Obama Claus

In a recent column, Dr. Thomas Sowell said, “When someone tries to lay a guilt trip on you for being successful, remember that your guilt is some politician's license to take what you worked for and give it to someone else who is more likely to vote for the politician who plays Santa Claus with your money.”  Unfortunately, we have a person occupying the White House who is more than willing to play Santa with our tax dollars, but I fear his motives are more than just votes.

President Obama recently gave his annual State of the Union Address.  As in previous addresses, he outlined how he plans to use the federal government to make our lives better.  He spoke of helping working families feel more secure and helping them afford childcare, college, healthcare, housing and retirement.  He talked about passing legislation that would guarantee paid sick leave.  He said he would send a plan to Congress that would allow people to attend community college for free.  And, he spoke of raising the minimum wage in order “to give millions of the hardest-working people in America a raise.”

President Obama wrapped his speech in a package of “middle class economics”, telling us that he wants to help not only the poor, but the larger middle class segment of the population; more Santa Claus means more votes.  Are votes his motivation in all this largesse?  I don’t think so.  Obama said, “I have no more campaigns to run.”  So what is his motive? In his address, Obama gave us a hint of what he really wants.  He stated, “the idea that this country does best when everyone gets their fair shot, everyone does their fair share, and everyone plays by the same set of rules. We don't just want everyone to share in America's success -- we want everyone to contribute to our success.” 

Like other progressive politicians, Obama wants us beholden to the federal government for our livelihood.  If you’re successful, it should be because the government gave you the tools, the education, and the investments.  Obama’s infamous “You didn’t build that” speech and Elizabeth Warren’s statement, “[t]here is nobody in this country who got rich on his own,” are attempts to downplay the significance of hard work and determination to become successful.  They are attempting to make those who are successful feel guilty for it.  And, more than guilt, Obama wants to punish those who are successful.

Obama promised us that under Obamacare, "If you like your health care plan, you can keep it". However, if your insurance policy didn’t measure up to what Obamacare mandated, your insurance company had to cancel your policy.  Hundreds of thousands have already had their health insurance policies canceled, according to the Washington Post.  Those whose policies were canceled had to buy more expensive coverage that covers less or provides coverage they don’t need.  Costs for employer-sponsored insurance plans have risen at a slightly faster rate and individual health care plans have risen at a rate three times faster than before Obamacare was signed into law. And, if you are fortunate enough to have a really good insurance plan, a so-called “Cadillac plan”, you’ll have to pay an excise tax on that plan beginning in 2018.  The reason, to help finance the expansion of health coverage for those that can’t afford it.  Although he said his goal was to provide health care insurance for the millions that didn’t have coverage, it appears to me that he wants us to have only the coverage that the government says we can have or pay a penalty. Also, he wants those who can afford insurance to pay for those who can’t.  Just a quick aside, but did you notice that the government is forcing you to buy a product or get penalized?  Not only is it unconstitutional for them to do that but the Supreme Court declared it legal!

Obama wants to make it free to attend community college, yet proposed taxing the 529 college savings accounts.  First, when he says community college is free, does he mean for everyone, or for a select group?  If people are shrewd enough or fortunate enough to save for college, why penalize them by taxing these savings accounts that can only be used for college?  That amounts to being punished for paying your or your child’s way through college.  That clearly doesn’t make sense if your goal is for everyone to be able to attend college—you’ve just punished those that don’t need to attend for free.  But, if your goal is to tax the “haves”, give to the have-nots, and make everyone indebted to the government for their education, it makes perfect sense.

Although these are only couple of examples, if you dig deeper into Obama’s policies and actions, it is easy to see a trend in his proposals and policies to redistribute the wealth and make the public indebted to the government for our lives and livelihoods.  Thankfully, Obama will be out of office in a little more than 700 days.  Yes, I’m counting.   However, it will take a long time to undo the damage from his and his predecessors’ policies.  And, we must be educated, active, and diligent in avoiding electing more progressives.  If we don’t, I fear for the future of this country—who of the “haves” will be left to provide?

