Monthly Archives: August 2011

Natural Law and Economic Prosperity

Benjamin Franklin, at age 81, addressing the Philadelphia Convention, June 28, 1787 said, “I have lived, Sir, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth — that God Governs in the affairs of men.”  After years of studying American History, the writings and biographies of the Founding Fathers, the Bible and America’s founding documents, I came to the same conclusion; as did Madison, Washington, Adams, and Jefferson; and when I consider the changes that have taken place in America, just during my lifetime, I am forced to also agree with Jefferson when he said, “Indeed, I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just: that his justice cannot sleep forever.”

Read More…


One-Dimensional Conservatism Not Enough

America, like all nations of the world is tripartite in its makeup. Socialists seem to recognize this as a natural fact. Most conservatives do not. That could prove to be our undoing in the struggle to take our nation back from the Democrat-RINO (DR) coalition that runs the federal government. As Obama and his socialist backers continue to dismantle the institutions of government, conservatives grow increasingly disgusted with the Republican leadership in Congress. The danger for 2012 is that the DR coalition will succeed in alienating the patriot movement from the Republican Party to the point that conservatives vote for someone other than the Republican Party candidate in next year’s election.

A more immediate danger, however, is that patriots fail to unite behind a single candidate in the primaries resulting in the establishment candidate winning the Republican nomination. If that happens, enough conservatives could cast votes for a third party candidate or simply sit out the election, to return Obama and the DR coalition to Washington in 2013.  November of 2012 marks the outer limits of the “point of no return” for America, as we know it, if we have not already reached that point before then. That is why it is imperative that we nominate three-dimensional conservatives for national, state and local offices whenever possible.

All civil societies are tripartite or three-dimensional by nature. The three parts comprising the essence of civil societies are its culture, its government, and its economy, all arrived at by the subliminal consensus of the people making up that society. In the sequence of development, the culture is first to be formed. From that, the economic and government systems develop. Throughout history, cultures have always been strongly influenced by man’s innate awareness of a supreme being. The predominant element in a society’s culture is the dominant religion practiced by the majority of its members. The economic structure and the organization of government always reflect the religious principles of its culture.

The old America that worked, with a culture based on Judeo-Christian principles, an economy based on the Lockean concept of private property, and a government based on a written constitution, has been deliberately and methodically dismantled over the past several generations and is in the process of being replaced with an American version of Marxist socialism that has failed in every place it has been tried the world over. In spite of this fact, a sizable number of conservatives continue to view our problems from a one-dimensional perspective. Libertarians for example, place their emphasis on the Constitution to the exclusion of cultural considerations. Many fiscal conservatives focus on taxes and spending while criticizing social conservatives for their insistence on preserving the moral basis of our culture.

We have watched for many years as progressives (American socialists) have used a dubious reading of the Constitution and the Chinese Communist concept of “political correctness” to undermine the most important of our cultural institutions: schools, families, churches and charitable institutions. These attacks on the American culture take the form of abortion on demand, the elimination of God from our public forums, the welfare state replacing the role of fathers in many households of the poor, and traditional gender relationships in marriage being looked on as “narrow minded” and bigoted. We have seen the complete breakdown of the traditional cultural values in our sports and entertainment, in our business relationships, and in our political institutions. And for those with “eyes to see” the results are only too evident.

When the culture breaks down, government effectiveness and fiscal stability also breaks down. On the final day of the Philadelphia Convention, Benjamin Franklin expressed his support for the Constitution with the warning that it “can only end in Despotism, as other forms have done before it, when the people shall become so corrupted as to need despotic Government, being incapable of any other.” While we may not be at that point yet, if we continue to ignore cultural issues, it is only a matter of time until private and public corruption reaches the stage that it can only be controlled by despotic means. That is one of the major lessons we learn from history. Once a society loses its cultural foundation, anarchy emerges, and eventually reaches the level where the populace will accept, and even welcome tyranny as the only means of personal security.

