Are Progressive Democrats Using Welfare to Keep Black Americans in Poverty?

My Fellow Americans,

I want to speak with you today about what I believe has lead to the demise of many black Americans and the black culture in general. I’m sick of the way black Americans are treated and how they’re viewed as the stereotypical welfare recipient.

The Refounding Father will defend and support those that don’t have the ability to do so themselves. The government is using black Americans as a fundamental means of furthering the progressive agenda of the Democratic (and yes, even Republican) party.

I firmly support and believe in the right of all Americans to pursue their happiness – it is an inalienable right. However, I don’t believe it’s the government’s job to fund that happiness. I also don’t believe that comments like that of Andre Bauer, lieutenant governor of South Carolina, have any place in the discussion either.

In case you missed it, here is what Bauer had to say regarding government assistance to the poor: "My grandmother was not a highly educated woman, but she told me as a small child to quit feeding stray animals. You know why? Because they breed! You're facilitating the problem if you give an animal or a person ample food supply. They will reproduce, especially ones that don't think too much further than that."

While I do not support what Bauer said, I will attempt to decipher what he meant. Basically, Bauer was saying that welfare only leads to more welfare. If you keep feeding a stray, you make them dependent on you. Then, if they reproduce, their offspring are dependent on you too. What you end up with is a continuous cycle of dependency and an inability for people to fend for themselves.

It is greatly troubling to me that many people continue to believe that it is the government's job (and, therefore, the taxpayers' job) to take care of us financially. We have grown up in a culture where that is what is expected and that is what we know. I am here to tell you today that it's time to put an end to it.

No more welfare. No more bailouts -- for anybody. It's time for people to once again be responsible for themselves. It doesn't matter whether you are poor or whether you worked all your life and lost all your money in your retirement account. It is not the government's job (or the taxpayers' job) to provide your happiness -- only to get out of your way and make sure nobody hinders your pursuit.

Welfare is the greatest money pit in the world. Speaking of "money pits," have you ever seen the movie with the namesake? Well, in the movie, a young married couple poors their life savings into a beat up old house. And seemingly everywhere they turn something goes wrong -- the stairs collapse, the roof is leaking, the heater is broken, etc.

Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but how does that not describe MOST government-run programs (i.e. Social Security, Medicare, the welfare system)? The government throws the money of hardworking taxpaying Americans into a bottomless pit in the name of "helping those who are less fortunate." Meanwhile, the "bones" of these programs are wobbling, their foundations faulty, and the structure of each program itself is a pigeon dropping away from collapsing.

In the guise of political correctness, people tend to stay away from topics like welfare and poverty – unless they are talking about instituting ANOTHER government program. I’m saying that it is these very programs that are implemented that are designed to keep people poor – a classic progressive and Democratic strategy. Democrats want to keep people poor in order to promise them these great programs to help them escape poverty. This ensures these people will continue to vote for them.

Unfortunately, for the black Americans, they are the target of the "charity" of progressive Democrats. I know -- you don’t believe me. That’s why I prepared for this argument.

To help explain this belief, let me throw some statistics and research your way:

1. A 2008 estimate of the United States population from Census.gov puts us at over 304 million people. Of those 304 million, white persons who are not hispanic accounted for 65.6% (199 million), 12.8% (39 million) are black, and 15.4% (47 million) are of hispanic or latino origin.

2. According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, "One in three food stamp households is headed by an African American. More than a third of food stamp benefits — over $10 billion per year — are issued to African-Americans." Furthermore, "Nearly 9 million African Americans receive food stamps each month. This represents a quarter of the African American population."

3. In its 2008 Annual Report to the U.S. Congress, the Health and Human Services Department (HHS) cited Indicators of Welfare Dependence. In its review, HHS found that "Among racial and ethnic groups, Non-Hispanic Blacks were more likely to be welfare dependent (10.2 percent) than were Non-Hispanic Whites (2.2 percent) or Hispanics of any race (5.7 percent)." Furthermore, "Among age categories, children from birth to 5 years of age were more likely to live in families that were welfare dependent than were children of other age categories." And finally, "Among family types, persons living in female-headed families were more likely to be welfare dependent than those in other family categories."

4. This leads me to an article published in the American Sociological Review by Steven Ruggles, Professor of History and Population Studies at the University of Minnesota and the Director of the Minnesota Population Center. The article, titled "The Origins of the African-American Family Structure," explains that "From 1880 to 1960, black children were two to three times more likely to reside without one or both parents than were white children."  (Note: If you're having trouble reading the Ruggles article, try saving it to your desktop first).

5. From there, Ruggles builds the case toward how the living arrangements of children should be the focal point when considering the differences between blacks and whites in family structure. In his research, Ruggles found that in 1880, 70% of black children lived in households with both parents compared to 87% for white children. In 1980, however, we saw that same number decrease to only 47% for blacks. The same number stayed roughly the same at 84% for whites.

6. When taking into account households with a single parent, 13% of black children lived in households with their mother only in 1880. That number in 1980 for blacks -- 37%, while only 11.7% for white children. These statistics offered by Ruggles cite that single parent households are a fundamental factor when considering differences in the households of children. The numbers speak for themselves and provide a historical perspective.

7. Per the May 23, 2001 Heritage Foundation article titled "Understanding Differences in Black and White Child Poverty Rates," by Robert Rector, Kirk A. Johnson, and Patrick F. Fagan, "In 1999, according to the U.S. Bureau of the Census, 33.1 percent of black children lived in poverty compared with 13.5 percent of white children."

8. Reasons for this vast difference are similar to what Ruggles explains above, including the fact that "Black American children are more likely to live in poverty than are white children, primarily because black children are far more likely to live in single-parent families and to be on welfare." Also, "Black and white Americans differ dramatically in marriage patterns and welfare dependence. In 1999, 68.8 percent of black American children were born out of wedlock. By contrast, the out-of-wedlock birth rate for white Americans was 26.7 percent. Similarly, black children were five times more likely to be dependent on welfare from the Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) program than white children. Since single parenthood and welfare dependence are the primary factors producing child poverty in the United States, any meaningful strategy to reduce the disparities in black and white child poverty must focus on increasing marriage and reducing welfare dependence among blacks."

9. According to a June 5, 1996 article by Robert E. Rector and Patrick F. Fagan of the Heritage Foundation, titled "How Welfare Harms Kids," welfare actually "has ended up damaging and abusing the very children it was intended to save. The welfare system has failed because the ideas upon which it was founded are flawed. The current system is based on the assumption that higher welfare benefits and expanded welfare eligibility are good for children. According to this theory, welfare reduces poverty, and so will increase children's lifetime well-being and attainment. This is untrue. Higher welfare payments do not help children; they increase dependence and illegitimacy, which have a devastating effect on children's development."

