The Dream of America, The Dream of Man

Growing up in the farm land of the mid-west during the 1960's, I often heard references to The American Dream. The liberal influence in public schools was still in it's infancy and more prevalent in the colleges and universities than in the elementary and high schools. Conservative thought was still in the mainstream in small and medium sized cities throughout the prairie states, in both political parties and for the most part in the white-collar and working class homes. America was celebrated and respected as a unique country that exhibited excellence and independence not found anywhere else. Despite the social injustices and problems we faced, many of us were raised understanding what the American Dream was and how fortunate we were to have access to it.

Today I hear our President, media outlets, lenders and others speaking of how the American Dream is out of reach for so many in our society. I have to say, I agree with them. The American Dream is fading from the collective memory of our society and is resulting in a oppressed class of citizens that is growing each year.  The once great inspiration and hope that the lower classes had of being upwardly mobile is diminishing. At times it seems that access to that dream will never return. However, there is hope.

Somewhere out on the horizon you can still see the dim light of the once brightly shining American Dream. It is hard to see most days, and on some days appears to be totally gone, but it is there. It is waiting on us. It is waiting to rise once again and shine on everyone that is willing to work hard, pay the price, take on the responsibility for themselves, and help their neighbors. It is waiting for room to grow. It is waiting to take it's former place in the sky, a place that has for the past 100 years been inhabited by a large, dark storm cloud that oppresses the spirit of man.  The storm of large, intrusive over-regulating government.

While I agree with those on the left and in the current administration about the need to revive the American Dream, I strongly disagree with their interpretation of what that dream is. The American Dream is not owning a 3 bedroom, 2 bath house in the suburbs. It is not having tuition provided for all your children to go to college. It is not universal, government (or more accurately, tax payer) provided health care. The American Dream is as unique as each individual American citizen that strives to embrace it. In this great country every man and woman is limited only by the size of their dreams and their dedication to that pursuit. In America a person can rise to a position of prominence, power, wealth, success, leadership and service regardless of who their parents were or where they came from. The dream is not about the material things that one can provide for themselves, nor is it about the services that the government can provide for them. It is about much more than that. Small government and individual rights provided a environment where the dreams of man could flourish and grow, unimpeded by a dictator, monarch, or socialist regime that would try and take from those that work and achieve, and give to those that will not.

From the beginning, America was a unique experiment. The citizens of the world have nearly always lived in societies that were organized for the benefit and enrichment of the ruling and privileged classes. America was different. This is a country that allows all men to dream of reaching their God-given potential. A place where men and women can succeed, but are also allowed to fail. This is the common desire of mankind. To be free and exercise the rights granted them by God, but too often limited or denied by governments of man.

I feel that our time is short to turn back the tide of large, restrictive government. We must work to restore the American Dream to it's proper place. To restore America to that place as the Shining City on the Hill. To carefully guard all that was entrusted to us by the founders, to provide opportunity for all men to achieve that which is their dream. God give us the strength to carry on this fight and the wisdom to constantly pursue that which makes men free.

Ignorance Must Be Bliss!

For several years now I have wondered how it is that some seemingly intelligent people come up with ideas that, to me, seem so illogical.  How can they look at the events of the day and interpret them in a completely different manner and come to a conclusion that seems to be the antithesis of the combined evidence.  I have wondered, is it a fundamental difference in the way that they process information?  Do they see things through a prism of life experience that bends the light of reason into some complex and hard to understand formulation that is difficult to interpret?  Is it pride that makes them twist everything into a multifaceted conglomerate of information that can only properly be decoded by those elites with a high degree of education?  Is it just good old fashioned ignorance?