Great Expectations

Along with a new year, we have a new session of Congress.  The 1^st session of the 114^th US Congress recently convened with the Republican Party holding a majority in both the Senate and the House of Representatives.  While many have great expectations that a Republican-led Congress can steer the country in the right direction, a majority of Americans believe that Congress will accomplish no more in 2015 than it did in 2014. It’s a pretty bleak outlook, but with an approval rating hovering around 10% for the last few years, even a few accomplishments would be an improvement.

The Republicans in Congress have a long to-do list and if they have any hope of remaining in office and getting a Republican elected to the presidency in 2016, they better make some meaningful progress.  But the tasks are formidable; immigration reform, deficit reduction, improving the economy, repealing or restructuring Obamacare are just a few of the big-ticket items.  Democrats, especially potential presidential candidates, and the media are poised to pounce on any misstep.  And, the Republicans have only two years to make meaningful changes.

But, the American public, especially the conservative segment, needs to have realistic expectations.  While some issues appear to be recent in nature, such as Obamacare, most of them began long ago and have been allowed to fester because we elected individuals who chose to avoid addressing the issue.  Other issues arose early in the last century, the Progressive Era, but we’ve blindly allowed them to grow and multiply in the name of progress and social justice.

While some good came of the Progressive Era, exposing government corruption, social reform that lead to women gaining the right to vote, and imposing child labor laws that protected children, there was much that, while sounding good, began undermining the principles and freedoms that our founding fathers fought for.

The progressives, such as President Woodrow Wilson, were, according to political scientist Charles Murray, “advocates of rule by disinterested experts led by a strong unifying leader. They were in favor of using the state to mold social institutions in the interests of the collective. They thought that individualism and the Constitution were both outmoded.”  Wilson said it himself in a campaign speech in 1912, “All that progressives ask or desire is permission—in an era when “development,” “evolution,” is the scientific word—to interpret the Constitution according to the Darwinian principle”. Since then, we’ve allowed progressive elected officials and the activist judges they’ve appointed to interpret the Constitution to further their molding of social institutions as they see fit.

The federal income tax was implemented during Wilson’s term.  Franklin Roosevelt, appointed judges that were sympathetic to his New Deal programs, replacing judges that had initially rejected his programs as unconstitutional.  And one of his New Deal crown jewels, Social Security, is taking up larger and larger chunks of our federal budget.  President Truman, who stated that “Every man should have the right… to worthwhile job…” continued the implementation of progressive policies. And payroll tax-funded Medicare and Medicaid were signed into legislation during President Johnson’s Great Society. These are few of the more blatant examples of progressivism.  There are plenty of other blatant examples, but there are many examples of progressives using the state to mold social institutions that are more subtle, and some may argue, more sinister.

Activist judges have found supposed “rights” in the Constitution and legislated from the bench, changing policy and setting precedence for legal “rights” that do not exists in the Constitution.  Separation of church and state?  It’s not in the Constitution, but court decisions have essentially put it there.

The federal government has been able to increase its power, oftentimes through bribery and coercion.  Remember the 55 mile per hour speed limit?  The Carter Administration thought it would be a good idea, and save lives and gasoline.  How was it implemented, when neither Congress nor the President has the power to set state speed limits?  Simple, threaten to withhold federal funding if the states don’t implement a 55 mph speed limit and reward those that do with highway funds.  Yet these funds came from us, the taxpayers.  Either comply or we won’t let you have your money?  It obviously worked, the 55 mph limit was a nationwide limit for a number of years.  And this is just one of many examples where the federal government has bent the states to its will using authority not allocated to it by the Constitution.