10. The article goes on to explain that: "It is welfare dependence, not poverty, that has the most negative effect on children. Recent research by Congressional Budget Office Director June O'Neill shows that increasing the length of time a child spends on welfare may reduce the child's IQ by as much as 20 percent. Welfare dependency as a child has a negative effect on the earnings and employment capacity of young men. The more welfare income received by a boy's family during his childhood, the lower the boy's earnings will be as an adult, even when compared to boys in families with identical non-welfare income."

11. Also according to the article: "Welfare also plays a powerful role in promoting illegitimacy. Research by CBO Director O'Neill also shows, for example, that a 50 percent increase in monthly [Aid to Families with Dependent Children] AFDC and food stamp benefit levels will cause a 43 percent increase in the number of illegitimate births within a state. Illegitimacy, in turn, has an enormous negative effect on children's development and on their behavior as adults. Being born outside of marriage and raised in single parent homes: (1) Triples the level of behavioral and emotional problems among children; (2) Nearly triples the level of teen sexual activity; (3) Doubles the probability a young woman will have children out of wedlock; and, (4) Doubles the probability a boy will become a threat to society, engage in criminal activity, and wind up in jail."

Did you get all that?

To summarize the points above, the reason the welfare rolls primarily include blacks comes down to one basic element -- the government's distruction of the black culture. The combination of the black culture (mainly the single mother household and welfare dependence) coupled with the government's need to keep black people in poverty provides the perfect formula for continual dependence. We do not need more welfare. That is what Bauer was trying to say in a not-so-subtle way.

We need to remember who we are, America. We need to remember that we employ the government -- they work for us. We need to remember that it is not up to our neighbor or the government to provide for us. That burden rests solely on the person who looks back at you in the mirror.

We also need to remember that, overall, America is a generous nation. According to Giving USA, "U.S. charitable giving [was] estimated to be $307.65 billion in 2008. Giving in [the] worst economic climate since [the] Great Depression [exceeded] $300 billion for [the] second year in a row." And let's not forget the millions given by individual citizens and corporations in light of the earthquake in Haiti.

America doesn't need its government to take care of the people -- the people can do the job quite well when given the opportunity.

The government just needs to get out of their way.

(Photo: Google)

Our Rights As Americans (Part III): The Right to Peaceably Assemble

My Fellow Americans,

Given the state of the current political climate, and the fact that President Obama needed to remind us once again how he wants to ram health care and cap and trade down our throats, I feel one of our most important rights as citizens of the United States is the right to peaceably assemble.

I want to explain to you today why this right is necessary as part of The Refounding Father's series on "Our Rights As Americans."

The year 2009 alone was a great example of why this First Amendments right is critical to the fabric of this country.  Tea Party activists (photo: Google) gathered together all over this country -- even on Capitol Hill -- to protest a government takeover of our health care system, the stimulus package, and other unfavorable policies put in place by the Obama administration.  No matter what the mainstream media will have you believe, overall, these marches and protests were carried out peacefully and with little to no violence.

According to David L. Hudson, Jr., research attorney at the First Amendment Center, the "freedom of assembly has protected individuals espousing myriad viewpoints" throughout our history.  Hudson continues by saying, "Striking workers, civil rights advocates, anti-war demonstrators and Ku Klux Klan marchers have all taken to the streets and sidewalks in protest or in support of their causes. Sometimes these efforts have galvanized public support or changed public perceptions. Imagine a civil rights movement without the March on Washington or the women's suffrage movement without ranks of long-skirted, placard-carrying suffragists filling city streets."

As you can see by Mr. Hudson's explanation, the beauty of the right to peaceably assemble is that everybody's "assembly" is protected.  While most people who would object to having a KKK rally going on as they walk by, Hudson says that, "First Amendment freedoms ring hollow if government officials can repress expression that they fear will create a disturbance or offend. Unless there is real danger of imminent harm, assembly rights must be respected."  So, despite the distasteful nature of such gatherings by hate groups, those types of rallies are included in this right -- as they should be.

Now, for those of you who may not understand this right or disagree with it, let's see what the alternative would look like.  And, yes, I will be going a bit extreme on this.  Then again, if we were to go down the path of socialism or communism, this example may not be far off.

What do I mean?  Well, do you remember Tiananmen Square?  No? 

Let me tell you what happened -- with help from Wikipedia of course: "The Tiananmen Square (photo: Wikipedia) protests of 1989...were a series of demonstrations in and near Tiananmen Square in Beijing in the [People's Republic of China] PRC beginning on [April 14, 1989]. Led mainly by students and intellectuals, the protests occurred in a year that saw the collapse of a number of communist governments around the world." 

The protests were in response to the death of "pro-democracy and anti-corruption official, Hu Yaobang, whom protesters wanted to mourn. By the eve of Hu's funeral, 100,000 people had gathered at Tiananmen square...The demonstrations centered on Tiananmen Square, in Beijing, but large-scale protests also occurred in cities throughout China, including Shanghai, which remained peaceful throughout the protests."

According to Wikipedia, "The movement lasted seven weeks, from Hu's death on [April 15] until tanks cleared Tiananmen Square on [June 4]. In Beijing, the resulting military response to the protesters by the PRC government left many civilians and military personnel charged with clearing the square of the dead or severely injured[citation needed]. The number of deaths is not known, however, estimates include the initial Red Cross figure of roughly 3,000."

What was worse was that "[f]ollowing the conflict, the government conducted widespread arrests of protesters and their supporters, cracked down on other protests around China, banned the foreign press from the country and strictly controlled coverage of the events in the PRC press. Members of the Party who had publicly sympathized with the protesters were purged, with several high-ranking members placed under house arrest..."

The international community blasted the government of the PRC for using military force on the protesters -- and rightfully so.  And to do such a thing -- to your OWN people no less -- is utterly despicable.  This is exactly why I am glad the Founding Fathers had the foresight to include a right like this in our Constitution.  I firmly believe it is something we should be thankful for -- not just because it's something so embedded in us that we don't have to think about it -- but also because we don't have to live in the 1989 version of the PRC.

Have you attended a Tea Party Rally yet?  If not, you really should go.  Most Conservatives or Republicans have never protested -- that's usually something left to the Democrats for reasons I won't get into.  But, I attended rallies in Philadelphia on July 4, 2009 and in Washington, D.C. on September 12, 2009.  Honestly, I don't think I've ever felt so empowered.  The energy given off at these things -- especially the one in D.C. on 9/12 -- is just amazing.  You really feel like you're a part of something.  It makes you feel like -- although you may not feel like you matter individually -- together we were heard that day.  All you have to do is look what happened in Massachusetts on Jan. 19 to understand the full impact of the Tea Party movement.

Now, that is the right to assemble in action.  May we never stop valuing this right or forget its importance in the history of our great country.

