Solutions to problems or reactions to events are shaped by an individual’s belief system but we are at a point where it is argued whether problems exist or events even took place. There are people who actually argue whether the holocaust actually took place.  There are people who believe our own government flew the planes into the twin towers.  As each day passes people seem willing to believe anything and everything.  Lenin was right when he said, “A lie told often enough becomes the truth.” 

I understand that politics is the manipulation of the people by distortion and exaggeration but are there not certain things that the American public has a right to know the truth about?  Two such items I think should be our national security and our financial situation.  It is no coincidence they are the biggest issues facing our country today.  I would say we are in our current situation because we have not been told nor demanded the truth on either issue.

A Pandora’s box was opened up last week regarding the release of the “torture memos” by the Obama administration.  Dick Cheney countered this chess move with a checkmate move of his own.  He called for a release of the information that was gained from those interrogation techniques.  Republican Congressional members then spoke out about briefings that were given to the party leadership of both sides during the years these techniques were being used. Democrats who for the past five years have been outraged that America would use so-called torture, denied knowledge of these detailed briefings. 

America is left to wonder whom to believe.  If these people work for us then isn’t it our right to know the truth?  It is proof that they look at us as “the rubes” since through this week the issue is being swept under the rug.  America should know who knew what and when.  Evidence of the minutes of meetings and who was in attendance should be presented to the public with redactions of any sensitive national security material.  The evidence should be published in every newspaper in America.  No more commissions made of people who are so-called beyond reproach. 

The hell with the Jim Baker types.  These commissions never really give us the truth but rather only what they want us to know because they have political backsides to protect.  It is time Americans learn the truth for themselves and then decide the proper course of action moving forward.  Let the American people decide how much interrogation is enough and what is over the line.  We should be tired of others telling us what to believe and think.

We see the same thing with the federal budget.  One party says one thing the other says something else.  We all know the truth lies somewhere in-between.  Why not get to the bottom of it.  Could you make financial decisions at home if you did not know your bank balance?  Why can’t we have a committee of accountants made up of every state in the country audit these books?  They are our books, aren’t they?  We are not allowed to because these leaders would be put in jail if the complete truth were known.  They prefer we stay stupid and do what we are told.  Kent Conrad can preach about fiscal responsibility but spends money we do not have.  Tom Delay invents earmarks as a way to secure votes.  Both parties grow government all the while our liabilities are at numbers so high the people can’t even comprehend.  Well, we need to know the truth.  Decisions about our future that are made on a pack of lies are not good decisions. 

We have to find out the truth then debate the solutions. Our media is not interested in finding it for us. Our founders said some truths are self-evident. Other truths take investigation and effort to obtain. As Rob Emanuel said, “Don’t let a crisis go to waste.” We have crisis of the truth in America today. I for one believe we are owed the truth on important issues by our leaders. I don’t trust these people to make those decisions for me. They are too important to not make individually and with full knowledge.

Tea party attendees want their elected officials to stand for a set of principles, one of which is a smaller, less intrusive government.  Spector was one of three Republicans to vote for the stimulus bill of President Obama. His mistake of principle has caused him to be challenged in a Pennsylvania primary for the GOP nomination for Senator.  Spector is trailing his challenger Pat Toomey in the polls by a wide margin.  Republicans of Pennsylvania are holding Spector responsible for his vote.  They are willing to take the chance of losing a Senate seat to the Democrats rather than have Spector represent them in name only. 

Spector had forgotten the principles of Reagan under which he was originally elected.  For years Republicans in Pennsylvania, like the many others around the country, were willing to accept his moderate voting record just to keep his seat a Republican one.  The tea parties of April 15^th were a sign that those days are over (as I wrote last week in another post called Lesson of Tea Parties).  Loyalty to party is becoming a thing of the past.  People from this point forward are loyal to principle only.  Spector represents the old school game politicians believe we are still willing to play where party loyalty trumps voting accountability.  His decision to switch parties tells me he has come to realize there is a new game in town.  He didn’t think his vote on the stimulus would be held against him.  He figured the state NEEDED him.  He was wrong.

Spector’s solution to his new predicament offers additional evidence supporting the tea party uproar.  Term limits whether by law or attitude are required because we have politicians who look at it as a birth-rite to remain in Washington so Spector’s decision to just switch teams should have been expected.  The man had fought cancer and continued to stay in office.  Why should he let a defeat in a primary keep him from occupying an office he feels he owns?  He said he was not ready for the primary electorate of Pennsylvania to decide the end of his time in Washington.  In affect he was saying he and only he will decided when his time is over as an elected official.  Imagine every incumbent up for re-election in November knowing today he or she was going to lose to a challenger in a primary back home.  It is my hunch eighty percent of them would be switching parties before the sun comes up tomorrow.    