The Republicans don’t have an easy job ahead of them.  As Thomas Paine wrote in “American Crisis” during the winter of 1776, “Tyranny, like Hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph.” And we are fighting tyranny.  President Wilson defined it for us when he said, “By tyranny, as we now fight it, we mean control of the law, of legislation and adjudication, by organizations which do not represent the people, by means which are private and selfish… We mean the exploitation of the people by legal and political means. We have seen many of our governments under these influences cease to be representative governments, cease to be governments representative of the people, and become governments representative of special interests, controlled by machines, which in their turn are not controlled by the people.”  The Republicans aren’t simply trying to undo six years of Obama policies but nearly 100 years of progressivism.  Be patient and applaud them for every positive step they take in trying to reign in the federal government, but don't throw them out if they fail to achieve every goal in the next two years.  And communicate with them to remind them that they are YOUR elected representatives, not the special interests.

Good or Evil

by John Galt

Due to the recent upsurge of divisive racism in the media resulting from the deaths of black Americans by police officers, I tried to understand what is causing these issues that are creating such outrage and dividing the American public.  My thoughts went beyond racial discord to the subjects whipped to a frenzy by politicians and the media.  Topics in today’s headlines are gay rights, wealthy capitalists, racial and gender inequality, and so many more subjects that divide the American public.  We live in a time of crime, poverty, drug use, terrorism, unemployment, and hopelessness.

Long story short, I decided our situation isn’t an issue of race, wealth, gender, sexual orientation, age, or political orientation, but instead issues of good versus evil.  There are good people, those with the moral and ethical bias to do the right thing, make the right choices, and shoulder their responsibilities.  There are evil people, those that take advantage of, blame, slander, hate, and brutalize others for their own gain.  In reality, most people are not perfect, they are a mixture, of varying degrees of both good and evil.  We all sin, rich, poor, gay, straight, men, women, black, white and all shades in between.

But I’m not talking about sinners cheating at bingo.  I‘m talking about the evil that we can recognize once we look at the facts without our biases of color, gender, or wealth.  My son asked me if someone that stole to feed their family sinned, well, yes, but they are not evil.  You can do wrong and not be evil.  But the person that kills another out of jealousy is evil.  Evil is done in the absence of soul or conscience.

In a society that expounds on the evil in man’s heart every day in the news headlines, we have to recognize that good people doing the right thing are hardly ever mentioned in the headlines.  There are people that will do the right thing regardless of the circumstances.  There are others that will usually do the right thing unless they think they can get away with it or they feel the circumstances are justifiable.  There are others that will do the evil thing, just because they want to.  Don’t you agree?  Notice that I didn’t differentiate on race, wealth, social standing, gender or religion.  There are good people and there are bad people.

Historically, differences of economic standing, race, religion, wealth and opinion have led to violence.  Anything that can differentiate groups of people has created discord.  Some people perform evil acts in the name of religion.  Politicians slander their competition for political gain.  People kill and maim because they feel slighted by another person.  Greed has long been a motivation for evil.  In all of those media stories, it is easy to see who perpetuated the evil.  In others, we fixate on the outcome of the scenario and we don’t consider the events or actions that led up to the final moments of the story.

What if every media story wasn’t colored with adjectives of race, political association, age, gender or wealth?  It matters less that a white or black person died than that a life was taken.  We shouldn’t feel more loss if a rich person dies than a poor person.  If two people get married, let’s not wonder if anyone wore a white dress.  It isn't really the headlines that define our society, it is the individual players, their motivation and their actions. 

All I ask of you is to scrutinize the next media story by using only the facts.  Don’t join in on a mob mentality inspiring hate.  Assess the entire situation, not just the outcome.  Beware of hearsay.  Who are the players in the story?  Walk in their shoes for a minute and decide if you would have made the same choices.  For example, did the officer draw his gun to serve and protect or out of fear for his life?  Who is the aggressor?  Who is the victim?  Who could have changed the outcome and why didn’t they?  Take the time to form your own opinion.

