“Give me liberty or give me death!”

America used to be “the land of opportunity” where Americans were “endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

Many Americans were able to achieve “The American Dream” with ingenuity and hard work.

In the last couple of weeks I’ve read several stories of changes in America that have caused me to write this blog. Here are just a few examples:

Most of us are aware of Obama’s contraception mandate that goes against religious freedom. But, are you aware that Matt Bowman of the Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) points out that exemptions are being granted to various organizations, including unions, but religious ones still face a mandate?

I read an article pointed out by a fellow HucksArmy member earlier this week informing us Collecting rainwater now illegal in many states as Big Government claims ownership over our water

In Dependence at an all-time high Neil Boortz says:

It’s no secret that more Americans are dependent on government than ever before. The Heritage Foundation released its 2012 Index of Dependence on Government. The results emphasize our slide toward a European welfare nation.

This morning I read an article that got me even more upset. Food Inspector Confiscates Kid’s Homemade Lunch

NONE of our GOP presidential candidates are perfect. EVERY one of them has something that goes against some conservative views. Our liberties are being trampled on and instead of uniting together against the Democrats’ socialistic agenda – Republicans are fighting against each other.

Republicans had a better chance of defeating Obama before campaigns and Super PACS resorted to tearing their fellow soldiers down. Why can’t all of that money be used to point out the positives for their chosen candidate instead of negatives against their opposition?

The Republican Party and America needs a leader that will stand up and show us why he is the one to lead the fight to restore our liberties that are being taken away one by one.

I’m ready to fight to keep our freedom. America needs a Patrick Henry willing to lead the charge, “Give me liberty or give me death!” – before we are no longer a free Republic.

Published in: on FebruaryUTCbWed, 15 Feb 2012 09:38:45 +0000000000amWed, 15 Feb 2012 09:38:45 +000012 4, 2008 at 9:38 am  Leave a Comment  

Comparing Huckabee, Romney, Pawlenty, and Daniels as FiCons

On one of the blog sites that I frequent a few supporters of other candidates questioned Huckabee’s FiCon credentials. On another site a contributor requested that someone “rank these same 4 as to who would be best for a poor economy?” I decided to give that a try using the data available at USGovernmentSpending.com. I’m hoping their information is accurate and am assuming it is from an unbiased source.

I’ll be posting only the information available during the years 3 of the 4 Governors (Huckabee, Romney, and Pawlenty) were serving together and include Daniels during the last two years of that time-frame so we can do our best to compare apples to apples. I hope I figured this correctly. Please feel free to check all the numbers and my math. (If the link starts working properly. I was having trouble with it most of the day.)

First we’ll compare the Gross State Product growth:

Arkansas GSP grew from $77.8 in 2003 to $97.6 in 2007 at an annual rate of 6.35%
Massachusetts GSP grew from $297.3 in 2003 to $353.8 in 2007 at an annual rate of 4.75%
Minnesota GSP grew from $212.4 in 2003 to $255.3 in 2007 at an annual rate of 5.05%
Indiana GSP grew from $239.6 in 2005 (when Daniels took office) to $263.1 in 2007 at an annual rate during the two years we can use to compare of 4.90%

Next we’ll compare the government spending in the state and local government for the four states:

Arkansas spending grew from $13.8 in 2003 to $19.1 in 2007 at an annual rate of 9.97%
Massachusetts spending grew from $40.7 in 2003 to $64.1 in 2007 at an annual rate of 14.37%
Minnesota spending grew from $37.6 in 2003 to $47.2 in 2007 at an annual rate of 6.38%
Indiana spending grew from $42.2 in 2005 to $46.7 in 2007 at an annual rate of 5.33%

Lastly, we’ll compare the Real State Growth:

Arkansas RSG was 3.0% in 2003, 3.7% in 2004, 2.9% in 2005, 2.7% in 2006 and 1.0% in 2007 with a 2.66% yearly average RSG
Massachusetts RST was 1.5% in 2003, 2.0% in 2004, 1.1% in 2005, 1.5% in 2006 and 2.0% in 2007 with a 1.62% yearly average of RSG
Minnesota 3.4% in 2003, 4.1% in 2004, 1.7% in 2005, 0.2% in 2006, and 0.7% in 2007 with a 2.02% yearly average RSG
Indiana 0.3% in 2005, 1.1% in 2006, and 3.1% in 2007 with a 1.50% yearly average RSG

In summary:
Huckabee saw the best annual rate of growth in Gross State Product. Daniels and Pawlenty saw the least growth in spending. Huckabee did the best in Real State Growth. Romney did the worst in all three categories.

