Category Archives: Uncategorized

My Views on the Amendments to the Florida State Constitution

The state of Florida has a provision by which laws can be added to the books by creating amendments to the state constitution that are voted on by the electorate. This is not without controversy as special interest groups will try to get an amendment passed by playing on emotions and taking advantage of the general population’s ignorance on a subject. Such was the case several years ago, when animal rights activist pushed through an amendment banning birthing cages for pregnant sows. Other times amendments are necessary to restrict the power of our elected officials, because there is a widespread mistrust in the ability of our elected officials to do the right thing no matter which party they represent. Such is the case with some of the amendments presented here. This election cycle there are twelve proposed amendments on the ballot which is why this post is so long.  I am not an expert in legalese, this is my understanding of what these bills mean. In the interest of inspiring my readers to think for themselves, I have given the reasons why I am voting the way I am, along with some valid reasons why you may vote differently. If you want to see the exact wording of the proposed amendments and get eyestrain and a headache in the process (you’re welcome) I encourage you to check out this website.

Placed on ballot by State Legislature
It will provide many middle-class homeowners with a tax break. It will force local governments to be fiscally responsible and to find other sources of revenue such as user fees and sales taxes. These alternate sources of funding are fairer than property taxes because they spread the burden to those who actually use the services, and to all residents and visitors of a community, including renters and temporary residents.
This law will decrease property tax revenue to local governments. You may feel that state laws should only be enacted by the State Legislature, not by amendments to the state constitution.

Placed on ballot by State Legislature
This would extend an already existing tax break due to expire in 2019. At first I was against this amendment but I have since changed my mind (we women can do that you know). Letting the tax break expire, would make property taxed go up for small business owners and landlords.  The increase would then be passed on to renters and would make rents prohibitively  high for the people who can least afford expensive rents.  There is already a shortage of affordable rental properties and this would make it worse. It would hurt small business owners making it harder for them to hire and expand.I know it is very Liberal of me to oppose a tax break, but here is my justification. First of all,  (FYI, I don’t believe luxury items should be subject to special taxes either). From what I could see, if the existing exemption expires, there is nothing in existing law that would prohibit local governments from implementing their own tax incentives to commercial entities to entice them to move into their territory, or to stay. BTW, neither amendment 1 or 2 affect school tax assessments.
WHY YOU MAY WANT TO VOTE NO                                                                                                 You may feel that since this amendment does not apply to homestead exemptions it is not a necessary tax break. It applies to commercial properties and second homes. You may feel the ownership of secondary homes or vacation properties is a luxury and it seems unethical to provide a tax break for luxury items. It will decrease the revenue for local governments


Placed on ballot by citizen’s initiative
I’m kind of neutral when it comes to gambling. I can see both the pros and cons. This amendment will put the control of casino gambling in the hands of the voters, where it should be, instead of deep pocketed lobbyists. Usually I feel most laws should be enacted by the Legislature, but casino gambling is a very divisive subject and the lobby for it is very well-funded, making the corruption of our representative more likely. Basically, I don’t think they can be trusted to uphold the will of the people on this one.
You would enjoy having a casino closer to home. It could bring revenue to local government entities possibly lowering taxes. You may feel that state laws should only be enacted by the State Legislature, not by amendments to the state constitution.

Placed on ballot by citizen’s initiative
This amendment would restore voting rights to nonviolent former felons. While I support giving not violent felons their voting rights back, the support of this bill by far-left groups such as the ACLU and the Southern Poverty Law Center, make me suspicious of its true motives. This law is more about increasing the voting base of the Democratic Party than fairness. In a different political climate, I might have been in favor of this.
You feel it is unfair to restrict the voting rights of nonviolent offenders after they have paid their debt to society.

Placed on ballot by Florida Legislature
This bill would require a two-thirds majority of the legislature to pass bills that would increase state taxes or fees. This law would force the Legislature to be more responsible fiscally. In the unfortunate likelihood that Andrew Gillum becomes governor, making it harder to raise taxes or fund entitlement programs will become imperative. This law is opposed by the far left, Southern Poverty Law Center.
This bill may make it difficult for the State Legislature to raise needed revenue. You feel that state laws should only be enacted by the State Legislature, not by amendments to the state constitution.