God Bless the United States of America.

Are These Our Rights as Americans? You Decide — Part II

My Fellow Americans,

I have included another article first posted on Blogcrtics.org:

Last week, I mentioned that, over the next several weeks, I will be posting about a right we have as citizens of the United States of America, per the Bill of Rights.

As I said before, I want to do a little experiment with you. I feel America has lost its way. I feel we have strayed from the value system that helped define this country at its inception. We have neglected the teachings of the Founding Fathers so much, in my opinion, that this country would be virtually unrecognizable to them.

What is sad is many of us have forgotten why America is so great. Our perception of reality has become so twisted that we do not even know what our basic rights are. The same rights that are “endowed by our Creator,” not granted to us by a government bureaucrat. We need to remember who we are, America.

With that, I want to continue with the First Amendment. Last time, we looked at the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause as it pertains to religion. Today, I want to focus on the freedom of speech and freedom of the press:

Right #2: Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.

Similar to how the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause are related to religion, freedom of speech and freedom of the press are linked together as well.

Of all the rights and liberties we are privileged to have as Americans, this one happens to be my favorite. It is also the one, I believe, to consistently be in danger of being repressed.

I believe freedom of speech is an important element of any society. Human beings have the need and the right to express themselves, whether verbally, in writing, in print, or over the Internet. The government in any country, not just the United States, should not be allowed to infringe upon this right.

Throughout history, we have seen leaders and dictators in other countries revoke their citizens’ rights to freedom of speech. In doing so, they only allowed those who agreed with the government to speak their mind and be heard. And if one were not in favor of the current administration and conveyed that publicly, chances are he or she would pay for it with his/her life.

Is it me, or do you get the feeling that the Obama administration wants to do away with your right to free speech? Well, maybe I won’t go that far just yet.

But, I will go that far with the freedom of the press.

Have you ever heard of the Fairness Doctrine? What about President Barack Obama’s Federal Communications Commission (FCC) diversity czar, Mark Lloyd?

First, let’s start with the Fairness Doctrine. Introduced in 1949 by the FCC, the Fairness Doctrine had two basic elements to it. One, it required broadcasters to devote some air time to important matters that were of interest to the public. Secondly, it wanted to ensure that different points of view where acknowledged and heard about on a certain matter.

The Fairness Doctrine was revoked in 1985. Why? Because it was agreed that it violated the First Amendment guarantee of freedom of speech.

Enter FCC diversity czar Mark Lloyd. His love for Venezuelan Communist dictator Hugo Chavez and desire for white people in postions of power to step down for minorities aside, Lloyd wants to reinstate the fairness doctrine and then take it even further.

The target: conservative radio and television (a.k.a. FOX News). Also, the government wants to be able to control the Internet and monitor who is speaking out against the administration. If that sounds unconstitutional to you, that’s because it is.

This is why I believe freedom of speech and freedom of the press are so important. The government should not be allowed to control what you say or what you write. To do so is a violation of your rights, not just as a citizen of the United States, but as a human being.

Furthermore, it is essential that the government stay out of the press no matter what the means of communication may be. When the government gets involved, and this, right along with freedom of speech are revoked, you have Communist China.  And when the government basically becomes the press, you have MSNBC. (Then again, having Jeffrey R. Immelt, chairman of General Electric (GE) and a member of Obama’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board, doesn’t help either. By the way, GE owns MSNBC).

With everything I have stated above, how important do you feel these rights are? Is it essential to have the ability to speak freely? What about freedom of the press? Is that essential? Why or why not?

I thank you for your comments. And as I said last week, these are your rights at the end of the day, America. It is up to us to make sure we remember that and do not let them be taken away.

And Now, It's Time For A Song...

My Fellow Americans,

The victory for Scott Brown last night in Massachusetts calls for a celebration.  I would like to share a song with you.  To the tune of "American Pie" by Don McLean, here's Paul Shanklin's "The Day Obama Care Dies:"

A long, long time ago
I can still remember
Oh, the protests used to make me smile
Cause I knew we could ram it thru
Before they even had a clue
Then maybe they'll shut-up for a while
But the protests grew and made me shiver
Pelosi and Reid could not deliver
Now our push for health care has to wait
Til September [Spoken: or October or next year]
I can't remember if I cried
When I heard the why's and organized
But something told me deep inside
That day National Health Care died.

So I'd lied, lied at every townhall in sight
Drove my Chevy cross the country tryin' to put up a fight
The good ol' boys were standing right there outside
Sayin' this will be the day that it dies
This will be the day Obama Care dies

We were gonna run it all on our own
But Congressmen and Senators were gettin' stoned back home
That's not how it was supposed to be
We used to be treated like a king and queen
And the sweater she borrowed from LL Bean
And my horse could part the stormy, stormy seas
But now everytime I hit the stage
Bitter crowds appear in fits of rage
Somewhere down in hell
There my members dwell
I was blown away by Bob and Bart
And the redneck neighbors with their pickup truck
But I knew I was out of luck
The day that health care died

Even though I lied, lied at every townhall in sight
Drove my Chevy 'cross the country tryin' to put up a fight
The good ol' boys were standing right there outside
Sayin' this will be the day that it dies
This will be the day Obama Care dies
Even though I lied, lied at every townhall in sight
Drove my chevy 'cross the country tryin' to put up a fight
The good ol' boys were standing right there outside
Sayin' this will be the day that it dies
This will be the day Obama Care dies

[Spoken: Uh... Would you be interested in a health care co-op?]

'The People' Have Spoken: Brown's Victory Makes Tea Party Movement Legit

My Fellow Americans,

What a difference a year makes.

A year ago, today, President Barack Obama was sworn in as the 44th President of the United States of America.  Carrying him through his campaign was the buoyant motto: "hope and change."  It's funny what that motto stands for in 2010 instead of 2009 -- or even 2008.

A year ago, today, the last thing on Obama's mind was losing the gubernatorial races in Virginia and New Jersey -- two states that strongly supported Obama in the Presidential race -- let alone Scott Brown (nobody even knew about Mr. Brown).  He was too busy having thoughts of health care reform, cap and tax, and sugar plums dancing in his head. 

In his opinion, and in the opinion of many liberals both in the government and the media, Obama was untouchable.  Nobody could possibly think ill of him or not support his goals for the country.

What a difference a year makes.

During his campaign, Obama promised not to raise taxes on those making $250,000 (well, health care will take care of that) and to allow for more transparency within his administration (health care took care of that one, too).  Another lying politican is not change, Mr. President -- it's more of the same.  And I don't know what you meant by "hope," but redistribution of wealth and bigger government are not things this country is (or ever was) hoping for.