No society can prosper without objective standards of conduct for its government, culture and economy. The objective standard of conduct for the government of America is the Constitution, which is no longer given even “lip service” by our national leaders. The President and Congress routinely violate the restrictions of the Constitution with impunity; the courts apply its requirements based on populist’s trends rather than impartial law. The foundation of the American culture is rooted in the Judeo-Christian principles found in the Holy Bible. An increasingly oppressive attitude toward Christian principles has existed in America since about 1960 and the Bible, prayer, and Christian symbols have been all but eliminated from the public institutions of our culture. Our capitalist economic system based on private ownership and management of property has been undermined by “crony capitalism” and central planning through the government regulatory system as we transition from a free market economy to a centrally planned socialist one.

The Ron Paul type of libertarianism and a fiscal conservatism that ignores the corruption of our culture is simply not adequate to meet the problems facing us as a nation today. We only need look at the state of California, the “hooligan” riots last week in England, or the “flash mobs” that have sprung up in American cities the past few weeks to see our future if we continue to ignore the cultural corruption that has become rampant in recent years. While the federal government has no constitutional authority over the nation’s culture, we cannot afford to support candidates for national office who refuse to champion publicly the traditional American moral values or who, in some cases, openly undermine them.

Many well meaning constitutional conservatives rightly point out that social issues such as abortion, gay marriage, and a host of others are reserved by the Tenth Amendment to the states and to the people; if you listen closely to their arguments for “states rights”, it is easy to conclude that they confuse morality with legality. Immorality sanctioned by state law is no less immoral than that sanctioned by federal law. That is why in deciding on candidates in the 2012 elections we cannot settle for one-dimensional or two-dimensional conservatives. We must insist they be constitution conservatives, fiscal conservatives, AND cultural conservatives. Anything less and we are wasting our time and only postponing the certain end to America “as we know it”.

A Fair Look at the “Fair” Tax


There are few things in the political discourse of today that infuriates me more than the sanctimonious, self-serving and misleading propaganda of the proponents of the “fair” tax. Consider, for example, the two following statements.

Statement No. 1: “Everybody should pay their fair share.”
Statement No. 2: “Everybody should pay their fair share.”

The first statement is made by a socialist advocating for more taxes. The second is made by a conservative advocating for the “fair” tax.  Can you tell which was made by the socialist and which by the conservative?  It really doesn’t matter because both are motivated by the same feelings of envy and jealousy. With one the jealousy is directed toward the more productive people who use their time and intellect to raise their income level and increase their wealth. The other directs his jealousy toward those who do not earn enough income to make it more advantageous for politicians to take part of it than to let them keep it, hopefully, in exchange for his or her vote.

Anyway, just what is our fair share? Don’t worry about that. That will be decided by those more knowledgeable about such things. You know, socialists like Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid or conservatives like Neil Bortz. Whoever decides, it seems to amount to a large chunk of the money you earn above what is needed for the “necessities” of life. For the socialists, necessity is figured on a sliding scale. Those on the bottom of the income ladder pay no taxes, while those above pay at an increasing percentage rate depending on how far up the ladder they have progressed.

Those touting the “fair” tax are more “fair” in their assessment. Fat Cats like Warren Buffet would pay the same as the single mom with two small children, whose husband abandoned her for a less demanding life with his new “honey”. Oh, but not to worry, the mom is going to get a “pre-bate” check on the first of every month to pay the taxes on her “necessities”. In fact, the “fair” tax is so fair that they are going to send Mr. Buffet the same amount in his pre-bate check. The pre-bate is based on the poverty level. Each family would receive a pre-bate check adequate to pay the taxes on an amount of purchases equal to the government determined poverty level.