Placed on ballot by Constitutional Revision Commission appointed by the State Legislature
This is the first of several bundled bills on this ballot. That would make me likely to vote no on all of them, but since I actually support each separate provision in this bill, I am in favor of it. This bill protects the rights and safety of crime victims. Increases the mandatory retirement age of judges and prohibits judges from deferring to government agencies to interpret the law. I suggest that you read the complete wording that enumerates all the rights of victims here,
as it is too lengthy to explain in detail. I don’t think a competent judge is going to become incompetent just because he is five years older, and it is the job of judges to interpret the law, not non-judicial government agencies. This amendment is opposed by the ACLU and the Southern Poverty Law Center which is a good reason to support it.
You think it is stupid to bundle unrelated items into one amendment in order to confuse voters and ensure the passage of unpopular portions of a bill. You feel that state laws should only be enacted by the State Legislature, not by amendments to the state constitution.
You think 75 is too old to be a judge. You think that judges should not be restricted on the resources they use to interpret the law.

Placed on ballot by Constitutional Revision Commission appointed by the State Legislature
This is another bundled amendment, but since I support all the provisions in it, I support it. This bill would grant death benefits and educational expense wavers to survivors of first responders and military members killed in the line of duty. It also requires a supermajority vote by university trustees and board of governors to impose fees. It also established the state college system as a constitutional entity. I support giving benefits to first responder survivors. I admit, that as a spouse of a first responder and retired Air Force Master Sergeant, I may be a bit biased, but I feel that if the tax payers of the state of Florida approve this bill, it shows that they are grateful to the deceased and their surviving families for their sacrifice and service. I hope and pray that I will never have to be a recipient of that gratitude. Providing governance and structure to the state college system will ensure consistency and making it more difficult to raise fees will help to make higher education more affordable. I do wish however that the bill applied to tuition as well as fees.
You feel that survivors’ benefits for military families at the state level are redundant since the federal government already pays them. You feel that survivors’ benefits for first responders creates another entitlement program. You feel that the control of state colleges should remain at the local level. You think it is stupid to bundle unrelated items into one amendment in order to confuse voters and insure the passage of unpopular portions of a bill. You feel that state laws should only be enacted by the State Legislature, not by amendments to the state constitution.

The Florida State Supreme Court determined that this amendment did not qualify for ballot.
(though they appear on the ballot, the other “bundled” amendments may suffer the same fate)

Placed on ballot by Constitutional Revision Commission appointed by the State Legislature
This amendment prohibits oil and gas drilling in state-owned waters, and it prohibits vaping in enclosed indoor workplaces. First of all, I hate vaping. While at present there is no conclusive evidence that vaping is as harmful as cigarette smoking, there is no evidence that it isn’t, either. Most of the juices smell sickening sweet, and I would hate to be sitting next to someone at a restaurant or sporting event who’s puffing that stinky white steam my way. Still, I don’t think a constitutional amendment was the way to go here. Until there is conclusive evidence of the harm of second-hand vapor (like there is with cigarettes), vaping restrictions should be left up to local governments. Nevertheless, because I strongly support the other provision in this amendment, I will vote yes on it. I am not inherently anti oil company or anti drilling. I believe in energy independence as a matter of national security, and there should be, with reasonable restrictions, drilling on public lands. While all oil spills incur varying degrees of environmental damage, spills in the ocean or inland waterways are especially devastating. A spill off the Florida coast, or one of its rivers or lakes would take a nearly incalculable toll on the environment and the economy of the state. It has been my observation that the big oil companies are either unable or unwilling to devote the necessary resources to develop more effective ways to mitigate the damaged caused by large-scale oil spills. The responses always seem to be too little and too late to stop massive destruction. Therefore, until the oil companies show a greater willingness to prevent and mitigate spills, I oppose drilling in those places. At first this might seem to be a liberal stance, but as a Christian, I believe that we have a divine responsibility to be good stewards of this earth G-d blessed us with. Good stewardship is a decidedly conservative attitude, but that is a subject for another blog post.
You believe that offshore drilling will lead to lower fuel prices and increased energy independence. You believe that offshore drilling will bring more jobs to the state and be a boon to the economy. You own stock in or are employed by an oil company. You enjoy vaping in public places and want to continue to do so. You think it is stupid to bundle unrelated items into one amendment in order to confuse voters and ensure the passage of unpopular portions of a bill. You feel that state laws should only be enacted by the State Legislature, not by amendments to the state constitution.