I’ll be voting Huckabee for President 2012!

Note: If there is someone out there with the ability to put this in chart or graph form I would really appreciate it.

Update: I struck out the comment about Romney because it was properly pointed out to be inaccurate. H/T Jeff Fuller

Update 2: I was asked to calculate some information for Utah and Jon Huntsman during this time frame, too:

Utah GSP grew from $90.7 in 2005 to $109.6 in 2007 at an annual rate of 10.42%

Utah spending grew from $17.2 in 2005 to $20.0 in 2007 at an annual rate of 8.14%

Utah RSG was 5.7% in 2005, 6.6% in 2006, and 5.8% in 2007 with a 6.03% yearly average RSG

Note: I’ll be adding more information as I calculate it. I’m not sure if I’ll post the information here or write a new blog.

Published in: on MayUTCbMon, 02 May 2011 18:24:37 +0000000000pmMon, 02 May 2011 18:24:37 +000011 4, 2008 at 6:24 pm  Comments (4)  

Who will prevail – special interest groups or the tax payers?

Money is power. How much money do special interest groups contribute to political parties? Do they receive power for their money? From what I’ve heard in the media over the years; Republicans owe their power to special interest groups – you know the most notorious ones – pharmaceutics companies, big business, financial institutions, NRA, etc. I stumbled on a very informative website while looking for some of that information. If you haven’t seen OpenSecrets.org yet – be sure to check it out.

Are Republicans really the ones that profit most from special interest groups? Let’s see what Open Secrets has to say. Who does Open Secrets term the “Top 10 Heavy Hitters” and how much did they contribute? Which Which political party received the most of the contributions from those “top 10 heavy hitters”? The info in brackets is from their page titled Top All-Time Donors, 1989-2010 – which also gives you information on other special interest groups – more than just the top 10. For even more info from Open Secrets – click on the links to see how it was split up and which specific politicians received the most money from them.

Top 10 Heavy Hitters:

ActBlue $51,124,846 [Democrats 99% Republicans 0%]

AT&T Inc $46,292,670 [Democrats 44% Republicans 55%]

*American Fedn of State, County & Municipal Employees $43,477,361 [Democrats 98% Republicans 1%]

National Assn of Realtors $38,721,441 [Democrats 49% Republicans 50%]

Goldman Sachs $33,387,252 [Democrats 61% Republicans 37%]

American Assn for Justice $33,143,279 [Democrats 90% Republicans 8%]

*Intl Brotherhood of Electrical Workers $33,056,216 [Democrats 97% Republicans 2%]

*National Education Assn $32,024,610 [Democrat 93% Republicans 6%]

*Laborers Union $30,292,050 [Democrats 92% Republicans 7%]

*Teamsters Union $29,319,982 [Democrats 93% Republicans 6%]

Note: the asterisks were inserted by me to mark union contributions.

Did you notice that exactly 1/2 of the “top 10 heavy hitters” are unions? Is anyone surprised that Democrat power spokesmen Jesse Jackson showed up in Madison, Michael Moore declared war and even President Obama weighed in to help protect their own interest (money and power)?

Maybe Scott Walker and the Republicans have a right to fight for the tax payers (as well as themselves) rather than giving in to the special interest groups.

Published in: on MarchUTCbFri, 11 Mar 2011 10:27:42 +0000000000amFri, 11 Mar 2011 10:27:42 +000011 4, 2008 at 10:27 am  Comments (1)  

Mike Huckabee’s newest book, “A Simple Government”

February 22, is not only my birthday – it is also the release date for Mike Huckabee’s newest book: A Simple Government: Twelve Things We Really Need from Washington (and a Trillion That We Don’t!) Today I was part of “an exclusive on-the-record interview conference call” with former Governor/ former (and hopefully future) Presidential candidate, Mike Huckabee discussing his new book.

I support Mike Huckabee – because his views come closer to mine than any other political candidate I’ve found.  I believe we need a Republican Presidential nominee that is willing to stand strongly on all three legs of the Republican platform: social, fiscal, and defense.  Listening to Mike Huckabee on that conference call today convinced me even more that he is the one I want leading America.

