Sunday, July 27, 2014

A Tale of Two Americas

One insightful Texan proffered an idea worth considering:

"Have Attorney General Greg Abbot and staff determine if and how Texas could draft legislation." This legislation would include giving "state tax credit, to be filed with residents' federal tax return to cover the expenses of sending the guard to the border."

The cost is estimated at 12 million per month. While small(about $50 per year per taxpayer)"it would send a signal" that Texas wouldn't be "double dipped from central government's failure to do their job."

True, this action would be mainly symbolic. But, it would return focus on the waste that is today's norm in Washington, D.C.. The Administration's failure to secure the border has spawned the immediate crisis. Yet, in the President's 3.7 billion dollar request, only 100 million would be allocated to border security.

How would the rest of the money be spent?

"Humanitarian" necessities, such as healthcare, food, shelter, clothing, transporation, lawyers and college tuition for the soon-to-be, "new Americans." The thinking behind the action is these "new Americans" will remember those behind the overture. The end result: New Democrat voters!

How ingenious!

Two problems for the Administration: (a) The Republican Congress won't pass such a measure. (b) Should the President attempt to by-pass Congress, he could fan the impeachment flames that grow brighter with each passing day!

Many Americans don't know what to think. While only one-third are ready to oust Barack Obama, more and more are questioning his judgment. When your disapproval rating stands at 54%, the 33-35% wanting impeachment could surpass 50%, with one catastrophic event. Such as 9-1-1...

Strangely enough, the President has been all but obtuse regarding the international scene. In Russia, Vladmir Putin is challenging Obama, fully knowing that America holds most of the cards. The Middle East is now more perilous than at any time in history. China is getting stronger every day. Yet Obama remains oblivious to it all.

Instead, the President has made "getting people here at home under control," his top priority. Continued calls for gun control, an aggressive N.S.A. seeking to learn more about our people, an I.R.S. gone partisan and an E.P.A. gone wild, have kindled a fear of government never imagined.

Amazingly, Obama's core supporters are with him all the way. Maybe it's because they believe that having "more government" is the only way they'll get a fair shake! His 2012 Presidential campaign emphasized class warfare. But it goes deeper than that. Many in the President's camp are not poor, or even slightly poor. In fact, a lot of them are doing quite well.

Some Obama constituents are relatively easy to fathom. The trial lawyers union opposes any suggestion that may point to tort reform. Even a "loser pays" standard, as established in Texas, is viewed as a threat to their interests.

Federal, non-military employees have always been more comfortable with the Democrat party. The President has enjoyed a "buddy-buddy" relationship with S.E.I.U., the international service employees union that includes 2.1 million workers in the United States, Canada and Puerto Rico.

Harry S. Truman warned of the danger of public sector unionization. He predicted that they would ultimately become a political action committee. His prophecy has proven accurate. Today, they are a rock solid constituency of the Democrat party.

The mandate of "forced union membership" is coming to a head in states like Michigan and Wisconsin. For decades, "big labor" has ruled the roost. Now, workers are questioning their leadership. And especially the political candidates their bosses throw their support(and their union dues) at!

The black caucus is more enigmatic. Founded in 1970, they have been some of the most loyal Democrats. Yet, while previously closed doors have opened to African Americans, the unemployment rate for blacks continues to be highest of all segments of the population. The increase in single parent households and gang violence in the black communities suggest that the mere "promise of boonies" will eventually not suffice.

The Gay and Lesbian movement has experienced an "open arms welcome" from this Adminstration. Emboldened by recent court rulings of left leaning jurists, they have concluded that advancing their agenda is as simple as proposing it! If the states don't like it, never fear!

Planned Parenthood can't complain about their "half billion" in federal subsidies. With Obamacare's implementation, more is on the way!

In essence, these constituencies are guaranteed votes for the Democrats. They see the "wisdom" of Barack Obama's "border strategy." It's all about future Democrat voters.

Much of the world now sees America as a "nation of wimps." But, in the eyes of Obama constiuents, "isn't it better to be seen as a wimp than a bully?"

Sovereignty? What sovereignty? In their eyes, the whole system is rigged! The only guarantee of "fairness" is to have the government play referee! After all, that's what "social justice" is all about!

Most disquieting is how few Americans question this intentional progression toward American insignificance. The good news is that "a tiny spark," can provide a "wake up call." Such as a reminder that Texans are paying for Washington's negligence!

Sadly, the aforementioned who comprise the Democrat base, could care less! Only their individual interests and well beings matter!

"Never mind" that there are two million fewer Americans working than in 2008.

