.   In the guarantee that we can “Pursue Happiness” is implication of the right to pursue the vocation of our choice, lawful business in a manner consistent with the equal rights of others not subservient to them but equal to them.

We have allowed the discussion of “civil rights” to become a leftist weapon for the advancement of a socialist, Marxist, liberal ideology and the very claim of a violation in that arena sends politicians into the shadows looking for cover.  I will defend your “civil rights” and “civil liberties” but will never consent to having mine tossed on the trash heap to accommodate what you perceive as yours.  I support everyone being treated equal but not that you have a “civil right” to redistribute that which another has worked for and earned distributing to others in the name of equality or civil rights.  If you adopt a lifestyle that is contrary to my beliefs I will defend your right to pursue it but never consent to forcing others to accommodate or facilitate it.  If you believe it is okay to abort a baby that is between you and God it is your right to believe what you believe but I will not consent to spending taxpayer dollars to fund the process and my beliefs find it reprehensible and even murderous.  I cannot agree that it is the right of a woman to make the decision when there is no representation for the child, yet unborn.  Leftist will vehemently disagree for they do not believe that a fetus is a living human being until birth and even then some stretch the definition of life to allow the murder of a baby born alive.

Civil Rights?  I am totally supportive of the “civil rights” of all people but totally opposed to the politicized definitions and activism of today.  I agree with Mr. Levin that we need a New Civil Rights Movement that has not been coopted by the leftist and politicized to the point it is virtually non-existent and meaningless.

God help us return to the constitutional definitions and pursue the constitutional republic our founding fathers sought to establish.  God bless you and God bless America!

Constitution Day was Thursday, September 17, 2015 and we celebrated the anniversary on which 39 brave souls signed the United States Constitution.  History, for the most part, credits James Madison with being the father of the constitution and Thomas Jefferson as the architect of the Declaration of Independence but they were just two pieces in the puzzle.  How many know that Gouverneur Morris of Pennsylvania almost single handedly meshed together the final wording of the constitution?  We hear little about him and most know little other than his unusual name.

There are others and one in particular that is worthy of note is Roger Sherman the delegate from Connecticut.   Without Robert Morris and Roger Sherman one could legitimately ask if the United States Constitution or America would even exist today.  It would not be the America the founding fathers gave us or the America we enjoyed for over 200 years.  Sherman was one of, if not the, prime engineer of the Connecticut Compromise which guaranteed the small states would have an equal vote in the United States Senate.  Interestingly that is the only part of the constitution that cannot be changed.

Roger Sherman was born April 19, 1721 and died July 23, 1793.  He was one of the early and foremost politicians and lawyers in the new Republic.  He was a member of the Committee of Five charged with drafting the Declaration of Independence.  He grew up in Stoughton, Massachusetts and received his education in his father’s library without formal education.  He was admitted to the Litchfield bar in 1754 and became Justice of the Peace.  He was treasurer of Yale University and received an honorary Masters in Arts degree.  He was elected to the Continental Congress in 1774 and in 1787 he offered a solution to the amendment of the Articles of Confederation.  The solution was known as the Great Compromise and laid out the plan for the people to be represented in the House of Representatives by proportion.  The state would have one representative for each 30,000 people and each state would have two Senators.

Roger Sherman signed the Declaration of Independence, Articles of Confederation, U.S. Constitution and the Articles of Association.  Madison nor Jefferson could make that claim.  His descendants have had a significant impact on American history, especially in the Northeast.  Let me list a few if I might:

• William Evarts.          Sherman’s grandson was arguably one of the most influential lawyers in the 19th century and a key founder of the Republican Party.  If you recall from history he was the lawyer who defended President Andrew Johnson during the impeachment trial.  He was Attorney General under Ulysses S. Grant from July 1868-July 1869.  His skills as an attorney probably led to the controversial election of Rutherford B. Hayes.
• Ebenezer Rockwood Hoar.        Evarts’ first cousin succeeded him as Grant’s Attorney General for 1869-1870.  Hoar’s brother George Frisbie Hoar served as Congressman and Senator from Massachusetts and made his mark in both houses.
• Roger Sherman Baldwin.         Another grandson served in Connecticut politics and was governor of the state from 1844-1846 and then in the Senate from 1847-1851.
• Edward Baldwin Whitney.       Sherman’s great grandson was Attorney General under Grover Cleveland in 1895.