Here are some reasons why – just from the conference call today:

  • He was prompt.  The call was supposed to start at 3:15 Eastern and it started at 3:15 Eastern.
  • He realizes you can’t talk about the economy without talking about the family.
  • He realizes that a great deal of our problem with the economy is because of failed families.
  • He realizes the differences between the family’s responsibilities and the government’s.
  • He realizes that if people would give “one dime on every dollar they make” to their own churches we wouldn’t need government programs and explained how the church he attended in Arkansas helped provide children with food for the weekend.
  • He realizes there shouldn’t be a “disconnect between social conservatives and fiscal conservatives.”   “All SoCons are FiCons – but not all FiCons are SoCons” and voting records prove it.
  • He realizes our founders expected our Government to be administered as locally as possible and would be willing to get rid of the Department of Education so that could be more possible.
  • He realizes that “education is the ticket out of the hole” that can turn tax takers into tax payers.
  • He realizes the “common opponent is Barack Obama and not each other.”
  • He realizes it is troubling that we are fighting these wars with guards and reserves that aren’t complaining because they are good soldiers.  “We’ve worn them out.”  They were supposed to be here to help at home.

You can read an excerpt from the first chapter of Mike Huckabee’s book by clicking here.


Here is a link for a map of where you can get Mike Huckabee to autograph your copy of his new book and a link with a list of places he will be on tour and/or places where you can order it.

I haven’t received my copy of his book yet; but will be getting my birthday gift autographed at the book signing in Dubuque this weekend.

Published in: on FebruaryUTCbMon, 21 Feb 2011 16:53:33 +0000000000pmMon, 21 Feb 2011 16:53:33 +000011 4, 2008 at 4:53 pm  Comments (1)  

“Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it”

The Democrats are working hard for an Obama presidency with a filibuster-proof Congress. According to an article I read recently; the last time there was a president serving with a filibuster-proof Congressional majority was in 1977. [The Carter Administration]

Although I don’t usually use Wikipedia for reference; since this quote goes along with what I remember – I will use it.

During Carter’s administration, the economy suffered double-digit inflation, coupled with very high interest rates, oil shortages, high unemployment and slow economic growth. Productivity growth in the United States had declined to an average annual rate of 1 percent, compared to 3.2 percent of the 1960s.

In my opinion the scariest similarities between Carter and Obama is this quote (also from the Wikipedia article)

The media discovered and promoted Carter. As Lawrence Shoup noted in his 1980 book The Carter Presidency and Beyond:

“What Carter had that his opponents did not was the acceptance and support of elite sectors of the mass communications media. It was their favorable coverage of Carter and his campaign that gave him an edge, propelling him rocket-like to the top of the opinion polls. This helped Carter win key primary election victories, enabling him to rise from an obscure public figure to President-elect in the short space of 9 months.”

The question is – Have we “learn[ed] from history” or “are [we] doomed to repeat it”?

Published in: on OctoberUTCbMon, 27 Oct 2008 11:52:56 +0000000000amMon, 27 Oct 2008 11:52:56 +000008 4, 2008 at 11:52 am  Comments (5)  

Actions speak louder than words

Edit: I’m adding 2 additions to this post. Note: The 2nd addition is at the end.

First addition:
I’m editing this post because I forgot to mention something which is very relevant to the theme of this article. This is the introduction of the original news article I mentioned that caused me to write this in the first place:

While Sen. Barack Obama’s presidential campaign has produced a television ad criticizing Sen. John McCain’s position on equal pay for women and pointing out that women in America are paid only 77 cents on the dollar compared to men, Obama pays his own female Senate staffers, on average, only 78 percent of what he pays male staffers.

Original post plus 2nd addition at the end:
I’ve never been a member of NOW [National Organization for Women] even though I agree with SOME of their goals. I believe that chores should be shared around the home between all family members. That is ONE of the reasons I was impressed with Sen. McCain’s VP choice. The Palin family is an example of “What’s going to work – Team Work” in action; a true inspiration for families across America. But, many outspoken feminists across America don’t like Gov. Palin. Are they afraid she might actually let the world know it’s OK to be a pro-life, pro-traditional family, pro-gun rights, and religious conservative female? Were they shocked such creatures exist? Maybe they’ve never heard of Feminists for Life, Christian Womanhood, Joyful Woman, etc.?

I believe in equal pay for equal work; regardless of race or gender. I just read an article that really leaves me very confused since NOW recently endorsed Obama. Have you heard that “Obama Pays Women Only 78 Percent of What He Pays Men”?

