It is that time of the year when Presidents rant and rave about the problem of government spending being out of control and they produce budgets that only add to the waste.  Barack Obama is no different; in fact, his budgets are the largest seen in US history.  Furthermore, his annual deficits are higher than the national debt was just a couple of decades ago.  Rhetoric aside, Obama is operating as if it is business as usual.

Peter Morici’s article title at FoxNews.com says it all, “Obama’s Budget — Straight From La La Land.”  In it, Morici notes that “Today, President Obama released his proposed 2011 budget, which forecasts the federal deficit will fall to $706 billion by 2014 or just 3.9 percent of GDP before rising again in 2015.”  The fantasy continues by noting that “To accomplish this feat, he proposes letting the Bush tax cuts expire and other spending cuts the Congress has rejected in the past. More extraordinary, though, the document assumes that real GDP grows at better than 4 percent a year over the four years from 2011 to 2014, and the economy does not encounter a serious recession.”  What is particularly interesting is that we have yet to recover from the economic down turn that we are currently in, yet Obama’s forecast is filled with optimism.

The truth of the matter is there are plenty of areas to cut spending.  In a perfect world, the Congress would be obliged to abide by its oath of office in which members agree to defend the US Constitution.  If they did such, they would find they are allowed to spend in seventeen different areas according to Article I, Section 8 of that document.  If they did that, budgets would always be balanced and our economic freedom would be vast.  Unfortunately, our world is anything but perfect.

There are numerous “real world” ways in which we can seriously cut the deficit and Elizabeth MacDonald points out some of them in a recent article at FoxBusiness.com.  The title will certainly get your attention: “$1.5 Trillion Ways to Cut the Deficit.”  The suggestions make sense, even if they do not have much hope in the political environment we live in today. Here are some examples:

An estimated $1.2 trillion in unused federal property. She notes that “The government owns and leases 3.87 billion square feet of property, and 55.7 million acres of land-meaning, one out of every forty acres. Real property asset value for all these holdings is estimated to be $1.2 trillion, says Citizens Against Government Waste, based on data from the Federal Real Property Profile created by the Bush administration, which helps federal agencies manage and dispose of their excess property.”  The examples that follow are numerous, and include Chicago’s Old Main Post Office, which is a 2.5 million square foot structure that costs over $2 million annually to maintain.  Than there is the John Murtha Airport in Johnstown, Pennsylvania.  This airport cost over $200 million in government subsidies, even though the place has fewer passengers than security guards.  The list continues and it would be very easy to get to $1.2 trillion with little or no impact on any of our lives.

Than she notes “there is the $123.5 billion on government programs that have consistently failed.”  She may be a little kind with such a low number, but she covers makes perfect sense.  The Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB) Program Assessment Rating Tool found 218 government programs that were either “inadequate” or “ineffective” virtually throughout the entire government.  The OMB may be generous too, but there seems to be plenty of areas begging to be cut.

Than there is $98 billion in agency over payments that MacDonald notes.  The following are only a few examples:

–Health and Human Services: $55.1 billion, or 9.4%. Includes overpayment rates of 7.8% and 15.4% in the Medicare fee for service and Advantage programs, respectively.

–Labor: $12.3 billion, or 9.9%. Most of the overpayments were in the unemployment insurance program.

–Treasury: $12.3 billion, or 25.5%. These are attributed to overpayments in the earned income tax credit.

–Social Security Administration: $8 billion, or 1.2%, in overpayments.

–Agriculture: $4.3 billion in overpayments, or 5.9% of total department spending. Much of the waste was found in food stamp, school meals and federal crop programs.

–Transportation: $1.5 billion, or 3%. This waste was primarily found in the Federal Highway Administration planning and construction program.

–Veterans Affairs: $1.2 billion, or 2.7%. Waste here includes overpayments in the pension and other compensation programs.

–Housing and Urban Development: $1 billion, or 3.5%. All of the waste in this department was found in public housing and rental assistance.

–Defense: $849 million, or 0.5%.

–Homeland Security: $644.5 million, or 3.7%. The Homeland Security grant program as well as Disaster Relief Fund Vendor Payments were the primary guilty parties at this agency.

–Education: $599 million, or 2.1%.

One of my favorite issues to attack is corporate welfare.  What that means any more has changed significantly after the bailouts of Bush and Obama, but MacDonald’s article (referring to the research of the Cato Institute) points out $92 billion of easily identifiable spending.  “The figure includes direct cash payments, to farmers and research funds to high-tech companies, as well as indirect subsidies, such as funding for overseas promotion of specific U.S. products and industries. The cash payments come from the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, Energy, HUD, and State.”