There's a commerical often shown on the Fox News Channel for The Weekly Standard, a conservative magazine.  In speaking of Obama, the commerical says: "He promises change.  But, what kind of change?  Are taxes going up?  Is the economy heading down?  As change blows through Washington..."  It's the last part about "change [blowing] through Washington" that interests me.  While it may not be true for Obama, it is certainly evident courtesy of the Tea Party movement.

The Tea Party movement has brought about the change -- real change.  You don't believe me?  Ask R. Creigh Deeds, Jon Corzine, and Martha Coakley.  They will tell you.

Just a few weeks ago, nobody really cared about Scott Brown.  To the Democrats and the Coakley campaign, the election in Massachusetts was a mere formality.  Of course, Martha Coakley would win -- especially since it was the "Liberal Lion's" former seat.

But, it wasn't the late Ted Kennedy's seat -- according to Brown.  It was the "People's Seat."  And as people got to know Brown, they saw a guy who got it.  Brown understands this country -- at least that's how he ran his campaign. 

He understands what the people of America want -- real change.  As we have found out -- and the Obama administration can't seem to grasp this -- you don't bring about change by just saying it over and over, then doing the same thing as your fellow politicans.

Obama, Coakley, and the Democrats miscalculated.  They misjudged the voter sentiment in this country.  I believe it will cost them.  I believe what you are seeing today is something that will be talked about in the history books.

It's funny, the first American Revolution started in Massachusetts -- and if the Tea Partiers have anything to say about it -- it looks like a second one will have started in the Bay State as well.

A large part of the reason for a revolution back then was that the people were governed without representation.  I don't see how that's any different from today.  While politicans in D.C. say they have the best interest of the American people at heart, what they say couldn't be further from the truth.  In my opinion, we have been governed without real representation for years.

And as Brown said in his victory speech last night, "You deserve better!"

With his election last night -- and the elections of Republican governors in VA and NJ -- the Tea Party movement is legitimized.  A second American Revolution is upon us.  We The People are making it happen and will continue to do so.  Finally, real 'hope and change' can be sought -- by our actions -- not just a good political orator's words.

What a difference a year makes.

Bring on November.

- The Refounding Father

PS: This one's for you, Mary Jo!

(photos: Google)

Scott Brown Wins!

My Fellow Americans,

The threat posed to the country by Obamacare is on hold -- for now.  The Associated Press has projected that Scott Brown (photo: Yahoo!) won the special election for the Massachusetts Senate seat.

I will have more on this tomorrow.

For now, Congratulations Scott -- and Congratulations to you too, America.  This is a very important win for Conservatives.  Look for an even bigger win in Nov. 2010.

Watch for the nuclear option in the health care legislation -- look out.

Brown and Coakley to speak in a little bit.

More tomorrow...

PS: I love watching Wolf Blitzer on CNN say that Scott Brown won!

The Results of the Special Election in Mass. Are Coming In...

My Fellow Americans,

Follow live updates from The Refounding Father on Facebook and Twitter.

Here's to a victory for Scott Brown!

- The Refounding Father

Hey Massachusetts, Do The Right Thing!

My Fellow Americans,

Less than twelve hours from now, we will know the outcome of the Massachusetts Senate seat vote.  We will know if Obama's legislation will become an inevitability -- or be added to the already long list of failed campaign promises.  We will know if groups like ACORN stole the election from Scott Brown (photo: Google) -- another strong possibility -- since the Democrats tend not to play fair. 

Less than twelve hours from now -- we will know the direction in which this country is headed.

For the next few hours, we wait.  For the next few hours, we sit glued to our televisions and constantly refresh our news websites.  For the next few hours, we think to ourselves: "Will our fellow Americans in Massachusetts," as Robert Frost once wrote in the poem "The Road Not Taken, "take the road less traveled by?"

Provided those that believe in Tea Party principles show up and ACORN runs out of graveyard votes, we should see the late Ted Kennedy's seat -- or should I say the People's seat -- go to a Republican for the first time since 1972.

On yet another election day, I want to share yet another quote with you.  This one comes from the American economist, social commentator, and author Thomas Sowell (source: Wikipedia):

"If you have been voting for politicians who promise to give you goodies at someone else's expense, then you have no right to complain when they take your money and give it to someone else, including themselves."

This is one the voters in Massachusetts need to hear -- because it will matter in the weeks to come. 

Brown has said he will be the 41st vote opposing Obama's health care plan.  Brown will save taxpayers money by voting against the massive health care overhaul.  That is why he has been so heavily favored over the last few weeks.

Martha Coakley, on the other hand, will vote right in line with her fellow Democrats -- and health care will basically be a done deal.

We know all this.  I don't need to tell you what is on the line here.

The message I wanted to convey with Sowell's quote was this: we get what we vote for.  We have learned a tough lesson with President Barack Obama -- especially those who voted for him in Nov. 2008.  He was not what they thought they were getting when they voted for him.  I guess you could call it a case of "Voter's Remorse."

Massachusetts, don't make the same mistake.  You have an opportunity here to help make right a terrible wrong -- and vote for Scott Brown.  The health care legislation will "fundamentally transform the United States of America" -- just as the President wants to do.

If you do go with Coakley, though, don't complain if she helps go after your wallet.  Don't complain when -- not if -- she "take[s] your money and give[s] it to someone else."  Don't complain when she helps move this country toward socialism.

Massachusetts, don't vote for somebody who doesn't even know who Curt Schilling is -- vote Scott Brown!

Conservative Victory 2010!

The Refounding Father Pays Tribute To Martin Luther King, Jr.

My Fellow Americans,

When it comes to the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. (photo: Google), it's hard to put into words what he meant to -- not just African-Americans -- but to the entire country...the entire world even.  People as great as MLK don't come along very often -- maybe once in a generation.  On this MLK day, The Refounding Father pays tribute to a man who continues to mean so much to so many.

I want to share a quote with you today from King that I believe helps sum up the political climate in the USA these days:

“Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.”

From the pending health care legislation to the special vote for the Massachusetts Senate seat, we are witnessing history unfold in this country.  We see the news at night on television and it feels as if our rights are hanging in the balance.  The Obama administration continues to push the envelope -- attempting to infringe upon our rights as Americans.

Since April 2009, we have seen how the Tea Party Movement has swept through this country.  We see people who generally wouldn't protest -- now they're out protesting a tax hike.  We see others speaking out against our "leaders" -- for the first time in their lives.

We see people standing up -- and not being silent -- about things that matter.  In many ways, what Rev. King stood up for is the same as what the Tea Party participants are standing up for -- our rights.  As Americans, our rights are fundamental.  They are necessary in achieving the "American dream."

As Rev. King knew well, our rights go hand in hand with our dignity as human beings.  Without our rights, what are we?  We become like animals.  We become nothing.  Without rights, there is no respect.

This is why we have a day set aside to honor a great man like Martin Luther King, Jr.  This is why we remember July 4th every year.