Placed on ballot by Constitutional Revision Commission appointed by the State Legislature
This amendment makes a state Department of Veteran’s Affairs a constitutional requirement.
It creates an Office of Domestic Security and Counterterrorism within the Department of Law Enforcement. It ensures the election in all Florida counties of Sheriffs, Property Appraisers, Supervisors of Elections, Tax Collectors, and Clerks of Court, and removes the counties’ ability to abolish, change the term or transfer the duties of these elected offices. This is another bill with too many unrelated moving parts. I have some mixed feelings about the issues in this bill. Florida already has a Department of Veteran’s Affairs and I do not oppose making it permanent. I don’t necessarily oppose creating an Office of Domestic Security, though there will be the issue of how to fund it. I support preserving the rights of county citizens to vote for the various county offices, rather than have them appointed by the powers that be.
The amendment doesn’t specify how to fund the Office of Domestic Security and Counterterrorism. The amendment removes the ability of smaller counties to consolidate elected offices. You think it is stupid to bundle unrelated items into one amendment in order to confuse voters and ensure the passage of unpopular portions of a bill. You feel that state laws should only be enacted by the State Legislature, not by amendments to the state constitution.

Placed on ballot by Constitutional Revision Commission appointed by the State Legislature
This amendment repeals the ban on owning property by persons ineligible to become citizens and, removes wording for a repealed constitutional requirement for high-speed rail systems. This bill will mean that suspects will be prosecuted under the new provisions of a law if the law has been changed before the suspect is brought to trial. It allows for the prosecution of a crime committed before the repeal of a criminal statute. I feel that the ban on aliens owning property should remain. I think the states should have the right to restrict the ownership of real property by those who for whatever reason are ineligible for citizenship. I agree with removing the wording for the requirement for high-speed rail systems. This requirement has been repealed and never should have been an amendment in the first place. It seems fair to me that if the law changes before you are brought to trial, that you be tried under the new provisions. However, this amendment is supported by the ACLU and the Southern Poverty Law Center and that makes me suspicious of it.
You feel that ownership of real property should not be restricted. You feel the wording removing the requirement for high-speed rail should be removed. You think it is stupid to bundle unrelated items into one amendment in order to confuse voters and ensure the passage of unpopular portions of a bill. You feel that state laws should only be enacted by the State Legislature, not by amendments to the state constitution.

Placed on ballot by Constitutional Revision Commission appointed by the State Legislature
This amendment restricts public officers from serving as paid lobbyist and further restricts former public officers from serving as paid lobbyists until 6 years after leaving office. It prohibits pubic officials from using their office for personal gain. This amendment helps to ensure that public officials remain accountable to the people who elect them, not special interest groups who pay them to lobby.
You feel that 6 years is too long for an official to be prohibited from lobbying after leaving office. You feel that state laws should only be enacted by the State Legislature, not by amendments to the state constitution.

Placed on ballot by Constitutional Revision Commission appointed by the State Legislature
This is a tricky one. This amendment will end by 2020, dog racing connected with wagering. When I think of the kind of people who would enjoy gambling on a dog race, I’m reminded of the kind of people who enjoy wagering on cock fights or dog fights. Dog racing is cruel. The dogs suffer frequent serious injuries and are kept in inhumane conditions. The revenues dog racing brings in are not sufficient justification for this kind of activity.
WHY YOU MAY VOTE NO Many people feel that this phrase in the amendment”-The humane treatment of animals is a fundamental value of the people of the State of Florida.”, leaves an open door for animal rights groups to argue that hunting, fishing, horse-racing, rodeos, basically anything the group feels is cruel, could be declared unconstitutional.  I don’t see it that way.  I see that phrase as an explanation as to why dog racing is cruel.



Truth, Justice and the American Way

In the title of my blog, you know exactly what you are going to get.  This isn’t a news site, or an educational reference blog.  Though I would like to be, I am not a journalist. I am exactly what the title says, a middle-aged housewife opining on the state of the world today.  Nevertheless, I try to be truthful in what I have to say, to back up my opinions with facts whenever possible.  It’s not enough to just be opinionated, I need to be at least somewhat educated about the things I post about. I think there is power in the truth, and right now in this country it is in very short supply.