Than there are the earmarks, which we seem to all love to hate more than any other area of government expenditures.  Although they only come in at $19.6 billion (on over 10,000 earmarks), they are despised because they are part of a government approach to funding that is filled with deception.  The list, again, is impressive and here are a few examples:

$75,000 for Wayne Gomes Youth Baseball Diversity Foundation

$381,000 for Jazz at Lincoln Center, New York, NY

$254,000 for Wool Research, Montana Sheep Institute

$2.2 million for Center for Grape Genetics, Geneva, NY

$1.8 million for swine odor and manure management research in Ames, Iowa

$4.4 million for the Army Center of Excellence in Acoustics

This, again is only the obvious…$1.5 trillion.  Imagine what we could accomplish if we were willing to suffer a little pain for the better of our Republic?

Bishop Council Nedd II of the Chesapeake and the Northeast for the Episcopal Missionary Church and a member of the Project 21 national advisory council noted that “After virtually walking away from the gay community after the election, President Obama is all of a sudden taking up their cause again? Last week’s election (in Massachusetts) shows he has problems with Americans of all political stripes, but he appears to be focusing most intently on quelling the civil war rising against him in the left-wing of his party. One would think that — as his approach to national security is being questioning in the wake of the underwear bomber and his dithering on Afghanistan — that he would think of some other military-related issue to champion than one that could fracture his 2008 base even further. And then there is his post-Obamacare pivot to jobs that seems to be uneducated and aimless. Is 2010 to be consumed with ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ for the military and ‘don’t ask, don’t know’ on jobs?”

Mychal Massie, who is the chairman of Project 21 stated that “It is time that President Obama realized his job is more than giving speeches and blaming former President Bush. Instead, from his performance tonight, he continues to show his disconnect with what the American people want and need. With record numbers of people unemployed and home ownership at risk or lost for so many, to point out just two problems, we needed to hear more from him than blaming others. It is time for Obama to own up to this malaise as his own.”

Kevin L. Martin, also with Project 21’s national advisory council argues that while “Watching President Obama’s State of the Union Address, it felt like he was back on the campaign trail. Like on the trail, tonight’s rhetoric tends to differ from reality. What was on display was a bait-and-switch in which broken promises were rehashed and more pandering was thrown at the middle class as he pledged tax cuts, tax credits and job creation.”

R. Dozier Gray, a combat veteran and also a Project 21 member stated that “The President reminds us that one in ten Americans still cannot find work. Hard as I try, I simply cannot think of anything he has done to truly mitigate the problem. Mr. President, if you hated the bank bailouts why did you support them. Own it, sir.”

In addition to her work with Project 21 Lisa Fritsch is a writer and talk show host from Austin, Texas. She observed that “President Obama wonders why there is so much ‘cynicism’ out there. While his speech was full of ironies and folly, this is the worst. It is President Obama who is the cynic, because he doesn’t seem to believe in anything but the government. Though President Obama worked hard to try to connect with Americans, it is clear that his position on some of Americans’ top concerns — taxes, terrorism and health care reform — remain the same. And his idea of change is at odds with the average voter…”

Ellis Washington who is a member of the national advisory council for the Project 21 black leadership network and a former editor of the Michigan Law Review noted that “Obama in his first year raised the spending limit to unsustainable levels ($1.35 trillion); more than GWB did in 8 years and now Obama is championing a freeze on spending? President Obama’s first State of the Union Address painfully exemplifies that this clear and present danger to America is not Mr. Obama, but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man of this ilk with the presidency. The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails us — lack of common sense and good judgment.”

You will not typically find these opinions among black Americans in the mainstream media. The reason for this is simple, there is a disdain by the media and by the left in general when it comes to a “diversity of opinion” among minorities and women. Liberals have “fought” for the freedoms of the “down trodden” for years we are told. One of the freedoms they did not fight for, it appears is freedom of thought.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Black Conservative Response to State of the Union Address (gloucestercitynews.net)
• Obama Declares ‘I Don’t Quit’ in State of the Union (usnews.com)
• Obama Seeks to Indoctrinate High Schoolers ala Nazi Youth (rightpundits.com)
• Hillary: I probably won’t serve two terms as Secretary of State (hotair.com)
• WaPo/ABC poll a vote of no confidence in Obama (hotair.com)
• Obama Admits Health Care Reform May Die In Congress (huffingtonpost.com)

While the rest of the nation sat in awe of the events that took place in a special election in Massachusetts that put a Republican in a Senate seat held by a Kennedy for a half of century, President Obama concluded that such was a result of policy makers going too slow on health care reform.  He came to this conclusion in spite of the following:

• • The state of Massachusetts had been under a socialized health care system since 2006 and it has led to higher prices and rationed care.
  • In spite of the fact that Massachusetts is 3 to 1 Democrats, it still chose a Republican for the Senate.
  • If the voter rage in Massachusetts was due to Republican resistance to reform, why would they elect a member of the GOP to this office?