"So what" if energy costs have skyrocketed during Obama's watch!

"Too bad" our young people are suffocating under the yoke of student loan debt!

"Who cares" about the "twenty-somethings" who can't fine work!

For the Blacks and Hispanics who continue to lead the unemployment rolls, "what else is new? Just keep voting Democrat!"

For the millions of middle class families witnessing spikes to healthcare costs, due to Obamacare, "Get over it!"

For those losing their individual physicians, due to Obamacare, "It's still a great idea. Especially when you're exempted from it!"

Evidence indicates that one-third of America has succumbed to the promise of percuniary advantage. The disposition of the nation has become secondary.

For these and other reasons, Barack Obama is playing a dangerous game with his opponents. Although making steady gains, his faithful still does not compose a majority.

Eventually, those unable to access the government's "bennies" list will heed Rick Perry's promise: "The American economy, minus the burden of unnecessary regulations and government meddling, will take off like a rocket,"

In reality, most of Obama's constituents have been spared the full horror of their "emperor's" economy. In effect, they have avoided participation in the great recession.

They have stood silent while the their leader turned his back on our military and our veterans. They have accepted America's new world position that "it's better to be liked than respected."

To be sure, there is opposition. And, it's growing with each passing hour. How Obama's opponents will play it, remains to be seen. A lawsuit? Impeachment? Something more drastic?

On one side are Americans who love their country, have faith in a higher being and believe in the family. On the other side are Americans who believe in nothing, save themselves, what money can buy and instant gratification.

Conflict between the two Americas is inevitable.

Sunday, July 20, 2014

The Approaching Storm

A budget deficit that grows with each passing second!

A partisan health care plan that threatens to destroy what is left of the American middle class!

A mess in the Middle East!

An absolute crisis on our Southern border that has the "smell" of something that was intentially inflicted by a divisive, power mad administration!

Governor Rick Perry has evidently had enough! He has elected to go it alone, in an effort to secure his 1200 mile stretch of the border. After years of pleas for help, the conclusion is, "Washington doesn't plan on helping!" If it is to be done, then Texas, with hopefully some help from other states, will attempt to stem the flow of undocumented souls pouring into our country!

Perry appears to have a grip on the problem. And, a solution! The problem is, the President doesn't think it's a high enough priority to make a visit to the border. Not that he wasn't recently in the neighborhood! It isn't that he wasn't asked by Perry personally! Perhaps, he simply can't grasp the urgency. After all Harry Reid himself, said this past week, that the border was indeed "secure."

More and more Republicans are ruefully acknowledging that the President doesn't want to do anything. Other than, to allow these "refugees" to stay, with hopes of spawning future Democrat voters! Never mind what the law says! Who cares about the constitution! The administration and friends consider the latter an anachonism anyway!

There are always unexpected consequences. Don't look now, but there are thousands of "thirty and forty something" veterans who are seeing this border crisis for what it could be: "Americas last stand." They are already unhappy with the administration. Whether it's Iraq, the V.A., or even the Marine interned in Mexico, all signs indicate that this President doesn't like them very much.

Not that Governor Perry is urging these forgotten Patriots to expend their resources and energy on such an undertaking! He isn't! But, he is, after all, a fellow veteran! Not a weekend warrior, but a former Air Force C-130 pilot! When compared to the current Commander-in-Chief, there is no comparison! Odds are, he's just the guy they've been looking for! Certainly worth a trip south, accompanied by their personally owned AR-15 and, say, 3000 rounds...

This is an exceptionally dangerous scenario! Without question, Texas is not alone. Even more alarming is these "Patiots" actual lust to get into a fight, preferably with the Americans who they have gradually grown to hate!

As always, liberals would pigeonhole it as "race based." In truth, these "Patriots" represent a "rainbow coalition!" Those inspiring their ire often work in unelected positions holding perceived dictatorial authority. Many "Patriots" have struggled in Obama's anemic economy. Perry's promise of "less regulation, less government and more economy prospertity," symbolizes deliverance.

Governor Perry talks about accomplishments and achievements. He points to an America that reaches for the sky. This message of hope and confidence is not lost on these frustrated soldiers of fortune. They understand it better than most! Years of neglect have culminated into unquenchable anger. To rally behind a cause can quickly transform anger into joy!

No doubt, many in the Perry camp would be slightly nervous with this development. As one supporter put it, "the media would portray us as the bad guys, like so many were viewed in Nevada. Receiving financial help from other states would be welcomed."

