Jeffersonian Standard at Odds with Present Day America

Tea Party Republicans continue to flounder at "why does the Republican Establishment have 2008 and 2010 memory lapses? And, "why do they treat us like red headed stepchildren?"

Maybe it's because they never reached out to the Tea Party. If memory serves me correctly, the Tea Party reached out to the Republican Party. Perhaps it was only place to go. As time progresses, we can see the vast differences between what we are and where they want to go. So what's next? A third party?

Yes. But, before we go there, we must remedy a much bigger problem. It is called "what used to be the United States of America."

For those who continue to bury their head in the sand, hoping that tomorrow will bring a new congress, court, president, bureaucracy and media, here's a shot of ice water! It is gone! To return to where we were, even in 1988, will take 50 years. By 2016 that 50 years will be 100 years. If not 150 years. If at all!

We need to create a new political party. But first, we must create a new United States of America. Not the current United American States, which represents Washington D.C.'s ideal. But a new country that is based on individual freedoms, personal responsibility and a government that serves the people, not visa versa!

I call it, The Jeffersonian Party. It is based on spiritual founder, Thomas Jefferson's famous proclamation, "When people fear government, you have tyranny. When government fears the people, you have liberty."

Nice slogan! Who will argue with it? Let's puts some "meat" on the bones!

We'll start with a quick review of the 10th amendment. Wow! A lot of stuff that we're handling from
Washington should actually be done at state level! Let's go down the list! Education, Energy, Environmental Protection, Commerce, Justice and more. Could the states handle it? Under the constitution, they have no choice!

Let us move to personal responsibility. Shouldn't everyone shoulder their share? Wasn't that what made "Perfect Society" work? Because everyone would have the right, if not the obligation, to contribute, they also earn their chance  to express their preference at the voting polls. Those not electing to shoulder their share of the burden, wouldn't!

Why is it important for everyone to be literate? Why do we need to have one language and not a number of languages? Does it really matter? Couldn't we place language preferences on the voting ballots and decide if we wanted more than one language? Or, which language that we did want, for that matter? It's about "turning sheeple into people." It goes back to individual development and betterment.

Deep in the "nooks and crannies" of 1770's politics reveal a dispute between Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton. It centered on banking. Jefferson wanted the government, as in congress to oversee the money supply. Hamilton thought best for that role to be reserved for outside entities. As in English, French and European entities.

This is an over simplification. But it does suggest a split which found John Adams, James Madison and Thomas Paine on one side, while Hamilton,George Washington, Benjamin Franklin and Samuel Adams took the opposite position. Ironically, Jefferson, Adams, Madison and Paine were not Freemason's. The others were.

So what does this have to do with a "new" United States of America? It could have alot to do with it, if states elect to separate!

A large part of the worlds debt is held by European and Northeast United States banking interests. Included are mortgage debt and student loan debt. There is always a danger of defaults with any major change in governments. Especially when many of the debtors feel that they were treated unfairly.

This is compounded by a central government that is not trusted due to it's lack of fiscal discipline. Complicating matters further is the worry that government is too big and getting bigger. Most see government as an overbearing force in everyday life. Now, it plans to shove Obamacare down the throats of a reluctant America! New Obama inspired regulations mount with each passing day. There is a feeling that American nationalism has been given a backseat to globalism.

It gets worse! There is a growing belief  that Barack Obama may not have won the election. His eligibility to be president continues to be questioned. And, evidence is mounting that he may be a "real live, in the flesh, Marxist!" Imagine that! A Communist, who cheated his way into the White House, who was never eligible to begin with!

Who would want to stay with such a person, let alone have them as their president? In a previous post we answered that specifically: "Career Welfare Recipients. "Sheeple." Unions. Socialist Ideologues. Wily Opportunists."

What about salt-of-the-earth Americans from Pennsylvania and Tennessee? We're not confining this discussion to Tea Party members. If Obama was found to be ineligible or if Obama's DNA confirmed the he was the son of someone other than the father originally claimed, what would they say?

This is what members of the Tea party must ask themselves. Would they listen to the "mushy milk toasters," stick their heads in the sand, ostrich style, hoping things work themselves out? Would they listen to career politicians, certain to assure them that there is no other way?

It is likely that we will never know who this president truly is. But it is a certainty that he will, as he promised, fundamentally change America. The question is, "are we going to sit around like a cattle going to slaughter awaiting the inevitable?

We need leaders. We need men and women who reflect the principles of Thomas Jefferson. We need visionaries. We need patriots holding the highest levels of courage and conviction. Are they out there?