Others served as lawyers for the railroads, solicitor general and presidents of the New York Bar Association.  Archibald Cox, great great grandson of Sherman was President John F. Kennedy’s solicitor general and in May of 1973 he was appointed as Watergate Special Prosecutor.  We have seen the Sherman descendants involved in America politics for generations.

When so many have given so much to carve out the America our founders and the colonist so valiantly fought for how dare we allow any interloper to usurp that great document.  I do not care if they are Democrat, Republican or Independent the Constitution is the Constitution and must be preserved and followed.  It, not the President, Congress or the Supreme Court is that which is to guide our nation.  If we fail to elect an individual who is committed to the Constitution of these United States in the 2016 Presidential Election we are signing the death warrant of the American Republic.  The number one thing I want to know from the candidates is their view of the Constitution.

God help us do that which is necessary to restore America to its rightful status as a Constitutional Republic.   God bless you and God bless America!

That is simple but complex for both Congress and the Courts have abdicated their jurisdiction and responsibility so frequently and the President usurped their powers to the point that we have in many respects our system has been virtually dismantled.  Even when the SCOTUS rules against this administration, this president has chosen to ignore them for the most part and has frequently thumbed his nose at Congress badgering, bullying and manipulating them so they are impotent figureheads more than legislators.

The founding fathers were deliberate and clear in their desire to prevent any branch of government from being too powerful.  The three branches devised by the Constitution are:  The Legislative (House of Representatives & Senate).  The Senators were originally appointed by State Legislatures but have since become elected by statewide popular vote.  The Executive (President, Vice President, & Departments under their authority and oversight).  The Judicial (SCOTUS and federal courts).  Each has enumerated powers, responsibilities and limitations and each branch was designed to provide a check and balance to the others.

The Executive:  Was given veto power over all bills; appointment of judges; can make treaties; ensure laws are carried out; commander in chief of the military and has the power of pardon.  The Legislative:  Was given power to pass all legislation; establish all lower federal courts; override a presidential veto; impeach a president.  The Judicial:  Was given the power to try federal cases and interpret the laws of the nation in those cases; the power to declare any law or executive act unconstitutional.  These all have specific guidelines and those lines have be so blurred through the years they hardly exist and each branch tramples on the authority of the other but none more so than the Executive under this current administration.

Separation of Powers was not a totally new concept devised by our founding fathers but has existed at least as far as ancient Greece.  Aristotle called for a mixed government made up of the monarchy, aristocracy and democracy for he felt that none were ideal in and of themselves.  John Locke presented his idea in his 1690 “Civil Government” treatise and separated powers between executive and legislative.  Charles-Louis de Secondat, Baron de La Brede et de Montesquieu or Montesquieu expanded on Locke’s formula and included a judiciary to the mix.  The framers took all those ideas and melted them into what became the American Constitution with a few twists and tweaks.

If we look at some of the examples of other national governments and their separation of powers we view the British and their Parliamentary system where there are two houses of the legislature (House of Lords and House of Commons).  Although, this is possibly changing with regard to the House of Lords it basically affords the House of Lords the judicial responsibility where they are the final appeal but have almost no authority legislatively.  The House of Lords can delay legislation but cannot veto it.  The House of Commons or Members of Parliament are elected representatives of the various districts.  The majority party makes all the laws and the minority frequently has little voice.  The Prime Minister the nearest to the American President is a Member of Parliament chosen by the majority.  The judiciary has no power to review legislation as does the U.S. Supreme Court.

The French example reveals the President is elected for a five year term and can dissolve Parliament and call for new elections.  He appoints the Prime Minister.  The President and PM head the executive branch.  The President does not have veto power over legislation but can ask Parliament to reconsider. There are two houses of Parliament and a Constitutional Council made up of nine members but with only a fraction of the SCOTUS.  The Canadian example is very similar to the British system and until 1982 Canada did not have power over its own constitution.  The judiciary is far more powerful in Canada than Britain or France and their judiciary has nine members that serve for life or until age 75.  Then we turn south to Mexico and it is so convoluted that I dare not go into it.  There are numerous similarities and significant differences in each.