Je Suis Charlie

by John Galt


Free speech was brutally attacked in Paris.  Terrorists killed 12 in an attack on the office of the satirical magazine, Charlie Hebdo.  Someone took offense at their satire and took lives.

Remember the childhood rhyme “sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me!”    My parents taught me to let the words roll off my back because sometime somewhere someone’s words will offend me or will be counter to my own thoughts.  Other than my feelings, when nothing else is hurt, get over it.  Why escalate a perceived slight into violence?  

We have warnings on movies and music CDs that warn us of the content.  If we don’t like a show on television, we can change the channel or turn it off.  If we don’t like what someone says, we can tune them out, walk away or avoid them.  We have choices.  People get offended, but it is their choice to be offended.  A long time ago, someone told me that no one can make me mad, I choose to be mad.  When you get right down to it, yeah, I could as easily chosen otherwise.

But when someone makes a choice to be offended, then escalate their discord to violence, that is so outside the bounds of social etiquette that it is barbaric.  What is even sadder is it seems this was done to vindicate a slight to their prophet, a prophet that was referred to in the Quran as a “mercy to the worlds”.  There is no honor there.

I don’t agree with all that is said; not by a mile.  When the Westboro Baptists protested soldier’s funerals, by no means did I agree.  But rather than hating them and escalating a response into violence, we rallied around the soldier’s families and shut them out.   I chose to get mad, but I reacted by voicing my disgust and joining the wave of honorable people that spoke out against them.  There are more of us than there are haters in that church and we too have a voice.  As the adage goes, fight fire with fire.  

We are involved in wars to give people the right to free speech.  We protest when our rights to free speech are challenged.  Today, we must rally around the world’s right to free speech, even if you don’t agree with the message.  Charlie Hebdo was quoted as saying, “I’d rather die standing than live on my knees."  Today, I am Charlie because I have the right to deliver a message.  And, as always, you have the right to tune me out or change the channel.  But today and every day, je suis Charlie.

Hope for a New Year

It’s been far too long since I last posted a blog.  I could give you a myriad of excuses for why I haven’t posted, but the fact of the matter is, I’d written so many posts that focused on negative things and events going on in this country, I’d simply lost hope. It’s a sad statement, but it seemed the country was going in the wrong direction, too many rude people, and other bad things that I just wondered, what’s the point?

Not long ago, one of my Scouts was trying to complete his Communications Merit Badge.  One requirement is to plan and prepare a script and serve as master-of-ceremonies for a troop program; this Scout chose to do a flag retirement ceremony to satisfy the requirement.

This young man is a very conscientious person and I expected him to do a good job of planning it.  He didn’t disappoint; he made sure that his ceremony was respectful and complied with all the rules of flag etiquette.  He’d even gone so far as to read the federal law (Chapter 1, Title 4 of the US Code) pertaining to the display and respect for the US Flag.

What surprised me was not his behavior, but the behavior of the other Scouts who participated in and observed the ceremony.  There was no talking, no horse-play, just sincere respect for the flag.  Even the younger Scouts, some of whom couldn’t sit still even if you stapled them to the chair, stood at rigid attention showing the proper respect.  No one had to tell them to behave or stand still or stop talking.  They recognized, of their own volition, that retiring the colors of this country deserves dignified and respectful behavior and they acted in such a manner.  If an 11-year-old can recognize when such behavior is warranted and behave appropriately without an adult reminding them, maybe there is hope for this country.

With the turn of the New Year, I hope to write more, especially more on positive subjects.  And I hope to make you, the reader, think more and inspire you to be an active participant, not a passive observer, in our communities, in politics, religion, and life, in general.

Happy New Year!

Habla Ingles?

A middle school principal in the Hempstead (Tx) Independent School District (ISD) has been fired for reportedly announcing over the school intercom that students were to refrain from speaking Spanish on school premises.  While some parents supported the principal, others have deemed her ban as racist.  Either way, it’s another sign of the divisiveness of the country.