Today I got a glimpse into the mind of two of the worlds most prodigious thinkers.  It was completely by mistake, or maybe by divine providence.  As I was looking through the programming guide trying to decide what channel would best compliment my current viewing of Fox News (I am one of those people that loves to switch back and forth between 2 shows that air simultaneously) I ran across Hardball with Chris Matthews.  Now, I must admit that in the past I have never watched more than about 5 minutes of Mr. Matthews at one time... or maybe in total, and that will probably remain true in the future.  His esteemed guest on this episode was Bill Maher.  You know the man I am talking about, the one that thinks that Jimmy Carter was a great President and displays his intelligence through a college frat-boy-like string of smart-ass quips.  Yeah, like I said, definitely two of the great thinkers of our day!

After making fun of the usual... Sarah Palin, Christine O'Donnell, Newt Gingrich and of course W, they talked about the "tea baggers" and their radical right ideas.  This time they really proved their point.  Did you know that the tea party folks want to end the popular election of Senators in favor of having them elected to their terms not by the people, but by (gasp) the state legislatures?  And furthermore, they think even small states like Delaware and Vermont should continue to have two Senators.  Where did these wing-nut idiots come up with that kind of idea?  How funny is that?  Definitely proof that the extreme right, conservative, homophobic, puritanical, sexually repressed, fundamental Christian, war mongers are completely looney!  Where did they get a radical political idea like that anyway?

Hmmmm. I had to think about that for about 0.21546 seconds before coming up with the answer... and, yes it is extremely crazy and radical.  If our liberal mental-giant friends would turn to Article I, Section 3 of the Constitution of the United States (I am sure they carry a well-worn, well-read copy in their pocket at all times) they would read "The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, [chosen by the Legislature thereof] for six Years; and each Senator shall have one Vote.  This was to ensure States Rights and protect the States from an overreaching power-hungry Federal Government.  Imagine if someone did something crazy that the majority of the people and the State governments were against (uh, like proposing some weird, socialist, sure-to-fail government healthcare), the Senators would be obligated and instructed to vote according to the wishes of their State.  Sounds like a pretty good idea to me.  Too bad a group of Progressives got Amendment XVII passed to ensure more power to the Federal Government (along with Amendment XVI, the income tax, another great idea!).

Now I know why these people think like they do... they are just ignorant of the founding documents, principles, and people that worked to create this institution.  I also know why Chris Matthews has a viewership about one-fourth or less of that of Glenn Beck... or  Sean Hannity, Brett Baier, Bill O'Reilly, Greta Van Susteren, etc.  I guess I will have to try and remember to tune in again next year... assuming Hardball is still on the air.

Conservatives Against Socialism.... (uh, sort of)

These days I hear a lot of discussion about Socialism, and unless your head is buried in the sand, or in the mainstream media, you have heard the same.  Most self-proclaimed conservative folks are taking a stand against the onslaught of Socialist ideas that have been coming rapid-fire from the sages and saviors in Washington, D.C.  These pillars of wisdom and virtue that inhabit public office have come up with some wonderful, unconstitutional ideas to wreck our republic, and have done so at an alarming rate.  We see government taking partial ownership in business, passing massive health care legislation, increasing regulations on Wall Street (which is already subject to over 700,000 pages of regulation) and now suggesting we investigate anyone financing opposition to the Ground Zero mosque.  In response to all this freedom destroying activity by our elected, the American public has largely stood up in opposition, joining protests, rallies,tea party activities, attending town hall meetings and getting involved in the political process like we have not seen in years.  I, and many others, say it's about time!

Citizens engaging in the political process is what America is all about.  We live in a republic by and for the people.  A society where the governed have a voice, give power to the government willingly and, if the government becomes burdensome, should take that power back.  Most of the problems we have today did not start because of a sudden election of leftist liberals into office.  Most of these problems started nearly 100 years ago with the progressive movement.  Thanks to this great movement we now have the Federal Income Tax, have nearly lost States Rights by changing the election process for the Senate and have an unconstitutional privately owned banking system called the Federal Reserve.  Yes, I guess we could blame a lot of our woes on the progressives, which by the way are still alive and well.  Then again what if the progressives were nothing but a symptom of the problem, not the actual problem?