As I read these obvious facts it seems like the need for an explanation is laughable.  These points should be clear to the most casual observer, but Obama is building a policy strategy that is contrary to these facts.  This indicates that either he questions the intelligence of his constituents or his constituents should worry about the “Emperor’s new clothes” or, in this case, strategy.  This approach to governing may work with petty dictators who are not accountable to voters or other branches of government, but it is still highly questionable in the United States.

In regards to the branches of government, Obama has developed this knack of attacking the Legislative and Judicial branches as if they are not necessary in accomplishing his policy objectives.  In a special joint session of Congress in September 2009, Obama claimed that members of Congress who stated that the President’s health care bill would include illegal immigrants were distorting the facts.  Members had seen enough of the bill to know that the President was misleading the audience and compelled Cong. Joe Wilson (R-SC) to exclaim out loud, “You lie!”  We have rarely seen such a reaction from a member of Congress, then again, we have rarely seen such an attack by a president on the Legislative branch. In the President’s State of the Union address, the President again went on the war path at another branch of power.  In this case it was the Judicial branch and the Supreme Court.

During the President’s speech, Obama openly criticized a recent Supreme Court decision on corporate and other group funding of judicial races.  The President claimed that the Court reversed a century worth of opinion on the subject by allowing for such funding.  The reality is, there was very little court opinion on the subject until a few decades and virtually all of that was without precedence.  In spite of this, it was still surprising than that one Justice (Samuel Alito), actually shook his head and said something to the effect of “not true.”  This was another demonstration we have not witnessed during an event such as this, but we have never had a president quite like Obama.  All of these incidents point to problems in his future when it comes to governing.

President Obama Continues to Show Immaturity

Obama’s last job was US Senator, which he did not finish one term.  Before that he was a part time State Senator from Illinois and community organizer, neither of which are typical springboards for the highest office of the land.  What we do know from his experience and temperament is that he does not bring the necessary skills and understanding to serve in the highest office of our land.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Rasmussen: Obama post-SOTU comeback, or dead cat bounce? (hotair.com)
• State of the Union: Pivot or Divot? (rightpundits.com)
• CNN: Independents now reacting negatively to mere mention of “hope” by Obama (hotair.com)
• Ego, Obama’s Achilles’ Heel (americanthinker.com)
• Opportunist-in-chief complains about political opportunism (michellemalkin.com)
• Two sharp responses to Obama’s SOTU (michellemalkin.com)
• Sarah Palin: Mr. President: Please Try, “I’m Listening, People,” Instead of “Listen Up, People!” (conservatives4palin.com)
• Is Obama Bored? (rightpundits.com)
• After Mass. Upset, White House to Focus on Economy (cbn.com)
• SCOTUS Slammed at SotU: Alito Mouths ‘Not True’ to the President (abovethelaw.com)

My husband and I were both twenty-one when we were married; in love, we knew we could conquer the world on a penny and a prayer. I was a college student, determined to go to law school and he was working the swing shift at $7.80 an hour. We were living the newly wed dream. We were not planning on having children for a very long time as we had life plans for our future; but the contraceptive didn’t work and we found ourselves just over six months newly married and pregnant. I cried almost every day of that pregnancy. The timing was a disaster in my mind. The finances were impossible. The dreams I had were dying before my very eyes. The theme song of my life was “I”. Yet because I knew that life began at conception, an abortion would be murder, plain and simple. Murder is a capital offense before God and I would not kill the life that was growing in me because it cut into my well laid plans. According to WebMD, I had all the classic reasons to justify an abortion and I fit the list of the most common reasons that teens and young women choose to have an abortion:⁴

• Awareness that they are not mature enough to have children.
• Knowledge that they are financially not able to support or care for children.
• Concern that having a baby would change their lives and compromise their (and a child’s) future. Many young mothers don’t ever manage to get the education and employment necessary to raise their children above the poverty line.

• Birth control (contraceptive) failure. Over half of all women who have an abortion used a contraceptive method during the month they became pregnant.³
• Physical or mental conditions that endanger the woman’s health if the pregnancy is continued.

I could have checked off each one of these reasons and made the legally justified decision to end the pregnancy, but my belief that all life is sacred and that conception is the beginning of life, countered these selfish reasons to abort this baby.