Mr. Buffet can entertain a friend at a five-star restaurant with his pre-bate check, meanwhile, the single mom has to figure out how to stretch hers to cover her loss of buying power since suddenly, the cost of her “necessities” has increased 30%. The one bedroom apartment she has been paying $800 for, now costs $1,040 per month. The baby sitter she has been paying $600 per month, now costs $780, the $3 gallon of milk now costs $3.93 and the gallon of gas for her car to get back and forth to work, now costs $5.20 instead of the $4 she has been paying. I forgot to mention, the mom works as a cashier at the local convenience store at minimum wage. And then there is the homeless man who lost his job and his home and who can’t get a re-bate check because he has no address to send it to.  Before he could always panhandle $1 for the $.99 special at McDonalds or Burger King; now he has to beg for an extra 30 cents to pay the tax.

I suppose we should be grateful for all the advantages of the fair tax. For instance, the IRS will no longer be bugging ordinary hard working citizens, instead they will be policing the local doctor’s offices and landlords to make sure they are passing through all the “fair” taxes they collected to the federal government. Best of all, we will finally be taxing all those deadbeats who work in the “underground economy” and have been getting away without paying “their fair share” in income tax for years. There are a few people, no doubt, who make a good buck off the underground economy. However, the overwhelming majority of people working in it are the working poor, struggling to keep a roof over their heads and food on the table, who work “off the books” for pay that is far below the prevailing wage at a job that would not exist if his employer was forced to pay the prevailing wage in his area.

Best of all, the “fair” tax will not take away any money from the cash strapped government and it will do away with that pesky tax Mr. Buffet and others in his income range have to pay on the interest earned from their saving or dividends on their investments. The “fair” tax is “revenue neutral”, meaning the federal government will still get its same amount of income, it will just be collected in a different way from different sources. For example, all government agencies, religious institutions, and charitable organization will have to pay taxes on every purchase they make. Imagine that; government paying taxes to itself. And, where will it get the money to pay its taxes? Why, from the taxpaying citizens, of course.

Please Mr. Bortz, we don’t want a revenue neutral “fair tax“, we want NO tax. Of course, we know that a certain amount of taxation is necessary to support the essential functions of government. But, how much is a fair amount to pay? Under Old Testament law in the nation of Israel, God required ten percent. That seems fair. In fact, if the federal government followed the Constitution and only levied taxes necessary to carry out the functions delegated to it by the states in 1787, it could probably get by quite well on a lot less than ten percent.

A tax on income is probably the most equitable tax possible, and a tax of five to ten percent on every dollar earned, from the poorest to the richest, would not be a burden on anyone. That amount would also provide enough money to the federal government for it to perform all the legitimate duties assigned to it by the Constitution and everyone would have “skin in the game”, therefore the average citizen would be much more sensitive to proposed tax increases. Now that I think about it, I guess I am in favor of a “real” fair tax after all.

For a more objective treatment of the fair tax see my article of a couple of years ago, “Beware of the Fair Tax”. Be sure to read the comments, they offer even more insights into the issue. If you have read this far you have surely concluded that I could be nothing but objective concerning the “fair” tax.

The All-American Conservative

If conservatives are to prevail in our struggle with the socialist hoards that have taken over our institutions during the past few generations, we must come together in a unity of purpose. If not, we run the risk of returning Obama to the White House and the Coalition of socialist Democrats and RINOs to Congress, the same group that has brought us to the brink of destruction in the past few years. As things now stand, the fiscal conservatives, the values conservatives, and the constitution conservatives make up conservatism’s three main groups.

The values conservatives are criticized by the fiscal conservatives for “trying to ram religion down our throats” and “turning off” secular independents. Many constitution conservatives seem to have a tendency to substitute legality for morality; anything is okay so long as the decisions are made at the state level and not the national. Fiscal conservatives, too often, focus on monetary policy rather than basic principles. The danger is two-fold: First, there is the danger that conservative voters will become so disgusted with both parties that they stay home on Election Day. The second danger is that conservatives, disenchanted with the Republican Party will vote for one of several minor party candidates soliciting their vote, thereby splitting the Republican vote, and giving the election to the socialist Democrats and RINOs.