One person interviewed during the controversy stated, “I think she [the principal] was trying to get the students to understand that they are being taught in English, their state testing is going to be given in English, all of their tests say you will answer in English.”  A mother of one of the Spanish-speaking students told KHOU 11 News that, “you’re handicapping our children. You’re telling them you can’t speak Spanish, and you can’t have anyone translating for you.”  But does a ban on speaking Spanish in school really handicap them?  Test scores would indicate that the answer is no.

According to the Texas Tribune, a nonpartisan, nonprofit media organization, the Hempstead ISD has approximately 1500 students.  Over 48% of the students are Hispanic.  Only 57% of the Hispanic students passed the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills standardized tests and 34% of Hempstead students were deemed college-ready in both math and English language arts; both results are below the state average.  Yet, Hempstead ISD spends more per student than the rest of the state.  Could poor language skills be the reason for poor test scores? And do the test scores matter?

Of all immigrants, those from Mexico are the largest group according to the Migration Policy Center.  Nearly 40% of Mexican immigrants worked in unskilled labor and were more likely to live below the poverty level than other immigrant groups. However, about 71% of all Mexican immigrants had limited English language skills, compared to 51% for all other immigrants.  Of the 10 largest immigrant groups, Mexican immigrants are the least assimilated, according to a Manhattan Institute study.

If immigrants can’t communicate in English, how can they acquire better skills, pursue higher education, or interact effectively with others?  The fact of the matter is, they can’t. And, quite often the burden falls on the rest of us.  Mexican immigrants are more likely to be on welfare, have a higher rate of teen pregnancies, and a higher rate of incarceration than any other immigrant group.  While those costs may be obvious, there are other hidden costs that we as consumers have to pay.

How many signs and labels do you see printed in both English and Spanish?  The printing isn’t free, so who pays for it? For every product you buy that has a bilingual label, the cost of that label is part of the price tag.  The price for every bilingual sign on a store front or advertisement is part of the price tag of the product or service you purchase.  It may only be a few pennies, but over time the costs adds up. And all consumers pay those costs, immigrants and native-born alike.

Was the principal being racist? Probably not, but she could have done a better job of communicating why she wanted students to speak English in school.  And if she truly wanted the students to become more fluent in English, then she’s simply being a good teacher; the more fluent they are, the better the test scores and the more opportunities for advanced education and employment.

As I did my research for this blog, I couldn’t help but wonder this; if an immigrant is unwilling to assimilate into American society, where does his or her allegiance lay?  Do they identify more with the country of birth or the United States?  If not with the US, then why are they here? George Washington, in his Farewell Address, wrote, “Citizens, by birth or choice, of a common country, that country has a right to concentrate your affections. The name of American, which belongs to you, in your national capacity, must always exalt the just pride of Patriotism, more than any appellation derived from local discriminations.” 

When large segments of the immigrant population fail to assimilate into American culture, there will be divisiveness. For as St. Augustine observed, “When men cannot communicate their thoughts to each other, simply because of difference in language, all the similarity of their common human nature is of no avail to unit them in fellowship.” Although no official language is mentioned or contemplated in the Constitution, English is the prime language of the US.  It’s time America became the melting pot again.

Poor Choices

Another post by John Galt

Recently, I read an article honoring people for performing acts of service to their communities.  It is inspiring that so many want to help those less fortunate.  One story caught my eye, not because of the honoree, but because the condition exists in this country—many kids in this country don’t have enough to eat.  The article honors the local churches that provide students on free lunch programs with food for the weekends.  Although they get breakfasts and lunches at school during the week, they may not have food over the weekend.  According to the US Department of Agriculture (www.fns.usda.gov), in 2013, almost 20 million students participate in the free lunch program.  The number has doubled since the 1980s.  I wonder if this is a measure of our country’s economy, or of people’s choices.