I continued on with my life, as this new life grew inside mine. I walked to my political science classes, worked my part-time job and dealt with the emotions of life not going the way I planned it. My husband came with me to every doctor’s appointment and was my support. We saw our baby, looking very much like a baby on the ultra sound and we went to birthing classes to prepare for this event. I continued to cry. The day she was born, my tears dried up. Twenty years and four more children later, my life is very different from the one I had planned, yet I recognize that God knows better that me. I have talked to professionals who have lived their dreams in their pursued fields, but have missed out on what they have discovered as their most important calling on life. I specifically recall a conversation with my doctor, who had just begun practicing medicine. She and I both had had babies around the same time, and she was back at work, doing the job she had dreamed about for a most of her life. She said, “I would love to stay home with my baby, but I have medical school bills to pay and can’t afford not to work.” She was living her life long career dream, but was torn because her heart was with her son. Her work was noble, but she recognized what she was missing not being home. God gave me a gift of an unplanned pregnancy, because it altered my life course and gave me His life course instead. I am so grateful that I did not have to make the difficult decision to choose career over child raising. I don’t know if I would have chosen rightly. But God in His grace allowed me to hold my baby in my arms, while studying for finals and getting my degree; all the while recognizing that His plans are higher than mine and the job He had for me was to raise a family. Had I allowed my legal right to dictate what I would do about my unwanted pregnancy, I would be a radically different woman today. But I did what I knew to be true, in spite of my feelings, and I let life live. Today I have a beautiful daughter in college, about the same age I was when she was conceived, who is living to serve God and pursuing her dreams. My dreams continue to be molded by God’s best for me. I may not like the direction it is heading at a given moment, but I can rest knowing that He has a vantage point that I do not and that His eyes see eternity in all directions, while mine only have the past and the present in sight. If I had lived for the moment twenty years ago, lived in the emotion, decided that my selfish legal right was to abort my unwanted pregnancy, not only would I have lived with the guilt of murdering my first-born child, but also, I would have missed out on all that she has brought to my life and to the world. It must be stated that if I had ended this un-planned pregnancy, God in His grace and love would have forgiven me, when I turned to Him in repentance. I recognize God’s hand in my life, in high-definition hind-sight, that He was the strength, when I had no strength of my own, that helped me make the right decision to keep my baby. God gave us a precious daughter which we named Alethia, the Greek word for Truth, as her life has brought Truth into ours.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Sarah And Bristol Talk About Rasing Babies Together (thesarahpalinblog.com)
• The 14th murder victim of the Fort Hood jihadi massacre (michellemalkin.com)
• Bristol Palin Embraces Abstinence; Oprah Suggests Retraction? (conservatives4palin.com)
• Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of…Words (americanthinker.com)
• Trainwreck: Scozzafava holds photo op … outside Hoffman’s office (hotair.com)
• The gutsiest QB in the Super Bowl may be … (hotair.com)

There is, of course, the old joke where we get a two line tax form. The first line asks, “How much did you make last year?” Second line, “Send a check or money order for that amount.” That would be simple, but it would also not work because we would all either stop working or become liars about how much we make. However, this joke does put us in the right direction, according to Malanga.

The vast majority of the modern economies are moving rapidly towards a “flat tax” as a way of guaranteeing a predictable amount of revenue coming in, avoiding the punishment of individuals for earning more income (with a flat tax people pay more if they make more, but it is not in punitive way), and to eliminate the problems of complexity.

How complex is our tax code? According to Malanga, some 80 percent of households now use tax preparers or software to complete their tax returns. Furthermore, we spend 7.6 billion hours on tax compliance, according to the IRS Taxpayer Advocate, which in turn costs nearly $200 billion a year.Over the past decade (since 2001), Washington initiated 3,125 changes to the tax code, or more than one a day. Malanga refers to one recent study that ranked the U.S. tax code 122nd in complexity among 175 nations worldwide. This happens because political forces have decided to use our tax code for social engineering rather than for raising revenue. Any time a politician says he or she wants to promote policies that encourage home ownership or energy savings, they want to do so in the context of changing the tax code to encourage such. This only makes the tax system more complicated.