One thing the left does with expert precision is distort the truth. Very rarely do we catch them in an outright lie or fabrication.  Instead they selectively edit, use half-truths, and provocative headlines to manipulate the facts to support their narrative. They repeat inflammatory talking points over and over, until the naive and uneducated believe them as fact.  This is what we have come to expect from the Leftists, unfortunately many of us on the Right have been playing the same game.38273577_2067012506936032_4601916191894667264_o

Memes like this circulate regularly on social media sites.  It distorts the truth.  While President Trump has indeed donated his first quarter 2018 salary to the Department of Veteran’s Affairs, he did not designate it to go rebuilding military cemeteries.  “So what?” You might ask. “The spirit of the statement was true, what does it matter if the details are a little off”.  It matters because the truth is the most powerful tool we have.  In this era of,   academic indoctrination,”fake news”, politically correct “double speak”, and even the manipulation of algorithms to effectively censor conservative viewpoints, the truth matters more than ever.  As Conservatives and especially as Christians, we have a responsibility to evaluate what we post and share carefully.  To the best of your ability, vet the websites you use, to make sure they are factual and trustworthy.  Remember if the post or meme elicits a strong emotional response, whether you agree with it, or it makes you angry, the creator of it might just be trying to manipulate you.

The Contradiction of Trump Support

Donald Trump

Donald Trump attends the Hank’s Yanks 1st Annual Golf Classic at Trump Golf Links on Monday, July 6, 2015, in New York. (Photo by Greg Allen/Invision/AP


I’ll be the first to admit, I am not a fan of Donald Trump. He says and Tweets cringe worthy things everyday. He steps right into the traps the Leftist media sets for him, then walks back what he said. No, he is not a paragon of virtue, a bastion of integrity or a fountain of wisdom, and the Left feasts on these flaws the way buzzards swarm around road kill. The leftist media pour over every statement, every tweet, every post ready to skewer and slander the President in ways they never would have considered had he been a Liberal Progressive.

Whenever there is interaction between Leftists and Conservatives there is an incredulity in the way the Leftist approaches the conversation. Even if they don’t say it, the question is there,”how can you possibly support such a man?” They are asking the wrong question.

They should be asking, “what is so wrong with leftist ideology that rational, moral, intelligent people would rather support someone like Donald Trump than that ideology?”

I don’t support President Trump by overlooking his many character flaws, I support him because the Leftist agenda is so immoral, so corrupt, so wrong for our country and indeed the world, that I have no choice.

Gun Control, Divided We Fall

I am disgusted. After seventeen people lost their lives last week at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, We lost our collective minds….again. From news headlines to social media posts, pundits and politicians, everyone has something to say. Whether Democrat or Republican, Conservative or Liberal Progressive, most of what’s being posted is nothing more than ignorant emotionally charged talking points, none of it promoting anything truly objective or useful. The Far Left uses every mass shooting as a platform to push their anti-gun agenda. The ultimate, though unstated, goal of which is to eliminate the private ownership of all firearms. The Far Right then pushes back, hiding behind the Second Amendment, to push it’s ultimate, though unstated, goal of complete and unrestricted access to all firearms. Most of us don’t espouse either extreme, but we lean Left or Right. It seems no one is centrist in this debate, though many claim to be. There are valid points and arguments on both sides, but we have dug in our heels, armed ourselves with our favorite talking points and have stopped listening to each other. The sad outcome of this obstinacy will be more needlessly lost lives.

To restore some reason and civility to this debate, both sides must accept some inevitable truths. Those of us on the Right must realize that the majority of Americans support universal background checks. Many also support expanding the minimum purchase age to include shotguns and rifles. It is inevitable that there will be change to gun control policy. Rather than opposing this change outright, we should take control of the narrative. We should support legislation that prevents the dangerously mentally ill from obtaining firearms, without restricting the rights of law-abiding adult citizens to purchase them.

Those on the Left like to hold the rest of the world up as the paragon of virtue when it comes to the possession of firearms. They must understand that the United States is unique in its treatment of firearms ownership. The United States is one of only three countries that has a Constitutional right to gun ownership. It was the first to protect this right in its founding documents, and the only one that has no Constitutional restrictions against it. Second Amendment proponents understand that this amendment has nothing to do with hunting. It has to do with a citizen’s right to protect himself and his property. Whether it is from an intruder or an overreaching tyrannical government. This amendment protects the tools by which we can defend liberty. Liberty for everyone, Right, Left or somewhere in between. The only way the Second Amendment will ever be repealed is with a bloodbath that will forever split out nation in two. Is that what you really want the ultimate legacy of the Liberal Progressive movement to be?