I read a discussion asking the question, “Is the United States system superior?”  The conclusion was depending on who you ask.  The article suggested that the French and British would scoff at the American head of state would have no power to make laws but would shudder to think of judges determining that the expressed will of the people is null and void calling it unconstitutional.  The Canadians would probably feel that all state powers should be fully detailed and enumerated and the Mexicans would likely be surprised at the longevity of American politicians.  Americans, on the other hand, are often amused by a monarchy and its figurehead control and even theoretical hold on Canada.  Americans express concern over the French Presidency having tyrannical emergency powers.

That being said, our framers designed a system in which the three branches of government were to provide legitimate checks and balances thus preserving the constitution and Republic with the ultimate power being WE THE PEOPLE.  Today, none of the three consider WE THE PEOPLE of any particular consequence and treat us as pawns rather than overseers. Thus, a reason for WE THE PEOPLE to be resurrected in our involvement and reclaim our constitutional authority as owners of the federal government.  If we do not virtually or literally clean house in Washington this can never become a reality.

God bless you and God bless America.

I’ve seen some posts from liberals declaring that Republicans are living in a reality of their own creation.  Some of them cite a number of the policies of this administration they consider good including the Iran nuke deal and Obamacare.  I find the assertion that Republicans and/or conservatives are living in fantasy land to be ludicrous for it has been those very people who have exposed the deception and truth about many of the policies of this administration and the agenda of the leftist.

A reality of their own creation, hmmm.    Who is living in a fantasy world of realities of their own creation?  Let’s consider a few facts:

• The declaration that the Planned Parenthood videos are fake – Democrat.
• The false declaration that 99% of the World agrees with Obama on the Iran Nuke Deal – Democrat.
• Global Warming or Climate Change is the single most threatening thing our world faces today – Democrat.
• ISIS is not Islamic – Democrat.
• Obamacare has reduced the cost of healthcare and health insurance and if you like your plan and doctor you can keep your plan and/or doctor – Democrat.
• The economy is roaring back – Democrat.
• The borders are secure and illegal immigration is not a threat to national security – Democrat.
• This administration is the most transparent of any in our American history – Democrat.
• The IRS did not target Conservatives – Democrat
• The 2nd Amendment does not cover the rights of citizens to keep and bear arms – Democrat.
• Who booed when a politician said All Lives Matter? – Democrats.
• Veterans placed on a national watch list as a danger to society –
• Republicans, Conservatives, Tea Party, etc. are Domestic Terrorist – Democrats.  

That is the tip of the iceberg and there are pages more that could be listed, so I ask “Who is living in a fantasy world of realities of their own creation?”   I laugh when I read many things written about any conservative from what could only be identified as transference or delusion.  But, alas there are those who drink the Kool-Aid and spin the spin to support their ideological views.

My faith and love of freedom prevent me from ascribing to the views of the left.  You may be, as a college professor I had years ago when he and I were debating evolution vs. creation, “Evolution and my religion do not conflict.”  I informed him that mine did but the point is that you may find that the views of the progressive, socialist, leftist, statist and your religion do not conflict and if so that will have to remain between you and God.  I want the best good for everyone and desire deeply that our Constitution be honored, respected and followed.  I long for a time when the court will not legislate, the President will not act as sole authority in the land and respect the Three Branch System of our Government and a time when Congress will do their jobs constitutionally.

Regardless of which side of the aisle or issue you stand rejecting reality is not productive or beneficial.  Are there things the Democrats support that are good?  I’m sure there are.  Are there things the Republicans support that are bad?  I’m sure there are.  I disagree with the GOP on a number of issues and am willing to support a Democrat proposal that is constitutional and in the interest of America not political position or agenda.  My commitment is to my faith, family and freedom and frankly do not care which party takes actions consistent with that view.  I have grown to detest labels in all facets of life if for no other reason, they tend to build walls and end open honest discussion.  That being said, I find no Democrat candidate for President that I could support.

God bless you and God bless America!

Life has been described as a series of hard choices and difficult decisions and that is accurate, to a degree.  If everyone accepted their personal responsibility, their positions and assignments in life many of the hard choices and difficult decisions of others would not be significantly lessened.  What we do affects others overtly, covertly, directly and indirectly.  None of us are an island and what we do affects others directly and/or indirectly making it imperative that we take full responsibility for our own actions and attitudes.