The system is complex, both for the taxpayer and those who prepare forms for them. A flat tax would be an improvement, although it is still a tax on wealth creation, which makes no sense for any country interested in promoting opportunity and growth. A sales tax would be better still, because it would be a simple tax on consumption. If our government did the things it is allowed to do in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution, a very modest tariff, like our Founders intended, would be sufficient. But simplicity with either a flat or sales tax would move us in the right direction.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Thousands May Incorrectly Be Using Stimulus Tax Breaks (nytimes.com)
• Special tax breaks proposed for Haitian earthquake relief donations (dontmesswithtaxes.typepad.com)
• PATRICK MCILHERAN: The Patsies Catch On To ObamaCare. “Nor is it just money. The ticked-off people… (pajamasmedia.com)
• How do you enforce a health-insurance mandate? (hotair.com)
• Principles, Not Polls, Should Dictate Policy Debate (girlpundit.com)
• A sham ‘compromise’ health care bill waiting in the wings (americanthinker.com)
• Surprise! 15 million will owe taxes on tax break (hotair.com)

Major news sources like to monitor migration trends among states. The Census Bureau has been watching these trends also and what you find “between the lines,” is really quite interesting.

The fastest growing states for population are (in order) Wyoming, Utah, Texas, Colorado, Alaska, Arizona, Washington, North Carolina, Georgia, and South Carolina.
There are several unique characteristics about these population shifts:

• They are often huge. Texas gained over 500,000 in one year. This is largely attributable to the huge number of businesses that have relocated to the state.
• All of these states lean Republican or are very Republican. Republican strategists’ lips salivate when they think of these population shifts to their state. This means more Congressional seats moving to their states and away (as you will see later) from Democrat states. However, they may be surprised by the long term results, as I will explain later.
• They tend to be in the West or (even more so) the South. This has been a trend that has persisted for decades and continues to be the case. Politically, the implications of this are significant. All of our Presidents since John F. Kennedy have been from Texas, California, Georgia, and Arkansas (with the exception of our sitting President and Gerald Ford.

What about states that have seen a decline in population? They are, starting with the biggest loser, Michigan, Maine, Rhode Island, Ohio, Vermont, New Hampshire, West Virginia, Pennsylvania, New York, and Mississippi.

• They are in overwhelmingly liberal states. With the exception of Mississippi, these states are all “true blue.” This, again, makes conservatives excited and liberals concerned, but the long term implications could prove different.
• With the exception of Mississippi, all of these are in the East Coast and Midwest, which have also suffered when it comes to political prestige and power.

What are the lessons learned?

I believe that the political and economic environment of many of these states have become so hostile to entrepreneurship and economic growth, people are voting with their feet in a quest to find better jobs and opportunities. Michigan has taken a pounding for decades (my family was among the “Michiganders” who flew South to flee the rust belt in the 1970s) and continues to face economic pressures due to unions that international competitors never have to encounter. New York and Connecticut are noted for their constant regulatory pressures they apply on business, forcing many to have little choice but to leave. The list goes on; people are leaving these states on the quest for economic prosperity.

I believe Republicans, who appear to be the long term winners in these shifts, should be cautious in their enthusiasm. I remember when I worked as an aide for US Senator Gordon Humphrey of New Hampshire. That state had become extremely Republican by the 1980s and was enjoying growth as people fled the disastrous political and economic situation in Massachusetts just to the South. Eventually New Hampshire became increasingly liberal as people moved who knew there were things wrong with their home state — taxes, crime, etc. — but didn’t realize that the people they were voting for were the source of their problems. So once they moved to a new promise land, they brought the same terrible policies with them. Today, New Hampshire is now a major population loser as the migrants from Massachusetts wonder what happened to the Granite State. It is a vicious cycle.

The future looks bright for conservative friendly states on paper, but this will only be the case if new voters support the very policies that have made these states so attractive in the first place.

One of the main reasons why voters are entertaining turning over one of its Senate seats to a Republican is that the people of Massachusetts have seen the future of socialized medicine and they know it doesn’t work.  They have been under a health care bill since 2006 that mirrors, in many respects, the Obama plan navigating through the Senate.

Forbes magazine has pointed out that many of the voters of Massachusetts are unhappy with the plan and for several good reasons.  In an article titled “MAss Disaster,” writer Sally Pipes exposes some of the ugly truths surrounding the socialized health care bill that has plagued the state.

Pipes reminds the reader of some words that have haunted then Governor Mitt Romney.  “‘Will Commonwealth care cost taxpayers more? No!’ So wrote Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney in November 2004, the economy then still in full bloom. ‘Neither the state nor the taxpayers can afford to pay more.’  She goes on to point out that “It’s worth pondering ex-Gov. Romney’s promises just over three years after he crossed partisan lines to reform health care in the Bay State. The Obama administration and congressional Democrats are modeling reform on the Massachusetts model, promoting bureaucratic health exchanges, increased restrictions on health insurance and vastly expanded taxpayer-subsidized care. Like Romney, they promise more coverage at lower cost, even as the evidence suggests otherwise.”