In my opinion people that have ideas opposed to our Constitution and way of life are not the problem.  The problem too often is a populace that is too concerned with their own comfort and convenience to get involved, educate themselves and fight viewpoints contrary to America's founding principles in the arena of ideas.  We need people involved, speaking out, attending public meetings and most importantly, voting.  Voter turn out in this country continues to be pitiful year after year, decade after decade.  Since 1960 the percentage of the voting age population actually casting a ballot in Presidential election years has been just over 55% with the highest of that time period being 63.1% in 1960.  Why do so many not exercise their right to vote?  That is a good question, but I would be willing to bet it has a lot to do with the complacency caused by many years of comfort and material wealth.  We are not uncomfortable enough to bother with such mundane tasks.

This comfort and apathy that we see is destroying our great republic.  What happened to men of principle such as the Founding Fathers that were willing to risk all for the sake of freedom for themselves, their families and future generations?  These men weren't perfect, but they were willing to risk what they had for the idea of freedom.  The idea that men should be able to pursue happiness without government intervention.  The idea that the role of government was not to provide equal outcomes for all, but to provide for opportunity.  The opportunity for citizens to work unhindered by taxation and regulation towards their dreams knowing that success or failure was determined by the individual and their God, not by government decree.  The idea that the government is given power from the people, not the other way around.  A freedom that allows men to succeed and fail on the merit of their own actions, to take responsibility for themselves, their families and neighbors and not be subject to a paternalistic State that enslaves the populace by creating dependence.

I know this country is full of great, independent and self-reliant people today just as it was 275 years ago.  The problem today is that we have bought into the lies of security and comfort that have been preached from Washington as the answers to our woes.  We have institutions still in place from the greatest socialist President of all time, FDR, that are sucking the life blood out of our economy.  The problem today is that while all these great Americans are standing up against the socialist and fascist ideas coming out of our nations capital, they are holding tightly to many that benefit them.  How many would be willing to give up the bankrupt Social Security system?  Or how many will willingly walk away from Medicare and Medicaid?  Do we believe in the virtues of hard work, determination and the free market enough to end the farming subsidies?  How about the federal grant programs for the Arts and Education?

You can see the problem, if you keep going down the seemingly endless list of programs of wealth redistribution we currently have, you are bound to find one that affects you or your family in some way.  The question we need to ask ourselves is are we willing to plan a way to put that thing we are so dependent on to death?  Are we willing to risk it all now, so that our children and future generations can be free of this addiction to the State that we suffer from?  Are we willing to stand up, not just against President Obama and his minions, but against all the accumulated and unconstitutional socialism that we currently have?  The answer to that question will determine whether, in Mr. Lincoln's words, this "nation, or any nation so conceived, and so dedicated, can long endure".
 

So, we do have rights?

In a recent Supreme Court ruling ( McDonald v. City of Chicago) decided June 28, 2010, the City of Chicago handgun ban laws were struck down.  The argument from Chicago (Daley and Co.) was that the previous decision in Heller v. D.C. only applied to the Federal government.  They argued that the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution restricted the Federal Government from infringing on your right to keep and bear arms, but that states, counties, municipalities, etc. could still keep banning your right to keep a firearm in their jurisdiction. This decision was split 5-4.

What is wrong with our country and our Congress when we even have a case like this emerge?  What is wrong with our court system when we get a decision like this?  This case should have never come up because it should have been settled long ago that the Bill of Rights applies to everyone equally in this country.  Just as the right of free speech is a natural right (not bestowed on us by a government, but rather by God) so is the right to defend one's self, family, and property.  It should have been so entrenched in our thought and way of life that the issue of taking away a law abiding citizen's rights would never even come up, let alone be put into law.  It should have been a 9-0 decision from the Supreme Court.

If any government entity can restrict or refuse our rights, then we really don't have any. The progressive movement in this country has been working since the late 19th century to erode our God-given rights and liberties.  When will the silent majority in this country stand up and say enough is enough?  When will we hold our elected officials accountable to the Constitution?  When will we have liberty again?