Here are my personal positions on this issue. I’m pretty sure Leftists will hate them, and Conservatives will think I’m selling out, but this is just common sense to me.

I support universal background checks with an exception for guns willed to or gifted to family members. However, the law should hold responsible family members who knowingly buy guns for another family member who wouldn’t pass a background check.

I support increasing the age to purchase a rifle or shotgun from eighteen to twenty one. The law should apply only to the purchase of a weapon. Persons under the age of twenty one should be allowed to posses and use a firearm under the supervision of an adult.

I support training in firearms operation, safety, maintenance and law. I would not oppose this being mandatory for the purchase of a firearm.

I support the banning of “bump stocks”.

I support increased funding to diagnose and treat the mentally ill. While compassion for mentally ill persons is important, when it comes to firearms, the safety of the patient and the public should be the main concerns. However to protect the rights of a patient, a person would have to be declared unfit to possess a firearm by a licensed mental health professional.

I support holding accountable the agencies responsible for performing the background checks for gun ownership. I also support holding accountable the agencies that fail to report dangerous individuals. The inability or unwillingness of these agencies to enforce the already existing gun laws is a great threat to public safety and will render any reform of gun law useless.

I oppose the banning of so-called “assault style” weapons. This is an unquantifiable term that concerns the cosmetics of a weapon rather than its action. It is a term meant to play on the emotions of people unfamiliar with firearms.

I oppose the banning of high-capacity magazines. It places an unnecessary restriction on law-abiding gun owners, and a well-trained marksman can change magazines fast enough to make such a ban useless. Again, it is a knee jerk reaction, meant to play on the emotions.

I oppose any form of gun registry or database of gun owners. To require gun owners to register their firearms and to maintain a database of those persons and their residences goes completely against the spirit and purpose of the Second Amendment.

Hell Hath No Fury

A little advice for all you men out there. Never, and I mean NEVER, mistake a woman’s silence for acceptance, approval, or agreement. It is a woman’s nature to talk about an issue, sometimes infuriatingly so, until she deems the problem solved. The solution will almost always require some sort of action on the part of the man, a change of habit, a change of attitude, an apology, or just listening and respecting her feelings on a subject. If you disagree with her, she wants an explanation, why you feel the way you do about a subject.  To her, discussion is intimacy, because she loves you, she wants to know what makes you tick, and she assumes that because you love her, you want to know what’s on her mind as well. To a woman, ignoring her or dropping the subject is the same as saying “you do not matter to me”.  You may think the silence is a welcome break from all the nagging and yammering, but trust me it is not. If a woman feels that talking about an issue is no longer productive, she hasn’t changed her mind, she has written you off, and if this is a woman you want in your life, this is not some place you want to be. It means that there is a hurricane churning and building strength out there on the horizon and you do not want to be on the beach when that baby hits land.

With Liberty and Justice for All Ted Eytan from Washington, DC, USA [CC BY-SA 2.0 (], via Wikimedia Commons

Veritas, as a Conservative and a Christian, there is no higher moral imperative than to seek out the truth. Even when it doesn’t gel with my preconceived notions about the world and my place in it, undeniable truth must be accepted. Personal integrity, and personal responsibility are the defining values for most Conservatives.  It is what the left both admires and fears in us.  To us, truth matters, character matters, justice matters. We play fair, we play by the rules.  To the Progressives, Conservative support of Donald Trump just doesn’t make sense.  He has fudged the truth on many occasions.  He says and tweets cringe worthy statements on a daily basis. He’s arrogant and petulant.  He displayed a litany of character imperfections throughout his campaign, and continues to display them into his presidency.   The Progressive Left is still in denial about President Trump’s election.  Taking to the streets, and the airwaves, in a mass panic they think that by declaring that he is “not their President” they can make him run, tail between his legs, from office.  “How?” they demand,  “How, could sane, rational people ever elect a man as flawed as Donald Trump?”  They are asking the wrong question.