Arrogance rather than honor is what fuels most of our current elected officials.  Spector again confirms the disenfranchisement of the people.  These sorry individuals we have serving us all across the country just won’t go away.  In the coming days we will hear Republicans worrying about the loss of one more vote in the Senate.  I say good riddance. Principles matter more than party.  We now have one down and a few hundred more to go.  The continual growth of the tea party movement will turn what Spector has done into a trend. 

I would suggest the next Republican to be “spectored” is this man, Gresham Barrett.  He was booed continuously during a speech he gave at a tea party in South Carolina.  The fool did not have enough respect to apologize to his constituents and leave the stage but instead tried to make a political speech to the crowd.  What has happened to Mr. Spector and Mr. Barrett is the future.  A future I hope becomes a reality in North Dakota in November.

Our current President fashions himself after another great President, Abraham Lincoln.  Lincoln was also known for his honesty.    President Obama ran on a new era of politics and transparency on his way to the White House.  Nearly one hundred days into his administration only a partisan hack would admit he is living up to his words.  Evidence continues to mount that there is nothing all that special or unique about him.  He continues the political gamesmanship he so often railed against.    His statements are full of half-truths and misrepresentations.  This week there were a couple of issues which demonstrate his lack of integrity and provide proof that Washington is still Washington.   

On Monday President Obama held cabinet level meetings to implement a plan to save $100 million from various agencies.  He did so with complete sincerity after previously announcing a $3.6 trillion budget.  His budget cuts equal 1/36,000 of his actual budget which is equivalent to the width of something less then a human air on a ruler.  His efforts to promote such inconsequential savings as news worthy shows the lack of respect he has for the American taxpayer.  He believes like most politicians do that we are useful idiots.  For those not paying attention and hearing $100 million in budget cuts; it was taken as genuine progress.  It was quintessential Obama.  A total con.  He continued his practice of using words to distract one’s attention from the reality of his deeds.    As disingenuous as his budget cuts were, they were nothing compared to his other blatantly partisan act of the week. 

President Obama went against the recommendation of leaders of the intelligence community and released details on what the Bush administration did to captured Al-Qaeda terrorists in the first couple years after 9/11.  The actions included water-boarding, physical discomfort, and insects among others.  While I find the release of such information a national security risk, it is the manner of how the information was released that displays a total lack of integrity from our new era President.  The methods of interrogation were made public while the information obtained from those methods was purposefully redacted.  In other words the release of this sensitive information was done for purely political reasons.  President Obama tried to taint the evidence rather than stand on principle.  His polling people know Americans favor tough interrogation actions if necessary to get information of a potential disaster. 

These types of actions were not supposed to be part of the deal.  We were supposed to see change and a break from the past.  However, the game is still played the same way.  Congressional officials still feign outrage on previously briefed information.  Democrats blame Republicans and Republicans blame Democrats.  The American people are put in more danger for political advantage.  All this was supposed to end with the arrival of the  new sheriff in town.  In Denver Obama said, “The change we need doesn’t come from Washington.  Change comes to Washington.”  His first 100 days has shown us he is not big enough to change Washington even though he likes to pretend his is.  He is neither Washington nor Lincoln.  He is a partisan, Chicago politician.  This week he sacrificed more of his credibility by placating moveon.org.  The act of redacting the evidence that helped prevent terrorist attacks was dishonorable.  Why would we expect anything more from our generation of politicians.  There isn’t a Lincoln or Washington among them including our current President.

The comments most often responded to with cheers from the audience were those made against incumbency.  People have had enough from both parties and do not trust either party to do what is best for the country.  Glenn Beck at the Alamo in San Antonio said the Democrats suck.  The crowd cheered.  He then said they suck no more than the Republicans and the crowd cheered even louder.  (watch here)  The reality is there is an ever growing movement out there of people who no longer trust their elected officials.  These people know what the Democrats are about.  What has now motivated them to get out and take action is because Republicans lied to them.  President Bush started this bailout craze but truth be told him and the Republican Congress began growing government shortly after his inauguration.  

The pace then was much slower than the warp speed we see now, hence the grass root call to action.  As we left the Bismarck tea party a few of us reflected how in the future there is going to be a seismic shift in American politics.  It is my belief that a new political party is going to be the end result of the tea party movement.  The Democrats have moved further and further to the left and out of the mainstream of America.  Republicans now act as Democrats did years ago.  It is these Republicans who are going to face the decision to join the Democrats or join the conservative movement displayed at the tea parties.  