And make no mistake -- it will be precisely the same reason why people will remember the Tea Party movement for years to come.

Thank you, Rev. King, for teaching us to speak without fear.

Are These Our Rights As Americans? You Decide (Part I)

My Fellow Americans,

I want to share with you another article that I first published on BlogCritics.org:

I want to do a little experiment with you. I feel America has lost its way. I feel we have strayed from the value system that helped define this country at its inception. We have neglected the teachings of the Founding Fathers so much, in my opinion, that this country would be virtually unrecognizable to them.

To that end, would you recognize the country as it is today back in November or December of 2008? Because I know I sure would not. This is not the America I know and love. And if the Tea Party movement that has swept through the country since April 2009 is any indication, many of you out there would agree with me.

President Barack Obama and his administration can keep their “change.” America does not need change. We need to return to our roots. We need to return to the principles that made this country a beacon of light for so many people. Our ancestors came here for a reason — to escape persecution and be free.

What is sad is many of us have forgotten why America is so great. Our perception of reality has become so twisted that we do not even know what our basic rights are. The same rights that are “endowed by our Creator,” not granted to us by a government bureaucrat.

We need to remember who we are, America. That is why over the next several weeks I want to talk to you about your rights. I want to remind you of the rights recognized by The Bill of Rights, the first ten amendments of the Constitution. Each week, I will post about one right and state my case for that right. Then, I will get out of your way. I want you to tell us why or why not you believe that right is essential.

I believe this exercise will be enlightening. It will allow for an exchange of rational ideas and rational debate. It should also tell us how far off course we are from the early days of this country and what the Founders intended – and how we can get back there once again. My hope is we can get to a general consensus one way or the other.

Right #1: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

I combined the “Establishment Clause” and the “Free Exercise Clause” because they are so closely related.

I have to agree with this one. I believe it is essential for the government not to endorse or promote one religion over another. I also agree that people should have the right to practice any religion of their choice. In my opinion, both are vital aspects of a free nation.

However, I have often struggled with the Establishment Clause. It is not that I am retracting my earlier statement, it is just I am a bit biased because I am Christian. I don’t like the fact that the Ten Commandments have been removed from court houses or that prayers are prohibited in public schools.

What I have come to realize is that the Ten Commandments are not necessarily just a set of rules from one religion’s God, but a fundamental value system for life. When you read the Commandments, are there not at least seven of them you should live by? Leave out the ones about God and the Sabbath. What about “thou shall not kill” or “thou shall not steal?” Can’t we agree that maybe the criminals in the court house about to be sentenced for first-degree murder or grand theft auto could have used those rules?

As for prayer, I think anybody that wants to join in a morning prayer should be able to do so. Don’t take it out because of political correctness. Just allow each student to pray to their religion’s God. There should be time set aside for it.

At the end of the day, people should be allowed to have their own spiritual [experiences] — without any government interference. The government should not be involved in something that personal. The only reason to do so would be to control you.

Now, I want to know what you think. I have stated my case. I am in favor of this right and believe it is essential.

Do you think this right is important? Would you consider it an essential right? Why or why not?

These are your rights at the end of the day, America. It is up to us to make sure we remember that and do not let them be taken away.

White House Urging Americans To Donate To Haiti Relief Effort -- Via E-mail: Do You Trust It?

My Fellow Americans,

I want to share with you something today that a reader brought to my attention.  Apparently, the Obama White House feels it's necessary to send American citizens emails to encourage them to donate to the Haiti Relief effort. 

That's fine.  I fully support helping those in need.  It's having and using email addresses of citizens I do not like. 

To me, there's something wrong with the White House sending emails out like the one I received from a reader.  While the gentleman who sent this to me pointed out he felt it was rather "self-serving" of the President, I also believe it builds on what we saw with the "Cash for Clunkers" program last summer (more on that later).

Let me show you the text of the email the reader received:

From: President Barack Obama [mailto:info@barackobama.com]

Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2010 3:04 PM

Subject: Help for Haiti

[Reader's Name Omitted] --

On Tuesday, a catastrophic earthquake struck near Port-au-Prince, Haiti. The full extent of the damage is still being assessed, but the death toll -- already in the thousands -- is climbing fast.

This is the worst earthquake to hit the area in more than 200 years. Entire communities have been ripped apart and as many as 3 million people have been directly affected, including tens of thousands of American citizens who are in Haiti.

Our neighbors in Haiti are racing to confront the enormous devastation -- and the OFA community can help.

Click here for more information about essential relief efforts and ways you can help today.

Footage is pouring in of homes collapsing, Haitians carrying injured family members, and hospitals being overrun in what was already the poorest nation in the Western Hemisphere.

I have directed my administration to respond with a swift, coordinated, and aggressive effort to save lives. Personnel from the United States and our partners in the international community are on the ground in damaged areas right now, working side by side with the Haitian people. They're providing much-needed food, water, and sanitation supplies, saving lives and helping local communities start to rebuild.

Despite the fact that we are experiencing tough times here at home, I encourage those who can to reach out and help. It's in times like these that we must show the kind of compassion and humanity that has defined the best of our national character for generations.

Click here to find out what you can do:

http://my.barackobama.com/Haiti

As this story continues to unfold, I hope you will continue to keep the people of Haiti in your thoughts and prayers, as well as the many Haitian-Americans who have done so much to enrich our country and who are worried about friends and loved ones in this time of need.

Thank you,

President Barack Obama

--END TRANSCRIPT--

The links in the email take you directly to the WhiteHouse.gov website.  Also, let me point out what appeared at the very bottom of the e-mail in a text box: "Paid for by Organizing for America, a project of the Democratic National Committee -- 430 South Capitol Street SE, Washington, D.C. 20003. This communication is not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee."

That's very interesting.  This is the group Obama's campaign arm became after he was elected.  Obama for America became Organizing for America (get it, he was a community organizer).  I just think it's great that now we're community organizing -- on a global scale, don't you?

Getting back to what I was saying about "Cash for Clunkers" and how it relates to this email campaign by the website, I want to point out something that came out over the summer.  If you recall, Glenn Beck revealed on his show what a warning box on the "Cash for Clunkers" program's website read: "This application provides to the DoT CARS system. When logged on to the CARS system, your computer is considered a federal computer system and it is property of the United States government. Any and all uses of this system and all files on this system may be intercepted, monitored, recorded, copied, audited, inspected, and disclosed to authorized CARS, DoT and law enforcement personnel, as well as authorized officials of other agencies, both domestic and foreign" (source: BusinessandMedia.org).  I don't know about you, but to me, that's pretty scary stuff. 

As you can imagine, I would think someone who got that email from the White House asking for donations would be a tad bit skeptical.  What's to stop the government from tracking you...from tracking what you donate?  What's to stop the government from using some of the money to pay for health care?  What's to stop them from tapping into your personal information?