What they should be asking is, “What is so wrong with the Progressive Left philosophy, that the vast geographical majority of the nation would rather have a flawed and divisive man like Donald Trump to lead us, than someone who espouses leftist ideology?”  The answer is liberty.  The conservative knows that without the freedom to reap the benefits, or consequences, of one’s actions, one can never achieve the quality of character necessary to prosper.  Progressives simply don’t get this.  The Conservative understands that most hard-working, everyday American citizens, regardless of their political proclivities, want the same thing.  To prosper in a safe, peaceful country.   The Conservative believes that our rights are inborn, a product of a Creator God or natural law, and the duty of government is to ensure that everyone who is willing to work hard enough, and abide by the rule of law, has the opportunity to pursue the course of his or her choice.  There is room for differing opinions, differing philosophies and beliefs.  Success and prosperity will mean different things to different people, so some will choose careers that are lucrative, while others will choose careers that are personally rewarding.  Our success will depend on the choices we make, and while some may not ever achieve prosperity, no one has a right to another’s earnings.  Charity is always on the terms of the giver.  The Progressive, however, believes that our rights are granted by the government and absolute equality must be guaranteed.  No matter what your choices or character, you are entitled to the same level of prosperity as everyone else, no more, no less.  Charity should always be on the terms of the needy.  Because there will always be those who prosper more than others, and their generosity cannot be guaranteed, the Progressive believes that the duty of government is to distribute the wealth evenly to everyone within the country’s borders.  The Progressive does not or cannot understand that to deprive a man or woman of their earnings to supply someone else, is theft at the most basic and personal level.  President Trump understands this, and so far his policies are in line with this basic Conservative philosophy.  That is why Conservatives are willing to grit their teeth and bear his obvious moral failings and support him.

What we Conservatives need to understand is that this election was not about putting a “Donald Trump” in the White House. It was about restoring our national culture. It is our duty to expose the hypocrisy and danger of the Progressive left agenda. To do this, we need to claim the moral high ground. We need to show, in our actions and interactions, as we go through our day, that Conservatism truly is the way to peace and prosperity.  We need to show that there is room at the Conservative table for everyone, regardless of your sexual persuasion, personal wealth, or religious beliefs.  That your personal liberty and dignity will always be respected so long as you are willing to respect the same for any other human being. We cannot do this if we are always on the defensive.  We need to educate ourselves, and shut down any attempts by the Left to erroneously label us as homophobes, Islamaphobes, racists, and any other unjustified monikers. We need to reveal their talking points for what they are, mindless, baseless accusations.  We also need to quit making excuses for President Trump when he makes inaccurate statements.  For better or worse, he represents Conservatism to the world.  We put him in office, and we must hold him accountable.

Just Say’in

Isn’t it ironic that the same people who call Creationists and Global Warming doubters, “science deniers”, are the same people who think gender is a social construct, and a fetus isn’t alive until it exits the vagina.

Let Cooler Minds Prevail

On October 24, 1929, the stock market fell. Millions of people panicked and rushed to remove their money from the banks, fueling the worst economic collapse in our nation’s history. Millions were left destitute and in despair. On January 30, 1933, a man came to power in Germany who, without any real evidence to back his theories, convinced the masses that an entire ethnic group, was intellectually inferior and morally evil. Millions of Jews were horribly massacred as a result. On September 11, 2001, a handful of people, convinced, by the propaganda of their religion, that a country whose culture they did not understand, was a great evil. Thousands died that day. In the aftermath, the fear and uncertainty caused the stock market to fall again. On November 4, 2008, a man who had little qualification or experience in leadership, was elected head of the most powerful nation on earth, by convincing millions of Americans that wealth is a finite resource, jealously hoarded by a few at the expense of the many. He promoted the ideal that those who sought destroy our nation were not evil, only misunderstood, and that a kinder, gentler America could make them our allies. He beguiled the masses with the promise of “hope and change” and that everyone could live free of worry and want. The result has been 8 years of declined job opportunities, and economic downturns. Our enemies are growing bolder. The country is more divided now, racially, economically, and socially, that at any time since the Civil War.

The thread that ties all these events together is that they were all fueled by negative emotions. Angry, fearful, and desperate, mass hysteria is a dangerous and powerful thing that almost always leads to disaster. Judging by the climate of this year’s election, we have learned little from history.

It’s ironic that as individuals, we can be thoughtful and intelligent. Using logic and reason to guide our decisions. But put us in a crowd, and we deteriorate to “group think”, and will seek a leader who seems most likely to provide us with comfort and security. This herd mentality makes us easy to manipulate. All a politician has to do is promise us a society where we can become prosperous by doing less, protection from our worst fears, or relief from what angers us. Our Founding Fathers were excellent studies of human nature, and that is why our system of Government never was, isn’t, and should never become, a democracy.