Glenn Beck discussed this very idea on his radio program on Thursday. (transcript here)  People at these tea parties are going to be leaving the two parties and declaring their independence.  They will become a larger and larger voting block.  It will be up to the Republicans to join them or become irrelevant.  Rush Limbaugh voiced his displeasure with a three party system on Friday. It is his view that conservatives must take control of the Republican Party.  Rush Limbaugh was also not at a tea party.  He did not experience first hand the sentiment of those in attendance.  Make no mistake about it; the sentiment was ANTI both parties.  His spiel of Democrats bad, Republicans good will not play to this crowd.  They don’t trust either party nor should they.  

I said at the end of the event, “Imagine if every incumbent lost in November.  We would have new solutions given by new sets of eyes on today’s problems.”  The tax day tea parties were the beginning of something every incumbent should pay attention too.  If I were them I would be very afraid, very, very afraid.  Your time is coming.  It may not happen this November but by 2010 it will.  The attitude on display on Wednesday will only grow louder.  The tea parties held on or around Independence Day will be twice as large.  I would suggest Limbaugh find the time to attend one.

Last week my dad spent the afternoon in a truck-stop talking politics with a group of men.  One gentleman in particular spent the first hour denouncing everything the Bush administration had ever done.  When asked if he voted for Obama, he originally denied it.  He continued, like Peter to deny it three times, before the pressure got to him and he left the conversation after finally admitting to the mistake of his vote.

I believe such denial based on embarrassment is probably very similar to how those who voted for Jimmy Carter felt.  Yes, we are less than 100 days into Obama’s presidency but the gaffes and socialistic policies are tough on those who voted for him.  He sold them on change; little did they know that the change he was talking about was going to drive us to the cliff of bankruptcy.

Did they have a right to be angry with Republicans?  Certainly.  But they should have used logic rather than emotion and focused their anger on all politicians not just the President.  The voting mistake was magnified by electing a community organizer who is a committed redistributor of wealth.

President Obama can’t go three consecutive days without a blunder.  The list of errors include hiring lobbyists when he said he would not, accepting earmarks in legislation while saying in the future he will not, spending trillions in stimulus and in budgets and calling it investment, calling $13.00 per pay-check a tax cut, showing a juvenile taste in gift giving, firing the CEO of a private company, saying America is not a Christian nation, and giving a speech on a nuclear free world while at the same time North Korea launches a missile.  There are plenty more but why pile on.

As each day passes it becomes painfully obvious Washington is broke regardless of who is in charge.  I thought President Obama bowing to the king of Saudi Arabia was as humiliating to America as it was to see George Bush kissing him.  It is in the aftermath of this where we see Obama’s true colors.  The White House is denying he bowed when greeting the king, so much for a new kind of politician.  This man is no different than those he has railed against.  Does he think the video tape of him bowing is open to interpretation?  America is not stupid even though politicians treat us that way.  Some people just take a bit longer to actually “get” it.   We make mistakes but continually electing the same politicians who have gotten the country in its current situation is definitely a man-caused tragedy.  Upon reflection many are beginning to realize their mistake.  Let’s hope the tea parties next week are the beginning of man-caused solutions.

Representing the governors who are looking for a quick, easy fix are Republicans like Schwarzenegger of California and Crist of Florida.  Their foundation in conservatism is made of straw.  They each run states with very large deficits and are looking at the stimulus money as their bailout plan.  Schwarzenegger went so far as to say if any state did not take their allotted share he was willing to take it for California. Meanwhile Crist stood next to President Obama at a rally in support of the stimulus bill in the sunshine state.  Both of these governors provide ample evidence about what the difference is between a Republican and a conservative.

The majority of Republican governors talk like conservatives but should give each and everyone of us pause.  In this group are governors like Hoeven of North Dakota and Pawlenty of Minnesota whose foundation may not stand up to a strong storm.  Their attitude on the stimulus bill is that of protest but they will be taking their fair share, hence the questioning of their conservative principles.  Recent history has taught us that compassionate conservatism is not really conservatism at all. 

Very few Republican governors are standing strong on principle against the stimulus money allocated for the states.  In this small group are governors like Sanford and Perry of Texas.  Conservatives should continue to heap praise on them.  They are taking their stand while political pressure from within their own states and Washington mounts.  They realize as Glenn Beck told Sanford last night, “the stimulus bill is nothing more than heroin for the states.” 

America needs its elected officials to be rooted in principle and not what is just politically advantageous.  A foundation built on bricks will stand no matter how hard the wind blows.  We need leaders who will stand on principle even if it causes them to lose an election.  Conservatives should be rewarding Sanford and Perry in the hopes that others may follow in their path.  We must require them to walk the walk or put them on notice we will find someone who will.  The blueprint is simple.  It is called the constitution.