On top of that, you have Rush Limbaugh getting slammed for his comments about the Haiti relief effort.  Like always, his comments were completely taken out of context by the Democrats and liberal media.  If you read the comments posted on this site, one rational person came to the conclusion that Limbaugh meant he didn't trust donating to the WhiteHouse.gov site.  He wasn't saying we shouldn't donate. 

And another thing, the money that is being donated by the U.S. government -- is a majority of it not TAXPAYER money?  I would think so.  Where else would they be getting the money?  So, technically, yeah, Americans have already donated in a sense -- even before the earthquake occurred.  Get off Rush's back!

I bring this up because I think people need to be told the truth.  Sometimes watching and listening to certain news outlets -- we often don't get the whole picture.  I do believe the American people are generous.  I believe there are those in our government that care.  I believe that even the President himself cares. 

But, as White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel once said, "Never let a serious crisis go to waste."

And don't think for a second that the Obama administration, even in the most minute way, would not use the crisis in Haiti to their advantage.

Do The American People Have the "Full Support" of Anybody?

My Fellow Americans,

I was listening to Rush Limbaugh's radio program during my lunch break today.  He mentioned a few things about the earthquake in Haiti, including remarks made by President Barack Obama.  In his speech, given less than 24 hours after the earthquake rocked the country, Obama promised that "[t]he people of Haiti will have the full support of the United States..." 

Now, let me be clear that I am all for helping a country in need.  While I believe that organizations like the Red Cross are better suited for these types of tragedies, it is admirable for a country like the United States to help out.

What bothered me about the speech was its timing compared to the timing of the speech Obama gave regarding the thwarted Christmas Day terror plot.  Obama waited 3 days to address a frightened America.  Yet, he's ready to offer the generosity of America less than 24 hours after a devastating earthquake in another country.

As Limbaugh reminded his listeners, this is the same America that has a 10% unemployment rate because of the Obama administration.  This is the same America that Obama is constantly apologizing to the world for.  Countries closer to Haiti, like socialist Cuba, don't plan on helping out at all.  I wonder if America would be able to continue to help other countries if it were a socialist or communist nation?

The point I'm trying to convey today, and I believe Rush was too, is that Obama sure is quick to offer our help after bashing us for the last year.  He is quick to enlist the help of citizens and businesses too -- both groups on which he plans a tax hike to fund his health care plan.

The question I have after all of this is: do the American people even have the "full support" of our President, let alone the federal government?

The answer, unfortunately, is a resounding "NO!"

America, Have You Had Enough of the Fed?

My Fellow Americans,

I don't know about you, but I'm fed up with the Fed.  Yesterday, it was reported on various news outlets that the Federal Reserve Bank of the United States made a $46.1 billion profit in 2009.  If you recall, that's more than Exxon Mobil's profit from 2008.

I just don't understand how, during one of the worst recessions in this country's history, how this entity gets away with making billions of dollars off of YOU!  They didn't exactly need a bailout, did they?

Will the government use the money the Fed turns over to aid their programs (i.e. health care) or reduce the nation's debt -- instead of taking more out of our pockets through taxes and bank fees? 

President Obama is set to make a major announcement Thursday, Jan. 14 regarding fees on transactions carried out by banks.  Will those fees be passed onto us?  You bet.

Haven't we had enough, America?

It was the great Henry Ford who said: "It is well that the people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning."

Let this not be the case any longer. 

Every day, America, you are becoming more in tune with the values and beliefs that made this country the last great hope for the human race.  Every day, you are re-learning truths about yourselves -- truths about how great this nation of ours really is.  Don't stop with the Founding Fathers.  Don't stop with the Constitution.  Learn about how money works.  Learn about what the Fed does and how it manipulates the dollar. 

Learn about how recessions and depressions are created -- and don't be naive...don't think for a second they aren't created.

Henry Ford knew the passion of the American people.  He knew what they were capable of.  And if they got wind of what the Fed really was, what it did, and how it played games with their hard-earned money, Ford knew "We The People" would NOT tolerate such abuse of trust and power.

Thomas Jefferson once said: "I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. Already they have raised up a monied aristocracy that has set the government at defiance. The issuing power (of money) should be taken away from the banks and restored to the people to whom it properly belongs."

Let that power be given to the people once again.

(Photo: RonPaul.com)

Allow Yourself to Succeed in This Recession

My Fellow Americans,

I wanted to share with you today an article I wrote for Blogcritics.org:

I would like to briefly talk to you about opportunity. Many people fail to see opportunity before them – either because they claim they are too busy or because they just are not looking in the right place. Or maybe it’s because they have immersed themselves in life: from their job to their children, there really isn’t much time for anything else.

Oftentimes, people miss opportunities before them because of these reasons – or should I say, excuses.

A great opportunity lies ahead of us over the next few years. Those who have prepared have already reaped the benefits and will continue to do so. There are people out there profiting off of this recession. There are people who have used this recession as their opportunity.

I would like to share a quote with you to further explain what I mean: “Success always comes when preparation meets opportunity.” Most often attributed to a Mr. Henry Hartman, on whom I was unable to find information, this quote resonated deeply with me since I first heard it.

Instead of looking at the recession as a bad thing, look at it as an opportunity to accumulate wealth. Look at it as a stepping stone for your retirement goals. Look at it as a chance to start a business. Look at it as a chance to prepare.

As Robert Kiyosaki, entrepreneur and author of Rich Dad Poor Dad, has said: “This crisis is the biggest opportunity in the history of the world.” This statement could not be more true. It just depends on how you look at life.

I firmly believe that, in America, anything is possible. I believe people come here looking for a better life. Whether rich, middle class, or poor, there is always a chance for you. While we may not all start off in the same position in the marathon of life, there are always opportunities for us to cross the finish line together. Don’t let fear or self-doubt stand in your way.

So what can you do to start? Here are a few suggestions:

1. Get your financial education, as Kiyosaki always says. (And yes, there is ALWAYS time. It just depends on what you want to spend your time doing).

2. Read magazines and newspapers like Forbes, Money and The Wall Street Journal. Watch channels like Fox Business and CNBC. CNBC is a great place to learn about money and entrepreneurship.

3. Read as many books as you can. My suggestions to get you started are: Rich Dad Poor Dad by Kiyosaki, The Lexus and the Olive Tree by Thomas L. Friedman, and The 4-Hour Work Week by Timothy Ferriss.

4. Don’t ever stop being a student. Take classes and attend seminars on finance, economics, and investing.

5. Learn about handling your personal finances.

6. Get out of bad debt as quickly as possible – particularly credit card debt.

7. Save money and invest in things like real estate – so your money doesn’t lose value. There are many opportunities for novice investors out there as property values continue to decline. Do your due diligence. (You may even have a chance to help somebody in foreclosure by assuming their mortgage).