You heard me right. In spite of what you have been taught in public school, we are not a democracy. In a true democracy, every person gets a vote on every issue, and the majority wins. Could you imagine what a logistic nightmare that would be? Our form of government is a Constitutional Republican Federation. That means that we elect persons to represent us at all levels of government, and those elected persons are bound by the limits defined in The Constitution. I know we all know that, but do you understand why this form of government is preferable to a true democracy? Logistically it is certainly more efficient, but there is a more important reason.

To understand how our government is supposed to work, you first have to understand the origin of our rights. Our founders did not believe, that the government granted us our rights. They believed that the rights listed in the Declaration of Independence were endowed upon every individual at birth, either through the Divine Providence of a Creator, or by Natural Law. By enumerating them in the Bill of Rights, our Founders intended to make the Government, and therefore our Representatives, responsible for protecting those rights. It’s vital to understand that the Bill of Rights pertains to the rights of the individual, not the rights of society. The concept of “we the people”, meaning the vast majority, was not what the Founders had in mind. One of the purposes of the Constitution was to protect the individual from the whims of the masses. In order to make our government more accountable to the individual, all powers not necessary to good order and security were supposed to be maintained by the states. The states would then elect their own legislatures, giving a greater voice to the residents of that state, and further diluting the power of the Federal Government. For Federal offices the states divided into districts, electing to the House of Representatives, people who were familiar with the needs of that district. An unscrupulous politician who was able to manipulate one district would not do as much damage as one who represented an entire state. Hoping to protect the individual from the oppression of mob rule, representatives to the Senate would be elected by each state’s legislature. Bet you didn’t know that. The people now elect senators, but this was not what the Founders intended. They were very concerned about mass hysteria infecting Federal Elections so in order to protect the nation from a political popularity contest, the Founders created the Electoral College. The way it works is a little to complex to explain here, but the purpose was to ensure that only a well qualified person was elected to the Office of the President. Here’s something else you probably didn’t know, we do not have a Constitutional right to vote for president. The president was supposed to be elected by the Electoral College, not the people. Laws pertaining to the voting rights of women, black people and people eighteen and over, were added as amendments many years later.

It’s a shame that we haven’t taken the time to read and understand our own founding documents. If we had, we would see just how watered down they have become and how our rights have been water down as a result. Our Founding Fathers were wise men that foresaw the disaster awaiting us this election year and tried to protect us from it. We didn’t listen, we didn’t learn, and now the inevitable collision between the Socialist Subway and the Trump Train will leave us all battered and bloody just suspended his campaign and effectively denied us of the only hope we have of restoring the nation. For the first time since I turned 18, I truly feel that my vote doesn’t matter, because no matter who the democratic candidate is, our only choice really is between a giant douche and a turd sandwich. We are sooooo screwed

Think Before You Vote

There’s a lot of bickering back and forth in the Republican party right now. Those in the RNC would be wise to consider a few things. First of all, there are a lot of conservatives who don’t care if the Republican party is being split. It’s not the party we’re concerned with, it’s the country. Those of us who call ourselves Conservatives,(Republican or not) would also be wise to consider a few things. Donald Trump and Ben Carson were not the only non-establishment candidates. Ted Cruz is first of all a Constitutionalist. He has proven that he will take on the establishment if they are pushing an agenda that goes against the Constitution. He is intelligent, well spoken and sure of his facts. If Donald Trump had never decided to run, many of the same Conservatives who are so suspicious of Cruz now, would have been quick to jump on the Cruz bandwagon. There’s been nothing new or sinister that has come out about Cruz, that wasn’t already common knowledge before he became a candidate. The only thing different is that Trump is in the race and he is good at working and audience. Yes, there are some things to question about Cruz, his wife’s involvement in Goldman-Sacs, his Canadian birth, his campaign shenanigans. But all those things are no worse than things in Trump’s recent past. Things his supporters are quick to dismiss. Make no mistake, Trump may not be an establishment candidate, but he is a skilled politician. He changes his statements to pander to whatever crowd he’s trying to impress. His business record contains as many failures as successes. Not everything in his hands turns to gold. Think long and hard about the damage that has been done to our county’s image by the Obama regime. Now ask yourself if Donald Trump is really the best choice to redeem it. If you’re truly being objective, then you would have to say no.

%d bloggers like this: