Government vs. Civil Liberty

The Constitution guarantees the right of free speech. Some Americans rebel against those who have different perspectives relating to unencumbered speech. Anytime a college or a high school censors free speech of a student or a guest speaker, it is a direct attack on our liberty. In a free society, citizens, the press and the opposition must have free rein to present their side of an issue. Of course, a speaker who incites violence is not, and should not be, protected.

Lately, liberal elements and institutions of higher learning have unilaterally canceled opportunities for dissenting voices. Often, the issues involved are highly contentious. Women’s rights, BLM, gay marriage, civil rights, the right to protest and the role of police officers are front and center. Burning down cities, looting stores, destroying property and committing bodily harm are too often associated with “free speech activities.”

Do you feel that the government is too intrusive into the affairs of average Americans? It seems to me that federal and state politicians are in our faces, pockets and lives far too often. Our civil liberties are being threatened on a daily basis.

The first thing that comes to mind is taxation. Our government has the right and duty to tax income and purchases to fund its needs. Since Washington is responsible for defense, security and a plethora of services, it needs to take part of our earnings every paycheck. But who evaluates whether the federal and state governments are using our money wisely? And who determines how much every citizen should contribute to the expenses of state? Of course, the answer is Congress. The people we elect every two years are the stewards of taxes imposed on citizens and noncitizens alike.

I’ve always been amazed that the 1% of earners have not been have not been abused in this regard. If 99% of Americans effectively have control of the government, why wouldn’t they attack the affluent more strenuously? If you ask someone who makes $50,000 or $100,000 to vote for a person who believes in higher taxes, why wouldn’t they be agreeable. It will not cost them anything while they increase government revenue that can be spent on things that improve society.

I suppose that everyone, rich and poor, aspires to make more money and to become part of the 1%, even though this logic is faulty. Thank goodness some of our leaders recognize that you can’t tax the rich at 90% and have a true capitalistic society. Many 99%ers want capitalism to thrive. They understand that the richest people subsidize the poor and middle classes in the country. Trickle down economics is a reality.

Are our tax dollars being spent wisely by our legislators? Should we spend almost $1 trillion each year to defend our country? These dollars are being used to protect our freedom, and worth every penny spent. Aircraft carriers and nuclear weapons are expensive items.

Why does the government try to keep taxes low on corporations? The answer is simple, corporations hire millions of Americans and pay them good wages.

But what about welfare and financial aid? America has an obligation to care for the needy. No one really disagrees with this principle. What roils people is that welfare always increases and never subsides. Aid that was needed years ago, but it’s no longer required, should end. And why shouldn’t every able-bodied person have a job, rather than a monthly check that enables them to stay home? There should be a quid pro quo for securing aid.

Parent involvement in schools is being attacked in recent months. There has always been a conflict between teachers and student parents about the level of involvement of the latter. Some parents want to have a say about what novels are read by students and, generally, the curricula designed by school administrators. Some teachers want to press students on certain theories about controversial issues too early or too often. For instance, the legitimacy of gay marriage has been a hot topic as well as issues regarding evolution. These topics are fair game only when the students are old enough to digest the facts (not opinions), and with parental input.

In recent months during the pandemic, the conflict between teachers and parents came to a head. In-school instruction versus home teaching has been a hot topic. Most parents, even those who are concerned about the deadly virus, want their kids back in the classroom. They believe children learn more when the teaching occurs face-to-face, in person. Many teachers are concerned about the health risks of an in-person teaching. Should the federal government intervene? This would be better than allowing the teachers to run free rein over our children.

Another fire storm involves the southern border of our country. Radical elements really do believe that entering our country without proper authorization is not a crime. These people are dead wrong. There is a procedure that must take place for immigrants to enter the US and ultimately become citizens. Local governments have no right to unilaterally change these requirements.