So what do the people of Massachusetts think about the socialized health care experiment they have been a part of?  The Forbes piece notes that “Only one in four considers the reform a success. Just one in five thinks it has made health care more affordable.”  I’m sure that many of the one-fourth work in government or they are among those that had no health insurance before and do not know quality care when they see it.  They certainly are not seeing it in their own state.

A plan that was touted as a way to increase coverage without excessive government spending has had the exact opposite effect:

• Medicaid has increased by 76,000 enrollees and the subsidized plans by 177,000.
• Forty-six percent pay no premium, and
• another 12% are highly subsidized.
• A mere 19,000 have signed up for the non-subsidized private plans offered through the Commonwealth Health Insurance Connector. These were the plans that Romney and others said would help contain costs.

To make matters worse, the bill is very costly.  Most citizens are looking at spending 10 percent of their incomes on premiums or face impressive fines.  So high, in fact, are the premiums, 20 percent of the state’s residents have become exempt from the coverage.  Many of these moved to Medicaid (as seen above), but at least 3 percent of the population are still without coverage.   Instead of reducing costs, like the politicians promised as the bill navigated through the legislative process, it has significantly increased costs and has the government scrambling for revenues.  Recently the state has taken a page out of Obama’s book and has put a hit on smokers at the tune of $1 a pack.

So how will the state fight the growth in health care costs? The same way socialist health care systems have fought such runaway costs for years; through a bureaucracy that will cut doctors’ income, moving patients into manage care, and the establishment of price controls.  In other words, through the development of the same type of rationed care that dominates much of the world today.  These are the exact type of approaches Massachusetts is pursuing.

Is Massachusetts Senate Race a Health Care Referendum?

The people of Massachusetts already know this type of health care does not work and that is why they are so close to electing a Republican like Scott Brown to the US Senate.

In researching my own book, What’s The Matter With California, I had no intent in waging any such argument. In the California spirit, I shied from judgments like “good” or “evil” or even “just plain stupid.”

Instead, I looked at outcomes from a material perspective, namely how does a given phenomenon affect the economy and the ecology of the state and the well being of its citizens.

In doing so, however, I stumbled upon one very powerful rationale for Christianity and, in the stumbling, I stumbled upon one more powerful rationale still.

The stumbling began when I visited Michael and Deborah Grumbine and their family of nine children, now aged 11 to 31, in the Los Angeles suburb of Whittier. I wanted to see how a large family could live on a median income in an area where such an income can buy only 2 percent of the homes on the market.

In Kansas City, by contrast, a family of median income can buy 87 percent of the homes on the market.

What I saw was that a family, bound together by a deeply held belief in God, could live on almost anything, anywhere, even in Los Angeles.

Michael himself grew up in Whittier in a deeply Christian family of twelve children, eleven of whom survived to adulthood. I asked him if he would survey his siblings to see how their 47 children had fared, and he graciously obliged.

As I report in the book, 43 of the 47 have lived their lives with a father in home. Only two of the 47 receive any kind of public assistance. Of the 35 old enough to have graduated from high school, 35 have graduated. None has been to prison. And the many Grumbine cousins have all had to work their way through school and college doing the jobs Americans allegedly won’t do.

I concluded that material poverty does not seem to cause crime. Michael Grumbine grew up in the same metro at the same time as Stanley “Tookie” Williams, whose story I also tell. Tookie was the one with his own bedroom and eventually his own cell on San Quentin’s death row. Michael was the one with his own father.

Obviously, however, there is more to a God-centered life well lived than a civil, self-supporting society. This I saw clearly in reading Michael’s response to the chapter I wrote on the Grumbine family. It speaks for itself:

Dear Jack,

You gave a great deal of joy, comfort and pride to a little bed-ridden lady, covered with sores, and racked with pain from several serious diseases.   My dear mother, who will not likely be with us much longer, and who has all too few joys left in life, was smiling from ear-to-ear as I read to her the Whittier chapter from your book.  She could not stop say “My, oh my” during and after the reading.

And I must also tell you about the difficult moment you presented her with, when I reached the parts where you say:  “If all the materially impoverished children in California had grown up with the support of faith and family that the Grumbine cousins did, California could virtually eliminate serious crime. . . . When all is said and done, the state’s future depends on the Grumbines.”

At that point, I looked over at my mom as she lay stretched out in her bed, her life and purpose now nearly complete.  I watched as her frail and well-worn lips trembled with emotion.