I have implemented, or am in the process of implementing, all of these strategies. They are all things I have read about or learned about over the past few years. I would not recommend them if I didn’t think they would work. Some things may not work for you. That’s fine. The point is to try things and learn things that will make life better for you and your family.

Here’s to your success this year and in years to come.

I’ll see you at the finish line.

Are You Willing To Have That "Uncomfortable Conversation?"

My Fellow Americans,

I wanted to speak to you today about a conversation I had last week with a college buddy of mine.  My friend, let's call him Phil, has been a U.S. Marine (logo: Google) now for over 3 years.  He has been sent to Afghanistan on at least one occasion and will deploy again in March of this year.  His unit is assigned the unenviable task of trying to detect enemy bombs.  He told me his truck has been blown up more than once.

But, that's Phil.  He has always had that "dare devil" persona since I've met him.  In college, he would bring his motorcycle helmet to class.  He even rode the same motorcycle, while in a suit, to a business dinner with a potential employer.  He's always been one of the more outgoing people in my life -- with a no holds barred style attitude.

That's why when he told me he wasn't going to take a job with a top accounting firm after college -- choosing instead to enlist with the Marines -- I wasn't completely floored.  However, I'm sure it had to be a rather unpleasant conversation for him and his folks.  I can't imagine having that talk with my parents.

That brings me to the quote I want to share with you today.  The quote comes from Timothy Ferriss (photo: Wikipedia), an angel investor and author of The Four-Hour Work Week (photo: Wikipedia).

"A person’s success in life can usually be measured by the number of uncomfortable conversations he or she is willing to have."

That's why I believe Phil will be a success in his life -- because of his ability to have that "uncomfortable conversation."  When I spoke with Phil, he told me about Ferriss and his book.  He explained to me how he was blown away with his entrepreneurship ideas and attitude towards life. 

One of the reasons Phil and I were friends was due to our desire to start our own business.  We would talk about starting companies and making millions.  We would talk about retiring early and being set for life.

This book rekindled that spark in Phil -- something he lost while at war.  It wasn't that he regreted his choice to serve his country.  He just felt that it may be time to move on.  He told me he didn't want to be blown up or shot at anymore.

So, he chose to deploy one last time and will likely call it quits after his term of duty ends.  And once again, he will be forced to have that "uncomfortable conversation."  This time it will be with his supervisors and fellow Marines -- in saying goodbye.  The Marines are a tight-knit group.

But, that won't be the last one he'll have.  I'm sure in his business endeavours, he'll encounter those that don't like his ideas or don't think his products will sell.  That won't stop Phil though.

I know he'll be a success because that's what the Marines do for you.  Robert Kiyosaki was a Marine.  The father of my best friend was a Marine.  Both are successes -- as I'm sure countless others are.  In having that "uncomfortable conversation" with their respective families, these people went on to do something great for their country.  And of those that are fortunate enough to have survived, many went on to become hyper-successful over the rest of their lives because of what they learned on the battlefield.

If I know anything about my friend Phil, I know he will be right there as well.  Sometimes all it takes is having that one "uncomfortable conversation" you keep putting off to make a real difference in your life and the lives of others.

What conversations have you been putting on the back burner?  How do you think having that conversation will change your life for the better?

My Encounter With A Liberal: The Refounding Father's Conclusion

My Fellow Americans,

I hope you have enjoyed reading about my conversations with various liberals over the past few days.  I know I have.  It's really been enlightening.  It's allowed me to get a firm grasp on various different points of view within the liberal context.

However, it has also left me rather worried.  If those in Washington share even one-quarter of the views with the people I have had discussions with over the past few days, that doesn't bode well for our country.  The liberal point of view is very misguided.

My hope is, as the Tea Party movement continues to grow, more liberal Americans begin to wake up.  All we can do now is keep standing up -- keep going strong.  Call your representatives.  Voice your displeasure with the current administration.  Read.  Learn.  Inform others.  That's what we need to continue to do.

I always love searching for quotes that convey my message on a particular subject.  Today, I think I found a great one:

“If you're a liberal, anything you say is protected. If you're a conservative, anything you say is hateful.”

This quote comes to us from Laura Schlessinger (photo: Wikipedia).  Schlessinger is "an American talk radio host, socially conservative commentator and author. Her call-in radio program features her short monologues on social and political topics..." (source: Wikipedia).

I thought this quote summed up my experience this week rather well.  The article I posted on Blogcritics.org about John Wanamaker was written to show you what a great man is capable of.  It was to give an example of how, when done right, capitalism is not evil -- how the rich are not evil.

Yet, when people are not able to argue their point effectively, they attack.  They criticize.  They degrade you.  That was my experience with our liberal friends.  They could not explain to me why their argument was better or how it would better the country's situation.  They just attacked me.  They attacked other conservative bloggers.

I understand that not everybody is blessed with the ability to speak or write eloquently (and no liberals, I'm not saying I can).  However, argue facts at least.  Give me the facts.  Don't just attack me or make hasty generalizations.  Make your argument and use facts you researched to back it up.

We see this every day though.  Keith Olbermann from MSNBC attacks Glenn Beck (probably because his ratings are atrocious).  The Obama administration attacks the FOX New Channel.  Notice that in these attacks -- the liberal point of view was not argued.  The opposition (in this case conservatives) was attacked and smeared.  Then again, that is what Saul Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals" says to do, right?

It's just frustrating at the end of the day.  Since starting this blog, I have done my research.  I watch and read information from many networks.  I read history books -- real history books.  I do my homework.  But, people attack me -- as they attack Glenn and FOX.  Nobody thinks the facts are important -- they just attack.

Don't be afraid, though, America.  Don't back down.  Don't stop.  If people don't agree with you after you argue your point (backed by facts and research), move on.  As I said before, I will not continue to cast my conservative pearls before liberal swine.  It's not worth it.  I will speak with those that will have a rational debate with me, not just attack me in the guise of arguing their point.

I won't do it.  And neither should you.

Chin up, America.  The year 2010 is upon us. 

And I smell a Conservative victory.

(U.S. Flag photo: Google)

My Encounter With A Liberal: Part III

My Fellow Americans,

After a brief recess, Jeannie's back.  I'm beginning to really understand what Glenn Beck means when he says liberals will "make blood shoot out your eyeballs."

Nevertheless, I will not back down.

Once again, Jeannie:

Hello Taylor Brown,

Thanks for posting your name..I just find it so funny that the most acrid responses and comments here are from people who hide themselves behind pithy little names.

I know you are not going to change my mind any more than I can change yours, but a third party might read this and see the light..