If parents neglect their responsibility as parents failing to make the hard choices and difficult decisions that come with good parenting, they significantly diminish the prospects of their offspring becoming responsible citizens and parents.  I am not saying that a bad parent cannot have good children who become good citizens and parents but I am saying the road to that objective becomes more difficult.  If we, as parents, fail to discipline our children we teach them that restraints are bad and it is acceptable to be a law unto themselves.  If we, as parents, fail to make the hard choices and difficult decisions giving our children free rein to do or have whatever they desire we teach them an attitude of entitlement and lack of respect for life, value, productivity and others.  Parenting is filled with hard choices and difficult decisions but we brought that child into this world and are responsible for their nurturing and preparing them for life.  Our choices and decisions may not be popular but necessary and if we are to fulfill our duty we must be willing and capable of making the hard choices and difficult decisions.

If as employers and managers we neglect our responsibility to make the hard choices and difficult decisions we destroy productivity and create a work environment that is conditioned to become incredibly hostile.  Many decisions in business cannot be subjected to the democratic process or made solely based on emotion.  I have faced times when I had to make the decision to reduce staff and had to evaluate the entire objective and each individual.  In a couple of those times I had to release a person that doing so broke my heart because of the personal connection I felt and knowledge of their need.   Yet, the hard choice and difficult decision, in the interest of the overall objective had to be made.  My decisions, though often difficult, were a part of the package of being an employer or leader.  I had a responsibility that went far beyond one person or one family.  There were things I could do and did to help those adversely affected by my hard choice and difficult decision but those had to be made.

In government and politics those elected to office should know that accompanying their position is the requirement and responsibility to make hard choices and difficult decisions.  When politicians are unwilling to make the hard choices and difficult decisions for fear of losing votes, campaign contributions or network connections for life after politics the entire country suffers.  If a politician makes choices based on convenience or popularity they are doing a disservice to those who elected them.  If a President or any politician is more concerned about perception  and their legacy than achieving the best good for the country they are moral failures although possibly political successes.

Our founding fathers and the colonist had to make hard choices and difficult decisions as 1776 dawned.  Their decisions were not always the most popular nor the road of least resistance but if there was to be a Free and Independent Sovereign Nation known as the United States of America they had to stand firm, bite the bullet and pull the trigger and they did.  They had to make the incredibly difficult choice between personal security and safety and placing everything on the line in what would have been viewed an almost impossible dream.  They had to make the difficult decision to sign their names to the Declaration of Independence knowing that made them marked men and placed their possessions and families in jeopardy should they fail.  They demonstrated a requisite in leadership and made the hard choices and difficult decisions that birthed the United States of America.  Today, we have politicians who are either incapable or unwilling to do so.  Too many make promises to win elections then are quickly assimilated into the DC network and refuse to make the hard choices and difficult decisions America needs and requires to reclaim her former greatness.

That brings us to the bottom line – You and Me.  It is incumbent upon us to be willing to make the hard choices and difficult decisions regarding the direction of our nation.  Are we willing to take the path of least resistance, sing que sera sera and sit around the proverbial campfire singing kumbaya while our heads are buried in the sand or somewhere?  Life is truly a series of hard choices and difficult decisions and if we are to be responsible adults, citizens and patriots we must accept that reality and do that which we know to do.  As a Christian my confidence and trust is in God not government and I will continue to pray for my nation and her leaders while I follow the directive of Ecclesiastes 9:10 and do what I find to do with all my might.  I am 100% committed to the Restoration of our Constitutional Republic.

God bless you and God bless America!