Here was a woman who had lived all of her life in her home as the very antithesis of the militant feminist ideal.  She had never left her children for strangers, and was truly valiant in her self-sacrifice and dedication to her husband and family.  But according to feminist logic, she had wasted away her life on the humdrum and the unfulfilling.

It was truly, truly wonderful, then, to see this humble and dedicated heroine get some public appreciation and honor for the great work she has actually done, before she passes on.

I watched her eyes sparkle with nearly uncontrolled pride and delight, to see her singular life’s work acknowledged to the entire country — she truly had made a difference.  It left me with tears in my eyes.

But I could not help but chuckle inwardly at the dilemma you had given her.  For mother is also one of the most completely humble people you could ever know.  And as is typical of such self-effacing saints, they are uncomfortable in moments of high praise.

But soon the “crisis” passed, and once more she graciously rose to the occasion and resumed her graceful demeanor.  She did what she always did – provide me with a lesson in virtue.  For despite her debilitated condition, she has never stopped teaching her family about grace, and the ways of Christian virtue.

For those who wonder why God allows “old people” to painfully linger in this world, I wish they could meet my mother.  For that matter, I wish you had the room in your book to list all of the heroic mothers who have dedicated their lives to their family, and through their selfless efforts and example, allowed culture, civilization, and yes, goodness itself to exist, in a fallen world.

But as Dad used to say, “Life isn’t fair.”

Perhaps not this life, but I dare say that when the final reckoning comes, and all of humanity stands before their Creator with His Son at His right hand reading from the Book of Life, we will finally be able to witness and rejoice aloud in the glory of those unsung heroes.  Indeed, I can’t wait to sing!

Blessings,

Michael Grumbine

Dinesh D’Souza could not have said it any better.

© Jack Cashill
WND.com – November 1, 2007

Related articles by Zemanta

• God and the Big Bang (exchristian.net)
• Chicago’s teen violence epidemic (michellemalkin.com)
• Missing Missionary Risks All for North Korea (cbn.com)
• How Much Torture Would You Take Before Your Will Was Broken? (persecutionblog.com)
• Tourists Take ‘LA Gang Tour’ For $65 Dollars (rightpundits.com)
• California’s Prison Crisis: Be Very Afraid (time.com)
• In Times of Hurt People Are Drawn to Prayer (persecutionblog.com)
• HBO’s Hung Not Ready for Prime Time (pajamasmedia.com)
• Broward County FL schools: No, you can’t opt out of Obama speech (michellemalkin.com)

So we are starting a new year.  All of us have our personal aspirations.  Some are seeking a new job, others want new business opportunities, others still want to make major purchases for their home or companies.  Than there are those who simply want good things for themselves and those they love.  I also think that people, more than we have seen in years, have hopes and dreams for this country.  That is certainly the case with me.  Below are some of my personal desires for the country this year.  It is a really small list in light of how great our national need, but it would be an excellent beginning.

• That members of Congress would get a healthy sense of fear starting right now.  The Democrats seem like people in a trance, with no sense of reality or consequence.  Their agenda seems more important to them than their careers and, certainly, their constituents.  Meanwhile, the Republicans blindly see the conservative revolt as its movement, when many of these angry voters would be likely to vote for a candidate under the “Tea Party” banner than the GOP.  The Democrats need to come to their senses and weigh the damage they are doing to both the country and themselves.  Meanwhile, the Republican party should be made up of people in repentance because they have been a part of the problem and not the solution.
• That there is a major shift in the US House and Senate races to candidates who support liberty.  This does not seem likely in the US Senate because of the number of states that lean towards smaller government being up for reelection and are more vulnerable.  However, I expect the US House to actually have a new Speaker.  It is my hope that leader is not just another Republican.
• That more Americans hold their elected officials accountable.  There is an old adage that seems to be true that “people hate Congress, but love their elected member of Congress.”  For the vast majority of people their members of Congress are the problem.  If your member of Congress is not honoring his or her oath of office to defend the Constitution, make that person have to look for other employment.
• That the states demand for the restoration of its rights.  We are seeing more states argue against the national government’s rapid and unconstitutional expansion.  Thirteen state Attorneys General, led by South Carolina Attorney General Henry McMaster, have recently notified US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and US Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and informed them that the Obamacare proposal is unconstitutional and that they intend to fight it every step of the way.  Specifically, they warned in the letter to the congressional leaders that legal action may result if they do not remove the unconstitutional “Cornhusker Kickback” Medicaid provision inserted into the senate health care bill to secure the vote of Nebraska US Senator Ben Nelson.  That provision allows Nebraska to have the benefits of the socialized health care program without paying for it.  We have also had governors cite Article I, Section 8 and the Tenth Amendment of the Constitution to remind the federal government of its proper role.  In addition to states fighting back, I would love them to win these battles in the courts.
• That America’s international prestige would be restored and our troops would be protected.  As Obama tried to figure out the US strategy in Afghanistan, we saw our troop casualties double last year.  This President is far more dangerous to our friends and our armies than to its obvious enemies.  I hope that does not remain the case in 2010.