What would cause a family to live below the poverty line?  Well, if you get down to it, it is all about our choices.  In a society that rarely holds itself accountable; we blame others for our condition.  What if we saved up to go to college or to learn a trade rather than spending our money on cell phones and status, showy purchases?  What if you pursued a degree that is in demand and would afford a comfortable lifestyle rather than a degree that fills a square, but nothing more?  I’m not slamming history majors or psychology students, but without advanced degrees, what are your employment options?  In many cases, an in-demand junior college trade degree will give you earning potential and a flurry of employment offers at graduation.  Consider the value of your education dollar.  Have you seen what an electrician or plumber makes an hour?  And for half of what your bachelor’s degree in British Literature cost you.  Education opens doors to opportunity, probably more than any other factor.

We have to get past demanding instant gratification.  You don’t need the biggest, best, shiniest bauble in the store window.  You don’t need the latest iPhone.  Looking up the latest scores or notifying the world that you just stuffed your face at an expensive restaurant on your facebook page doesn’t have to happen right this second.  You don’t need a new car; you need a quality means of transportation.  Most $50 sneakers are just as good as the $200 brand.  Why pay $100 for a pair of jeans if you can buy quality below $20 a pair.  It’s a choice.  Credit card debt is not a badge of honor.  It is a strike against you and a notice that you are unable to manage your money.  Save up for something that matters, something that will improve your life, not just impress your friends.  Consider your needs, not your wants and make a choice. 

Personal choices aren’t just about money or education.  Teenage pregnancy alters your life by taking away choices.  Losing your virginity at an early age is not a badge of honor and it doesn’t define you as a man or as a woman.  Parenting responsibilities change your priorities and the course of your life. Oftentimes education has to wait while you work to feed your family.  Sometimes you just drop out of school and demands keep you from ever going back to school.  Some people choose drugs or alcohol over education or their job.  Addiction can consume them, destroying their health and their prospects.  Still, these are personal choices.

There are some factors that are out of our control such as the loss of manufacturing, technology and research jobs in this country, natural disasters like flood and drought, and crime.  We should honor those that render aid and those that pick themselves up, dust themselves off, and try again.  Americans are a resourceful lot.  I hope that our economy will recover and spawn new jobs that grow our economy.  I believe that we will always render aid to those affected by natural disaster and by crime. 

Notice that I didn’t say anything about anyone owing you anything or spreading the wealth.  I don’t agree with entitlements.  They make people weak and willing to accept handouts.  Reliance on handouts and entitlements will never lift you over the poverty level.  The math just doesn’t work.  Taking charge of your own destiny and self-reliance are the key to success.  That used to be an attribute of the American spirit.  Over the years, it has been replaced with political rhetoric creating a divisive mistrust between the haves and the have-nots.  Just as it is a crime to break into my house and steal my hard-earned money, it is a crime to force me to pay into entitlement programs.  I don’t get a say in either situation.

So, is it choices or the economy that determine the amount of poverty in this country?  Although the unemployment rate has declined in the last year, job growth isn’t in high-paying jobs; it is service industry and retail jobs.  These aren't the kind of jobs that grow the economy of a country.  A poor economy drives up crime rates and the use of drugs and alcohol.  Those factors either directly or indirectly affect our society. 

The answer to the causes of poverty in this country is not all one or the other.    Maybe the key is hope.  A society mired in a poor economy can lose hope and stop trying to succeed.  Without hope, people throw away their choices and search for an escape or instant gratification from shopping, sex, alcohol, and drugs.  Maybe without hope we just live for today and not for tomorrow.  Without hope, our society doesn’t aspire to something better or create opportunities to do great things.  We fail to look beyond the end of our nose.  Without economic growth, poverty will continue.  Distrust and dislike will grow between the perceived haves and have-nots, fueled by rhetoric and the media.  We have to stop this slow, painful demise of the American spirit before it is too late.