While most of our problems may originate in Washington, their full impact is felt by citizens at the state and local levels. Most state governments are made up of the same socialist Democrats and RINOs that populate Washington D.C. States like California and Illinois offers undisputable proof that the problem goes much deeper than an out-of-control federal government. If there is one lesson to be learned from our 225-year experiment in self-government, it is that no government, even with the best plan ever devised by man can endure without a sound and solid culture, based on time-tested moral principles.

As we pointed out in our last post, America, like its government, is composed of three separate and equal parts, its government, its culture and its economy. At the federal level, government is based on the principles and rules contained in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, the most nearly perfect plan of government ever devised. However, the best of plans is of little value unless it is faithfully followed. The cultural foundation of America is our Judeo-Christian heritage composed of the Christian principles found in the Bible. Out economy is based on the principles of free-market capitalism.

The dysfunction of one part of this three-part system results in the dysfunction of all. A near perfect Constitution does not work when the moral standard underpinning the culture breaks down. Political corruption and individual immorality among the nation’s population leads to poor economic decisions, self-serving politicians and an amoral citizenry with no objective standard of what is right or wrong. The results, we see all about us today. We have a government that no longer works, an economy dominated by crony capitalism, and a culture that accepts depravity and immorality as something to be tolerated and even applauded.

If we are going to pass down to future generations, the nation of liberty and prosperity handed down to us by our forefathers, we have to put aside our hyphenated conservatism and unite in an All-America Conservatism. As Christ reminded us, “man does not live by bread alone” and “what shall it profit a man [or nation], if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?”

The future of America depends on conservatives winning the current struggle with socialism. To do that we have to stop approaching issues based on political expediency and personal financial gain. We have to stop judging policies based on expediency and judge them on the time-tested principles that transformed us from a collection of displaced vagabonds into the greatest nation on the face of the earth.

America’s Second Civil War

Next year marks the hundredth anniversary of the beginning of the longest Civil War in world history, the war between the American Socialists and the American Conservatives. Make no mistake about it; we are in the midst of a Civil War, although most Americans do not recognize it and most refuse to accept its reality. Although its conduct resembles the Cold War between America and the Soviet Union more than it does the Civil War between the states, the dangers to the future of America are every bit as threatening as either of those.

The first serious battle of our second Civil War was launched in the Presidential campaign of 1912 when four political parties vied for the office of President. All four nominated progressive (American Socialist) candidates. The party platforms on which the candidates ran were all slightly different, but all contained the basic elements of the then defunct Peoples Party; a graduated national income tax; popular election of Senators; and protective tariffs, among other things. In 1913, the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Amendments were ratified, paving the way for the Socialist’s primary goals of income redistribution and a consolidated national government through annulment of the Tenth Amendment.

Eugene Debs was nominated by the Socialist Party, Ex-President Theodore Roosevelt by the Progressive Party, Woodrow Wilson by the Democratic Party and William Howard Taft by the Republican Party. Taft and Roosevelt split the Republican vote giving the Presidency to Woodrow Wilson. Since that time a succession of Progressive Presidents and Congresses have waged a relentless attack on the institutions of American Society. It is only since the election of socialist Barack Obama and the rise of the patriot movement, known collectively as the Tea Party Movement, that many Americans have become aware of the nature of the struggle and the possible devastating consequences of its outcome.

The identity of a nation is determined by the nature of its three primary components, its form of government, its common culture, and its economic system. In America, the form of government is drawn from the principles set forth in its Declaration of Independence and codified in its Constitution. The Constitution contains the rules and limitations placed on the federal government, but deals only tangentially with the culture and the economy. The American Socialists are determined to destroy all three components of American society and replace them with the institutions of socialism. For the most part, they have been successful in shredding the Constitution, corrupting our culture and dismantling our economic system outside the conscious awareness of the American people.