This is a short list, but imagine if we could accomplish these few things alone?  2010 could be remembered as a very good year.  One that set the ground work for the restoration of this great Republic.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Cornhuckster Sen. Ben Nelson: We shoulda waited on Demcare (michellemalkin.com)

With Kennedy, the Democrats had 60 seats in the Senate. With 60 YES votes, they can ram through whatever they like. With 59, they can’t. So this Massachusetts election is, in many ways, a referendum on the health-care issue.

And I’m not the only one who sees it this way. MoveOn.org is sending out an email to its members that says, in part,

“In 11 days, we could lose progressive hero Ted Kennedy’s Senate seat — and with it, any hope for passing major progressive legislation this year. … A Republican victory here would be a catastrophe — Democrats would lose their 60th vote in the Senate, health care could die, and the Republicans could block pretty much anything they want.”

The Boston Herald just reported that Democrats have ADMITTED that, if Brown wins, they will do whatever they can to delay his taking the Senate seat, which is currently occupied by a temporary, pro-health-care voter.

The Herald notes, “In contrast, Rep. Niki Tsongas (D-Lowell) was sworn in at the U.S. House of Representatives on Oct. 18, 2007, just two days after winning a special election to replace Martin Meehan.”

In other words, the Democrats’ attitude is “election be damned, we’ll ram this thing through no matter what the people want.”

SOURCE: “Scott Brown swearing-in would be stalled to pass health-care reform” By Frank Quaratiello – January 9, 2010
http://www.bostonherald.com/business/healthcare/view.bg?articleid=1224249

Even if you are a die-hard progressive who thinks Congress is doing a bang-up job with this health-care reform business, you should be opposed to Democrats using sleazy, underhanded means to get it passed. Any corruption in the political process undermines our freedoms and sets a precedent for whoever is in power next. And elections happen every year.

Consider these recent Rasmussen poll results:

Sixty percent (60%) of U.S. voters say it’s at least somewhat likely that the next president will be a Republican. (The question did not specify whether that next president will be elected in 2012 or 2016.)

Fifty-eight percent (58%) of voters now say Congress is doing a poor job. That’s the highest negative finding since Rasmussen Reports began surveying on the question in November 2006.

Fifty-four percent (54%) of likely voters disapprove of Obama’s performance as president and 75% of these STRONGLY disapprove. Forty-six percent (46%) of likely voters approve of Obama’s performance, but only 58% of these STRONGLY approve.

Fifty-two percent (52%) of likely voters oppose the Democrat’s health-care reform plan, while only forty-two (42%) favor it. The remainder are undecided. Rasmussen has been tracking this issue since before Thanksgiving and has found this ten point spread favoring the “against” position to be fairly consistent.

Forty-five percent (45%) of likely U.S. voters now think a group of people selected at random from the phone book would do a better job addressing the nation’s problems than the current Congress. Thirty-six percent (36%) disagree. Nineteen percent (19%) are not sure.

Americans are currently divided almost evenly between Democrats, Republicans and Independents.

Only one in three Americans currently feel that America is moving in the right direction.

——————-
SOURCES:
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/right_direction_or_wrong_track
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/partisan_trends
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/partisan_politics
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/september_2009/health_care_reform
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/january_2010/45_say_random_group_from_phone_book_better_than_current_congress
Moveon.org By Big Fur Hat – Jan 8, 2010 @ http://iowntheworld.com/blog/?p=14586

Related articles by Zemanta

• Democratic heir to Ted Kennedy leads Republican challenger by … nine points? (hotair.com)
• Exit of high-profile Democrats underscores Obama woes (nationalpost.com)
• Senator Max Baucus Drunk (Video) (rightpundits.com)
• Clinton to Dems: “The reason the tea-baggers are so inflamed is because we are winning” (hotair.com)
• Health care takeover roll call vote – and what GOP Rep. Joseph Cao got from Obama (michellemalkin.com)
• “If we pay for something and it’s the public’s business, we ought to be able to see how it’s done” (michellemalkin.com)
• Who wants to be a Democrat? (michellemalkin.com)
• Dodd, D-Conn., Retiring from Senate; Attorney General to Run (usnews.com)