That’s right America it is my assertion that we are just not fed up enough YET!  Oh, I do not question we are irritated, inconvenienced, have legitimate concerns and fears as to the state of nation and liberty here in America, we do!  The move toward either Elitist Oligarchy or Full Tyranny has significantly escalated over the past 7 years and is cause for concern.  We do have cause for alarm, but I do not believe, as a people, we are fed up enough yet.  In the pre-revolution era those who were astute with the pen and passionate for Freedom, Independence and Liberty began a lengthy process of driving public sentiment toward Revolution.  They sought to expose the conditions, build on the concerns of the individual colonist and pull back the veil on what the British Crown was doing and would do.  Those who were capable of recruiting financiers and train the colonist in a uniform method began their work long before 1776 the Revolution began because those who knew were FED UP and they finally reached enough people in the colonies with reality that the a significant portion of the colonist became FED UP to the point that they could stand with Patrick Henry and adopt the mindset, “Give me liberty or give me death.”  I do not believe we are there yet.  We make a lot of noise but rather than joining forces we are often at each other’s throats over minors and people rather than addressing the problem

The founding fathers and colonist reached a point they knew that if they remained subservient to the British Crown they would never be able to enjoy the life they knew possible in America.  They had carved out a niche for themselves overcoming incredible odds and facing unimaginable difficulties and demonstrating what was possible if the monarch or government gave them space to purse Life, Liberty and Happiness.  We are unhappy but even among those most vocal I do not always sense a level of disgust and despair that says, ENOUGH IS ENOUGH, I’M TOTALLY FED UP!  I hear, I don’t like this and I want you to change and if you don’t I am going to try to keep you for being reelected and verbally demand you stop what you are doing.  Of course, those advancing the tyrannical agenda ignore those voices and sidestep the few elections won or lost and keep the ship of change headed toward the port of their vision.  When we get FED UP enough they will find their unimpeded path is lined with opposition that is beyond complaints but of substance.   Some will accuse me of calling for armed rebellion and that IS NOT what I’m suggesting.  We are a nation of laws, have a constitution, a Congress and the courts what we have not effectively used because we are too busy targeting our individual pet peeves.

            Do you think that the founding fathers and the colonist agreed on every issue or who should lead the effort?  NO!  They were in severe disagreement up to and through their hammering out the Declaration of Independence.  They were FED UP sufficiently to lay aside their differences and reject the notion that those singular issues individuals considered of paramount importance were more important the objective of Independence, Liberty and Freedom.  We tend to develop such tunnel vision that we focus on our issue(s) and if any candidate or individual does not agree with us on those issues they become our enemy.  We allow what can be only be described as pettiness to prevent us from a unified voice.  I know some will object that their views are not petty but if they become more important than the Objective of the Republic they are.  The Tea Party helped address this to a degree then factions within the movement began to splinter to their candidate or issue and we began to lose our impact and the ability to plant fear in the hearts of politicians because of our uniformity and togetherness.  We will never all agree on everything but we must all agree on the importance of the Republic, freedom and liberty.  Until we become FED UP enough that we can unify as did our forefathers and stand against a common real enemy we will not achieve our objective of restoring the Republic and preserving Freedom and Liberty for ourselves and those generations to come.

Too often we take the futile approach of, “well it’s the best we can get.”  NO!  Enough already!  It is not satisfactory to resign ourselves to ordinariness and the lesser of two evils it is time to get FED UP to the point and widespread enough that across America from Maine to California from Washington State to Florida and everywhere between we are FED UP and motivated to organized resistance at the polls, demonstrate to the courts and Congress that we are willing to lose everything to gain our Freedom.  It will be then and only then that they understand we are not just angry but FED UP and as we STAND UP, SPEAK UP and put our money, time and lives on the line for the cause of the Republic we will become a force like that of 1776.

The reason a candidate for the GOP can be brash and even caustic and still be supported is that people are disgusted with the political correctness and ineptness of politicians. The disgust causes anyone who demonstrates a political fearlessness to draw like honey draws flies.  That person becomes like a flame to a moth and even if we do not agree with some or even much of what they are for we seem unable to resist the appeal.  We need fearlessness in politics if we are going to see America salvaged and restores as the Constitutional Republic we were given.  We also need to vet carefully those who step forward volunteering to lead us to the Promised Land.  I am not making an endorsement or leveling a criticism of the political volunteers of the GOP I am saying that we need fearlessness and we need consistency in constitutional principles which I believe will also be conservative in nature.  When we become FED UP enough we will take back our government or if we do not become FED UP enough we will watch it die in the very near future.

How long will it be before America is truly FED UP?  Personally, I do not think it will be or can be long and probably before if not shortly after this next election we will see a new level of FED-UP-NESS among legal American citizens who love America and long for our God given rights and liberties.

God bless you and God bless America!