The same elements are also betting that illegal immigrants will become citizens even though they have broken our laws. And if enough of these immigrants become citizens, they will impact the balance of liberals and conservatives and in the country. Really? Do radical elements think that conservatives are going to stand aside and allow millions of people who illegally crossed our borders to become citizens?

Actually, the answer is yes. Millions of illegals are already living in America, and if they follow our laws, they will likely receive citizenship. But the flow must stop, and conservative groups must do everything possible to stem the illegal flow of humanity onto our soil. If not, the rights of legitimate citizens will be denigrated.

As you can see, there are many areas where our government has usurped the power of the people. Our leaders must recognize that they are in power at our pleasure and only if we vote for them again in the next election. Unfortunately, because of opposition to term limits, too many of the people in Congress have remained in power to the detriment of all citizens. I believe a strong federal government is important to our country, but the power of the people should never be minimized.

NY Times Krugman Scrooges Trump

For the holidays, Paul Krugman, op-ed columnist for the New York Times, is fomenting class warfare by unfairly denigrating Republicans. He believes that tearing the country apart is good for our nation. Honest disagreement is unacceptable to Krugman, so he twists facts so they are consistent with his ideology and distorted opinion of people he despises.

Krugman earns his money by dreaming up new ways to portray the “cruelty” of conservatives and Republicans. This year-end, he claims that calling president Trump and his supporters Scrooge, Dickens ’protagonist in “A Christmas Carol,” is insulting to Scrooge. The character is not innately amoral, as compared to Republicans who spend every waking moment trying to conjure up ways to steal from the poor and cut taxes for themselves.

Many in the Democratic Party have embraced Krugman’s warped perspectives by pushing further and further to the left. There is no entitlement or other giveaway for non-affluent Americans that is over the line. This is one of the reasons why liberal candidates are doing so poorly in the presidential polls, and electorate is drifting towards Republicans in spite of the horrendous antics of the Trump administration and all the inane investigations.

Some Democrats are so hard up for a moderate contender, they are willing to endorse Joe Biden, an unsteady elderly man, whose claim to fame is that he worked for a president who accomplished nothing, and a neophyte, who leads South Bend, Indiana, a metropolis with just over 100,000 residents. Really? One man can’t keep his foot out of his mouth and the other leads, and not without controversy, a handful of Hoosiers. As a graduate of Notre Dame, I can attest that South Bend is not a training ground for the presidency of this country.

Left-wing progressives, whose aim is to socialize the greatest capitalistic country in the world, have infiltrated the Democratic Party. Competition and exceptionalism have made our country an economic and military powerhouse. We don’t want to be clones that receive the same stipend every month, and who wait on long lines at hospitals to get treatment for our sore throats. History has proven many times that socialism is a failed economic institution, and that capitalism coupled with democracy are a winning combination.

Back to Krugman. If we assume that socialism is not an acceptable alternative for capitalism, then axiomatically Americans would support a system where everyone earns a compensatory wage. Our government should guarantee a job to every able-bodied citizen, not provide a check that encourages him or her to sit at home and avoid work. Why can’t Democrats accept that there are other perspectives regarding the distribution of wealth than theirs? Why don’t liberals celebrate successful Americans?

Who is Krugman, a millionaire in his own right, to tell us that being affluent is evil and amoral, and refers to us as Scrooges? Krugman, left-wing radicals along with sanctimonious critics of hard working Americans have no right to steal other people’s money or tell them how to spend their hard earned dollars.

Class warfare is what mongers like Krugman thrive upon. He clearly has no intention of giving credit where it is due. The US economy is benefitting almost every American. Even minorities are enjoying high levels of employment and greater wages. Krugman is a naysayer, a hater of successful people. He wants conservatives and liberals to be at odds. He is supposed to be an economic expert, but he can’t add. If he could, he would know that open borders, one-payer medical insurance, 70% taxes on the rich and free college tuition will ultimately be a disaster for the country.

I wish all my readers a healthy and happy holiday season.