Our culture is built on the foundation of its Christian principles. I am not talking about the denominational doctrines quibbled about among America’s 900 Christian denominations, but the principles behind those doctrines, as contained in the Ten Commandments and the Sermon on the Mount. Despite the Constitution’s prohibition against the federal government’s involvement in religious matters, not a day goes by but what some atheist group or some government agency attempts to interfere with the religious expressions of citizens and communities; from monuments to the Ten Commandments in local courthouses, to prayers being offered at public events to reminders of Christ in Christmas celebrations.

The Founders recognized the importance of a religious foundation for our culture in order for the Constitution to fulfill the purpose for which it was created. John Adams, our second President, said,

“our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

George Washington reminded America about the importance of religious principles in his farewell address,

“Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity.”

“Let it simply be asked: Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice ? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.”

Along with the efforts of American Socialists to purge Christianity from our culture, we have witnessed a steady decline in the moral foundation of our politics and economy as well.  We marvel at the equanimity of our elected officials as they look directly into the lens of the TV camera and lie to us with a sanguine belief that the American people will believe their fabricated assertions in spite of the evidence of experience and common sense.

Our economic system rests on the centuries old principles of free market capitalism where individuals make their own economic decisions based on their perception as to what is in their own and their family’s best interest. The system worked fine in the days when “a man’s word was his bond”, and deals were sealed with a handshake. However, the corrupting influence of continuous incremental successes of American Socialism has replaced free market capitalism with “crony capitalism” and is moving us ever closer to the centrally planned economy coveted by socialists the world over.

Both our political and economic well-being are dependent on the moral character of the culture that gave it birth. As Benjamin Franklin Observed on the final day of the Philadelphia Convention,

“I agree to this Constitution with all its faults, if they are such; because I think a general Government necessary for us, and there is no form of Government but what may be a blessing to the people if well administered, and believe farther that this is likely to be well administered for a course of years, and can only end in Despotism, as other forms have done before it, when the people shall become so corrupted as to need despotic Government, being incapable of any other.”

As America prepares for the deciding battle in our second Civil War next year, it is time for a decision; everyone must decide which course they wish follow. One leads to a return to liberty and prosperity, the other to poverty, misery and servitude to the state.  There can be no middle ground. One cannot compromise with an enemy whose objective is to destroy your way of life. It must be defeated. Have we, as Franklin mused, become so corrupt as a nation that we can only be ruled by despotism? Are we so lacking in character that we prefer the false security promised by American Socialists, or are we willing to take the risk proposed by the American Conservatives and battle for liberty, freedom and the blessings of God, settling for nothing less?

Fooled, Hoodwinked and Bamboozled on Debt/Budget Deal

By Sam Gallo
Conservative Party USA

It is now clear the new Debt/Budget “Deal” the Republi-Dem elite have fashioned among themselves exemplifies “business as usual” in Washington.  This “compromised” Bill is a smelly political deal rather than a true fiscal solution. It accomplishes NOTHING resembling the desires of the people.

America lost and Obama won. Period.

This Bill increases the debt ceiling by $2.1 Trillion immediately while it spreads just $1T in cuts over 10 years. The REAL debt increase, however, will be more than $8T because Baseline Budgeting rules require the government to spend $10T during that period. Fooled!

The Bill makes no necessary structural reforms to Medicare, Medicaid or Social Security.  It creates yet another Commission to “recommend” cuts that Congress will ignore just like it ignored all the previous Commissions. Even when Congress fails to make cuts (and you know they won’t make any cuts during an election year), that “Trigger” has more loopholes and gimmicks than old Swiss cheese hanging in a Rube Goldberg factory.  The Bill exempts those big entitlement programs from any cuts while Defense and Homeland Security will suffer almost 50% reductions if the “Trigger” is pulled. Hoodwinked!

Obama and Democrats got this entire debt and spending issue pulled off the table until after the election.  Keeping current tax rates is the only thing Republicans “won” during this political charade and even that is no sure bet once the new Commission acts. The GOP just “compromised” with……..itself.