If you think I'm going to crumble under your teapots your all wrong..:)

I must say i was impressed with Ron Paul in the beginning, but when he proclaimed that we did not need the department of agriculture and education he lost me...

Anyone up for some more salmonella in their salad?

Who needs education? Just the privileged?

I'm laughing right now. Do you hear it?

Oh there is one nugget of worth coming from Ron Paul...we don't have the right to preemptively strike wherever and whenever we want!

Please continue deregulating everything...my cats toys aren't shiny enough, need more lead.

-END TRANSCRIPT-

The Refounding Father's Response:

Jeannie,

What are you talking about? Did you just see Ron Paul and stop reading? I mentioned I liked that he was fiscally conservative, that's it. Everything else you say there doesn't deserve attention...you're just ranting.

I'm glad you responded again because I wanted to ask you a few questions. Hopefully, you will actually answer them since Roger won't (or can't) give answers to his.

1. Why do you assume that I'm rich?

2. To you, are all conservatives white and rich? If so, is that not racist? After all, you assume I am racist.

3. You mentioned Canada. Is that the country you want the U.S. to become? Do you like Canada because patients from Montreal who need an angiogram have to go to Detroit or because of the high taxes?

4. If you want the country to look different...prove your case. What do you support and why? What do you envision for America? If Jeannie Danna were President of the United States, what would she do?

- The Refounding Father

-END TRANSCRIPT-

But, wait -- there's more from Jeannie:

I'll answer#4 first TRF :)

If i were President i would throw all the lobbyists out the back-door and make them all come through the front,,transparently like the Teachers Union..no secret deals and padded bank accounts.

If i were president the EV one would be humming out of our hurt car factories and everyone would have their jobs back!

If i were president we would have clean energy jobs, cap & trade would be implemented immediately, and all the jobs shipped over seas would return. (there is a way)

Above all, if i were president, we would have National Health Care!

-END TRANSCRIPT-

Doesn't she just want to make you scream?  Yeah, me too.  I don't know how she could type some of these ideas with a straight face.

The Refounding Father's Response:

Jeannie,

You failed to prove your case. You're just saying what you would do. You simply give me examples without saying how they would make things better.

I asked: "4. If you want the country to look different...prove your case. What do you support and why? What do you envision for America? If Jeannie Danna were President of the United States, what would she do?"

How would your changes make things better?

- The Refounding Father

-END TRANSCRIPT-

Why I continue to cast these conservative pearls before liberal swine I have no idea.  Stay tuned.  Check back for updates here and at Blogcritics.org.  Be sure to check out my exchange with Jeannie's liberal pal, Roger, too, on the Blogcritics site.

Doing Research For Our Liberal Friend

My Fellow Americans,

Here is a post I added to help our liberal friend understand something about "green jobs":

Jeannie,

I actually did a little research for you.

Check out this article from The Wall Street Journal [message truncated].

Here's an excerpt I found particulary intriguing (and very relevant to our conversation): "The Europeans once believed the "green jobs" myth too. Now, as blue-collar workers take to the streets, they have learned that climate-change legislation means green unemployment."

Could it be that even the Europeans are waking up?

- The Refounding Father

-END TRANSCRIPT-

My Encounter With A Liberal: Part 2.5

My Fellow Americans,

Our liberal, Jeannie, struck again today.  Not to worry, though, The Refounding Father is on the case.

Herrrrrre's Jeannie:

TRF-

Too bad your not brave or genuine enough to publish your real name...sooo TRF will have to do. I had two great fathers in my lifetime and they are the only ones deserving of that address from me.

#1 Why are you addressing President Obama as messiah? I detect racism here...spit it out man, you are still freaked that the 'good ole white boy' didn't win...and

where is this famous tea bagging patriotism? does it only exist if you win?

I wasn't really asking for your money yesterday T, I just wanted to point to the glaring fact that when the individual needs help in this society it's called a hand out and they are somehow morally defunct! Yet when Wall Street or big business needs help, that's called a bail-out a loan, or something absolutely necessary. Not what it truly is CORPORATE WELFARE!

Why don't they lower their bottom line or bring back a fraction of that sheltered money from the Caymans if they are so moral?

your third point can be answered by one word..lobbyists! but we will win my fellow pixel:)

The Obama Administration is a long time coming for this world and I for one will give them all the praise and encouragement needed...the economy is recovering.

The greatest thing about green jobs is that they can't be shipped over-seas...oh no! No more slave wages and huge profits for the faceless shareholders....

I LOLRONF at the use of the word socialism...yes T just like Canada...

I like French-Roast coffee myself.

-END TRANSCRIPT-

I actually agreed with some of her points this time around.  However, she still seems pretty misguided.  Take a look.

The Refounding Father's Response:

Jeannie,

My name is Taylor Brown. Nice to meet you. I go by The Refounding Father because it's the title of my blog. I invite you to come by.

1. How is calling Obama the "Messiah" racist? There we go again with the racism claim. I didn't give him that nickname.

2. As I said before, I'm not a Republican. I believe they are just as guilty for the mess we are in as the Dems. Am I freaked out that a black man is the President of the United States? No. It's just I think people who voted for him are beginning to realize he isn't what they thought they were getting.

3. Honestly, I would've preferred Ron Paul over John McCain. McCain and Obama were very similar on many fronts. Health care and the economy to name two subjects, if I recall correctly. I liked Paul, although I knew he wouldn't get enough votes, because of his fiscal conservatism. (The Fed does need an audit done on it. In light of their role in this financial crisis, wouldn't you agree?)

4. I don't know why you think I'm against you here, but I'm not. If corporations are getting bailed out, I agree that taxpayers should too. However, I'm not a fan of bailouts at any level. People need to be allowed to fail. That's the only way you can achieve true success. It's about eliminating dependency and picking yourself up off the ground despite unfortunate circumstances. It's the true American way.

5. What about lobbyists? I'm not a big fan of them either.

6. Green jobs are a myth. You want companies to stop shipping jobs overseas? LOWER TAXES! DE-REGULATE!

7. You're correct, not all companies are moral. There is a lot of greed out there. A lot of it is on Wall Street. But, it's also the government's fault. Who do you think forced banks to give out loans to people who couldn't pay? When you package up a bunch of bad mortgages and sell them as bonds...that's not a good idea. While greed is a flaw within capitalism, is it not in socialism and communism? In that case only the government gets to be greedy, but it's still there. Don't throw capitalism under the bus...throw the people that caused it there. You need to remember to distinguish between the greedy who use capitalism and the fundamentals of capitalism. They are mutually exclusive. Not everybody is greedy.

It's very simple, Jeannie. I don't care how long it takes to help you understand this. I will help you see where I'm coming from.

- The Refounding Father (a.k.a. Taylor B.)

-END TRANSCRIPT-

We shall see if she comes back with more.  I will keep you posted.