That, too, may be forthcoming. But the possibility of thousands of veterans, many battle tested, showing up in Texas to defend the border, would likely be greeted enthusiastically by apprehensive locals. They would likewise influence those BLM, DHS and National Guardsman trying to cope with a problem increasingly seen as both self inflicted and infinite!

Imagine a 23-year-old, suddenly confronted by a 35-year-old. The later has, at the very least, been through the grind. At the most, he (or she) has experienced a tour. Think how easy it would be for the older soldier "to get into" the younger soldiers' head! Get the picture? Alas, the perfect storm!

Don't forget, the military is going through a downsize, courtesy of the administration. There is clearly a morale problem throughout the armed forces. The prevailing paradigm amounts to being "unappreciated and no longer needed." Thus, when the 35-year-old reminds the 23-year-old that their oath is to "defend the constitution," not the presidency, the circle becomes complete!

It is estimated that there are about 270 million firearms held by the civilian population which are accounted for. It is believed that there are an additional 270 million firearms unaccounted for. Nearly all are in the hands of roughly "30%" of the population. Can we guess who these Americans are?

How about law enforcement officials? Has anyone checked to see where the majority of them stand, ideologically?

Conservatives in America are seething! Most have reached a tipping point. The consensus of opinion reins consistent: "liberals have used everything from voter fraud to an overreaching judicial system to force their agenda upon America."

Equally disquieting is the near universal belief that the system has failed. Any remaining confidence in leadership dissipates with each Thad Cochran candidacy.

"Fixing America" via a constitutional convention is openly discussed. Term limits, English only, a definition of marriage and a more simplied tax code are hot topics! They are joined with calls to repeal the 14th, 16th, and 17th amendments. On a growing number of tongues are Malcolm X's historic ultimatum: "The ballot or the bullet."

Should there be a second American Civil War, make no mistake! It will be ideological, not sectional. It will not be North versus South or East versus West! It will be "Liberals versus Conservatives." The Liberals will lose! Decisively!

Following the rout, massive immigration to Canada, Europe, South America, even Africa can be anticipated! Perhaps twenty million Americans will permanently exit the country. Their Conservative victors will proclaim, "don't let the door hit you on the way out!" Left behind will be the "Sheeple," who will, in effect, be granted release from their dubious destiny of drone duty.

Could this apocalyptic future unfold? Perhaps! Thomas Jefferson noted that, "the tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." That time may be upon us!

Governor Perry is not advocating such an outcome! Without question, he would do everything in his power to thwart a calamity of this magnitude! History has proven, however, that leaders are often not self chosen!

Sadly our country looks to be approaching the point of no return. The left has pushed relentlessly, obviously unconcerned that they might be overplaying their hand! Arrogantly, they have concluded that their intellectual superiority will prevail over their slower talking, seemingly provincial counterpart. Tragically overlooked is the determination held by the latter. Not to mention the passion!

It is hoped that Governor Perry can secure the border. While it's shameful that the President has chosen to take a back seat, it isn't wholly unexpected. Open borders will result in increase crimes against the civilian population. As former Idaho Congressman, Curtis Bowers implied in his documentary, "Agenda: Grinding America Down," citizens will "relinguish freedoms while welcoming more government when threatened with violence and anarchy."

The good news is there appears to be room for a compromise on the border crisis. Better yet, there is an approaching midterm election.

Should the Republicans reclaim Senate majority, while holding House serve, a brief lull could follow. Not to suggest that things will be settled! The President has made it clear that if Congress won't comply, "I have a pen and a phone."

The political establishment would like to see Obama leave office without incident. The problem is, he may not be interested in going quietly. An ideologue to the last, Barack Obama looks determined to finish what he started. Even, if it carries cataclysmic consequences.

Sunday, July 13, 2014

Increased Federalism Could Emerge as Key Campaign Issue

Ever noticed how counties that are home to state capitals always seem to vote Democrat?

There is a logical reason. As a rule, public sector workers always favor the party of expanded government. In today's world, federal employees especially are predisposed to vote Democrat.

Next question, "how does increased Federalism play into this tendency?" In other words, "what if" jobs currently handled at the federal level were reassigned to the states? Would it make a difference?

Old habits are difficult to break. This is certainly the case when studying voting patterns. For reasons beyond explanation, members of the bureaucracy tend to lean Democrat.

Most of these jobs are gained through qualification. But, there are others, especially the lower echelon ones that are often fruits of the traditional "spoils system." Republicans are seen as more on the side of the private sector. Most state and especially federal workers have traditionally found Democrats more amenable to pay increases and benefit enhancements. The main exception has been with Defense Department, Military and Law Enforcement employees, who historically have leaned Republican.

The question becomes, "how would individuals in "blue" counties such as Leon County, Florida and Dane County, Wisconsin react to a call for more federalism?" In other words, "eliminating jobs at the federal level, returning the money to the individual states in the way of block grants, so that the individual state might re-create these same positions at the state level?"

Sounds complicated, not to mention a bit messy! There is, however, a motive behind such action.

Last night, I was privy to an enlightening discussion between friends. The topic, "who" would make the best Republican candidate for President. On the table were several key issues, beginning with border control and ending with Obamacare. In the middle of the discussion, two other concerns surfaced: Education and global warming. The participants included an environmental engineer, a law enforcement official, a member of the "agency," a public school principal and myself. Needless to say, we were all Republicans.

From the outset, it was concluded that "if the Republicans were smart," the field would be immediately narrowed to two contenders: Jeb Bush and Rick Perry. The main distinction between these two men is their views on Federalism.

Neither Perry or Bush have made official their intentions for 2016. Smart money suggests that both will run. It is no secret that the Republican Establishment yearns for a Bush candidacy. Meanwhile, Perry continues to raise his profile with each passing day. The primary consideration is "which" Republican possibility is perceived to have the best chance of besting Hillary Clinton in the general election. Now surfacing is the question of "individual counties in swing states" that could decide the election. These "state capital" counties head the list.

Perry hasn't been specific on "which" departments would be the most impacted. It stands to reason that the E.P.A. would top the list. If such were the case, Federal jobs would be eliminated, the money returned to the states, where the individual state would recreate the position. The objective: "increased accountability through accessibility."

Jeb Bush has a strong environmental record. While in office as Florida Governor, he added almost a million acres to the Florida public land holdings. His attention to preservation of the Everglades drew national applause.

Perry, lest we forget, was Al Gore's 1988 Texas campaign chairman when the former V.P. ran for President. Their difference centered around Gore's insistence that "only Washington" could be trusted via the E.P.A. to regulate Environmental standards. Perry's 10th amendment orientation resulted in a permanent split with Gore, contributing to his party switch. His environmental record as Governor of Texas has been as good, if not actually better than Bush's Florida record.

We know that Jeb Bush ardently supports "Common Core." Perry not only opposes "Common Core," he wants to eliminate the Department of Education in it's entirety.

Ditto for the departments of Energy and Commerce. Bush has said nothing about either.

George H.W. Bush once headed the C.I.A.. It would stand to reason that the Agency, not to mention the Department of Defense would be comfortable with his son in the White House. But how would this impact things back home? We know that Perry has one of the strongest second amendment records in the country. Would this equate to sending money back to the individual states, in order to expand their state militias?

Healthcare? Both men seek to "repeal and replace" Obamacare? But, what specificially would this entail? The recently introduced Republican alternative? Crossing states lines? Loser pays Tort reform, which Texas has already implemented? Allowing the individual states to make the final determination?

In short, could the promise of increased Federalism trim the Democrat's advantage in capital counties? Chances are, no matter what someone promises, these voters belong to the Democrats. Still, some of the more intuitive state officials might see increased Federalism as a ticket for job creation at home!

Both Bush and Perry will tout private sector job creation as their primary objective. In fact, this will be Perry's strongest selling point. Yet, it never hurts to remind these voters in capital counties that, "more state jobs will result from decentralization."

Ironically, Jeb may be more "in sync" with Hillary than Perry regarding Federalism. This could ultimately be his downfall! For those who remember the Texas 2010 Gubernatorial campaign, Perry made it "the issue" when disposing of Kay Bailey Hutchinson. There might be an additional benefit.

It takes no Harvard graduate to see advantages from increased Federalism. For starters, there are always employment gains on the state level! Plus, advocating a Washington "down size" is increasing popular politics. Perry has proven to be one of the best at "seizing the moment!"

Sunday, July 6, 2014

The Sequence

Google "State of Jefferson."

Next google "Cascadia."

A few have noted Venture Capitalist,Tim Draper's proposal that would split California into six separate states.

For those unfamiliar with "Cascadia," it's a separatist movement introduced largely by environmentalist groups. It would join the states of Washington and Oregon with British Columbia. As of 2010, there were roughly 15 million people living in this proposed new country.

The state of Jefferson is one of the six California states, according to Draper's plan. The other five states are as follows:

1. North California
2. South California
3. West California
4. Central California
5. Silicon Valley

Unlike the other five Californias, the Jefferson movement has been around for a long time. It even has it's own capital and flag. It's basis is more ideological than geographical. Seven southwestern Oregon counties join these Northern California counties. All told, 1.6 million people live in this "Nebraska sized" area.

Surprisingly, these counties are heavily Republican. As are the eastern counties of Washington.

Like their neighbors to the southwest, eastern Washington has entertained a separatist movement. The proposed state of "Lincoln" was originally introduced in 1865. It's possible that at least eight eastern Oregon counties would join them, in the event that Portland and the western part of the state elected to go "Cascading!"

Is anyone aware of the separatist movement in Alberta? It's been around since the early 1990's and stems from the Province's sending far more money to Ottawa than received. Proponents talk about both going solo or teaming with like minded western Canadian provinces to form their own country!

This, too will never happen! Unless, something "screwy" takes place south of the border!

Something "screwy, south of the border" translates to hoards of Central Americans illegally entering the United States. This is the opinion of residents in California, Texas and Arizona! Barack Obama sees them as future "Democrat" votes!

Eventually, even the most reasonable of citizens reach their breaking point! Throngs of disease ridden newcomers and a disinterested federal government may do it!

Most "good Americans" not living in these states will proffer: "Let's see how the Senate midterms turn out. If the Republicans win the Senate majority, things will change!"

Maybe. Hopefully. But if so, can we count on the Lindsey Grahams and Thad Cochrans to take the necessary steps to correct the problem?

An equal number of "good Americans" ask, "can the problem be corrected, by people who are actually the center of that problem?" We may be "whistling Dixie!"

As one Chicagoan turned Texan phrased. "The Senators would lose too much power if states decided to go separate ways. They'd never let it happen!"

From a legal standpoint, Texas could secede. Most Southerners, myself included, maintain that any state can secede. After all, the original union was voluntary. Yet, even conservative judges such as Antonin Scalia consider the question "settled." Texas, however, is different. There is no debate about it's right to exit the union.

Governor Rick Perry vehemently opposes secession as much as his hero, Sam Houston did. But so did Jefferson Davis and Robert E. Lee. Without question, Perry loves Texas as much as Lee loved Virginia.

In Texas, the flood of "refugees" is personal, believed by most as "intentional." Didn't Debbie Wasserman Schultz vow to "turn Texas into a blue state?" The quickest way to ignite action is when homes are threatened!

The breaking point could be upon us! Politicians will say otherwise. But their credibility may have slipped to the point of no return. It only takes a spark! And Mississippi likely provided it last month!

What if Texas did exercise it's option to withdraw? Predictably, other states would follow. Starting with the Lone Star State's closet neighbors, Louisiana and Oklahoma. From there, the actual sequence is unpredictable.

Trends typically begin in California. Draper contends that California is simply too large to run under a single government. A large number of Californians concur. Especially those in South California where, like Texas, their homes are under threat. Ditto for Central California, where E.P.A. concern over a minnow has forced many farmers to the mat. When you include the Jefferson counties, we are now talking 15 million people and 80% of the Golden State's geography!

Would the three Californias follow Texas? Probably, if not definitely! And the exodus would be on, beginning with Arizona and concluding with most, if not all of the Southern States, the Great Plain States and all, or practically all of the Rocky Mountain States. Midwestern States such as Illinois and Michigan might vote to exclude some of their cities, in an effort to avoid being left behind.

Amazingly 100 of Illinois' 102 counties were carried by Mitt Romney in 2012. Only Cook and St. Clair went Democrat, albeit it by wide margins! Pennslyvania, sans Philadelphia and Delaware counties is a "red" state. Ditto for New York, north of the 43rd parallel and west of the 75th parallel. There is a current separatist movement taking place in Wisconsin. The President's approval rating is less than 40% in Minnesota.

It remains to be seen if Washington and Oregon would join British Columbia to form Cascadia. Two things would happen if they did! The state of "Lincoln" would be formed and join the states that followed Texas. Alberta would almost certainly request permission(not from Canada)to do the same!

The inevitable question: "Wouldn't Obama use the military to suppress the rebellion?"

Probably. But, we must remember! The military is sworn to uphold the Constitution, not the Presidency. The reason for such action would be based on the President's refusal to govern with the guidelines of the Constitution. The military would be torn between their oath to defend the Constitution and the predicted directives of their "perfumed princes;" AKA four and five star generals.

The hypothetical sequence would takes years, if it happened at all. Yet if it did, the new nation that emerged would be unquestionably the richest in the world! And certainly the most free!