… Obama pays his own female Senate staffers, on average, only 78 percent of what he pays male staffers.

Women on McCain’s staff, meanwhile, earn 24 percent more on average than women on Obama’s Senate staff. McCain also pays his female Senate staff members a higher average salary than his male Senate staff members…

In percentage terms, McCain paid female staffers 101 percent of what he paid men. Women outnumbered men on McCain’s staff, 26 to 16.

NOW President Kim Gandy did not view the pay disparity as a problem…

Thirteen of the 20 highest paid members of McCain’s Senate staff were women during the sixth-month reporting period. Eight of the 20 highest paid members of Obama’s Senate staff were women.

Read more here.

NOW had a choice between endorsing a candidate whose ACTIONS support fairness between genders or a candidate that SAYS they support fairness between genders; even though his actions PROVE otherwise. They chose the empty suit candidate full of empty words.

As an Illinois State Senator, Obama worked hard to raise tax payer dollars to support his favorite charities. As an US Senator, he was working hard to encourage Congress to fight global poverty. Read more here. That was probably part of the reason Oprah endorsed him. Fighting poverty is dear to Oprah’s heart and she has done a good job using her own money supporting that cause.

I’m a strong supporter of our 1st Amendment right and believe God gave each of us the choice as to which religion (if any at all) we want to practice. I personally believe it is Scriptural to give to charity and examine my own records to make sure I give a minimum of 10% [Tithe] of our family income to charity like the Bible teaches. Malachi 3:8 (KJV) “Will a man rob God? Yet ye have robbed me. But ye say, Wherein have we robbed thee? In tithes and offerings.” I also believe it is up to the individual as to whether or not they obey God and give to charity. But, I’d like to point out some interesting information.

Until recently [2005 – around the time he began his presidential run] the Obama’s charitable contributions were at a lower percentage of their total income than the national average of 2% of gross income. Read more here. In 2007 the Biden’s gross income was $319,853 with less than ½ % [$995] going to charity. Read more here.

How do the presidential candidates compare in charitable contributions for 2007? The Obama’s 2007 income level was larger than that of most Americans, 4.2 million dollars gross income with approximately 6% [about 3 times the national average of 2%] going to charity. Although smaller than the Obama’s, the McCain’s 2007 income is also larger than most Americans, $794,000 with approximately 27% [almost 10 ¾ times larger than the national average] going to charity. Read more here.

Regardless of what happens with our taxes, I intend to continue fulfilling my promise to give at least 10% of our family income to charity. I have a problem with government deciding WHICH charities I should support with our tax dollars. Some of their choices are fine. Some of them go against everything I believe. I really have a problem with the Democrat ticket wanting to put OUR money where THEIR mouth is. Maybe they never learned that charity begins at home.

Obama says Congress should do something about the way mortgage companies do business. He blames the Bush administration and McCain for our “recent” economic crisis. Bush tried to do something about it in 2003. Read more here. McCain actually tried again by co-sponsoring a bill in 2005 to address the problem. But, once again the bill was squashed by the Democrats in bed with Freddie and Fannie. “…Obama in his three complete years in the Senate is the second largest recipient of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae campaign contributions…” Read more here.

Obama says he supports immediate troop withdrawal; but allegedly “OBAMA TRIED TO STALL GIS’ IRAQ WITHDRAWAL” Read it here.

Obama says he wants to reform government. “Obama sidesteps reform in Illinois.” Read it here.

Something to think about:
Hypocrite means “a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings.” What does that say for Obama’s and NOW’s words vs. their actions? I wonder – What kind of picture would be next to the definition of the word hypocrite in a dictionary?

Edit: 2nd addition:

Something more to think about:
Didn’t Obama claim running his campaign is proof of him having executive experience? Upon examining that type of “resume” – which candidate could we really expect to make changes for equality among the sexes? Sen. McCain pays males and females of his staff virtually equally; although women are paid about 1% more than men among the top positions and chose a woman to be his VP. Obama pays women 22% lower than men and chose a man as his VP. Does Obama’s “resume” mean we should expect “more of the same” suppression of equality between sexes if he is elected the chief executive of America? Once again Obama talks “change” while McCain performs change.

Published in: on SeptemberUTCbFri, 19 Sep 2008 16:46:53 +0000000000pmFri, 19 Sep 2008 16:46:53 +000008 4, 2008 at 4:46 pm  Comments (4)