This “Deal with the Devil” has another aspect that few people understand. The White House and their supporters in the Lame Stream Media convinced Republicans into thinking they prevailed by repeating the false notion that Obama “caved” while the Tea Party “won”.  The media firmly believe that a big lie – if repeated often enough – will eventually be accepted as true.  All that counterfeit left-handed praise was designed for only one purpose: it duped Republican RINO’s into supporting the Bill just because they believed Obama lost the negotiations. Bamboozled!

This fiasco reconfirms that the two-party system is failing America – again.

Debt Crisis Highlights Buck-Passing Culture of Washington

The Constitution is very specific as to which office, department or branch of government is responsible for each of the many functions of government. The decisions that have to be made in order to carry out the necessary tasks required for the good of the country is often politically unpopular. Over the years, Washington has become skilled at passing the buck and blaming others. For example, the first line in the body of the Constitution gives Congress the responsibility for “All legislative power”. (Article 1.1.1) In its eagerness to meddle in the affairs of citizens and states, Congress delegates many of its legislative powers to the various Secretaries of departments in the Executive Branch crating the giant bureaucracies that plague our lives today.

This allows Congress to further its agenda of expanding government and controlling the lives of citizens with impunity. If the “rules” (laws) prove unpopular with their constituents, they blame the Executive Branch and the Secretary or Department Head of that particular bureaucracy. Congress Members can even campaign for reelection — and often do — by opposing certain unpopular bureaucratic “rules” or Executive Departments, even though they personally may have voted for the bill that created the bureaucracy and gave it its power in the first place. When you think about it, this is an ingenious tactic for escaping blame, confusing constituents, and holding on to power.

This political ploy shows up “in spades” in the present budget and debt crisis. How often have we heard the complaint about the profligate spending by Obama; or the fact that Obama has not yet presented a budget; or, we are reminded that the Senate has not presented a budget since 2008? Here’s the shocker for many people; The Executive Branch can only spend money that has first been appropriated by Congress. (Article 1.9.7) Here is the second shocker; Neither the President nor the Senate is required by the Constitution to present a budget. Budget making is the Constitutional Responsibility of the House of Representatives. While I strongly disapprove of the actions of both the White House and the Senate, we are not going to solve our problems until we place the responsibility where it belongs.

Any Senate Budget is only a suggestion to the House of Representatives who must appropriate the funds and decide how to raise the revenue to pay for it. (Art. 1.7.1) The same is true with any presidential budget. (Art. 2.3.1) It is merely a suggestion to the House of Representatives. The Senate can offer amendments to the House’s budget but they must be approved by the House (Art. 1.7.1). The Senate can refuse to approve the House budget or the President can veto it, but neither can spend money that has not been appropriated by the House of Representatives. Some might argue that the House is only charged with the task of raising revenue, and that appropriations and the borrowing of money is not exclusively that of the House of Representatives.

Unless American businesses and foreign nations are willing to donate goods and services to the federal government, spending bills must also include appropriations to pay for the goods or services for which the money is to be spent. Hence, the raising of revenue to cover the purchase is always understood to be a part of the appropriation. That means the House of Representatives is the Constitutional originator of  the nation’s Budget.

There are only two ways of raising revenue, taxing and borrowing. Since we are told that the present necessity for raising the debt ceiling is to pay for expenditures already appropriated by Congress, that means that the deficit and the debt are both the result of the House of Representatives’ poor stewardship of the taxpayer’s money. It is just as disingenuous of the House to try and blame the Senate or the President for its lack of backbone as it is for President Obama to blame George W. Bush for his own poor leadership.

In his speech today on Congress’ raising of the debt limit, Obama also gave a litany of things on which he would like to spend more money. If any of them come to pass it will only be because the House of Representatives has abdicated its responsibility as “keeper of the purse”.  We need to watch carefully what our Representatives in the House vote for over the next sixteen months and make sure that the “business as usual” crowd is primaried and replaced.