It is my hunch that personal responsibility means different things to different people.  For instance I don’t believe it is personally responsible to leave our children with trillions of dollars of debt.  I don’t think personal responsibility means income redistribution or allowing a politician to buy my vote for life with a government check.  I also don’t think it is responsible to think government can do a job better than the private citizen can nor should one buy a house that one cannot afford.  I also think it is responsible for fathers to help raise their children.

Many would not agree with my examples of individual accountability.  Like the many versions of the truth that seem to exist today, there are also many versions of what is being responsible.  When one gets specific about responsibility and/or truth we usually find a parting of the ways.  Democrats and Republicans each have their own version. 

We call it personal responsibility because it is “personal”.  Why should we allow politicians who can only speak in half truths define it for us?  Well it is because we have, that we are in our current situation.  Our ancestors knew what personal responsibility meant.  They lived it every day.  A hand shake meant something.  They did not depend on the government for their existence.  They were better than us and we have let them down. We did so by believing the crap our politicians are selling us. 

It has been the political modus operandi to never say no, to tell us we can have it all without paying for it.  If a politician tells someone “no”, he or she runs the risk of losing a vote.  A “no vote” is like kryptonite to Superman.  A politician who hopes to spend his entire career in Washington cannot say “no” to often for fear of spending his life as a private citizen.  So he/she makes promises that would never be made by someone who takes an oath to responsibility.

The goal of our current lot of politicians is not responsibility but rather reelection.  So here we sit, America is near bankruptcy.  We no longer have leaders who act as stewards of America but politicians whose careers could not continue if responsibility were a prerequisite since they have conditioned us “to just keep shopping”.  We are told going in debt is investing in our future.  True deficits are kept on separate sets of books so the public remains oblivious to our true problems.  We are told cutting 100 billion from 3 trillion is actual budget cutting.  In the meantime our ancestors spin in their graves.  Personal responsibility as an American virtue died with them.

While the hypocrisy of politicians should not come to a surprise to anyone anymore, hello we have the last thirty years as evidence.  The fake outrage is reaching levels of insincerity never seen before and it is coming from both parties.  Last week we saw Republicans showing their indignation about earmarks while fifty of them had inserted special earmarks into the legislation. Some of these Republicans who had earmarks also voted no on the same bill that contained those respective earmarks.  By doing that they can go home to their constituents declaring they opposed outrageous spending.  Does the cadet code of duty, honor, country apply to these types of actions?

Not to be outdone this week congressional Democrats led by Chris Dodd and Barney Frank were offended by $165 million in bonuses paid to employees of AIG.  They were shocked that public funds would be used in such a manner even though as in Dodd’s case he helped write the bill.  Duty, honor, country?  No, nothing more than pure politics…pure hypocrisy!

Responsible Americans are getting tired of politics on both sides.  Our current politicians cannot solve the problems facing the country.  Sure there are a few principled people on both sides of the isle but the vast majority’s principles are concerned with only the next election.  The only way it can be fixed is by changing the entire lot with new people of honor.  This is where Rush Limbaugh misses half the argument.  This is not only a Democrat politician problem it is an ALL POLITICIAN problem.  We have ample evidence that neither party is capable of running the country with their current members.

While names like Ryan, Cantor and Coburn are honorable members of congress, should we continue to keep the ninety-five percent who are worthless in order to keep the five percent who put their country first?  This problem is so much bigger than which party is more capable of leading.  There needs to be a house cleaning that changes the dynamic from career politicians who are invested in power and money to servants who know the meaning of public virtue. 

West Point cadets learn how to serve with honor and that begins with being able to trust the person serving with you.  The populism being played by politicians in Washington today is nothing more than a continuation of the game they play so well.  They are hearing the anger of the citizenry and are placing blame at everyone but themselves.  The duplicity they have demonstrated for years has finally gotten our attention only because we are now being affected in the pocketbook.  America realizes these people in the collective can no longer be trusted.  We must start by demanding a higher standard in our leaders.  There are many cadets and civilians who have no problem meeting  a higher standard.  It is time to give them the job.  It should be obvious to everyone that those who have served for years upon years have failed.

Senator Obama answered, “That’s a great question Jacob.  When I think back on it I think a good example is welfare reform.  When President Clinton initially signed the welfare reform bill in 1996, I was concerned that it could have disastrous results for the working poor.  At the time I was working in the Illinois legislature to make sure that we were providing childcare and health care and other support services for the women who were going to be kicked off the roles after a certain time.  Welfare reform worked better than a lot of people anticipated, myself included.  And what it provided is that we need to have work as the center piece of social policies.  Not only because we need to create good paying jobs, but because there’s an intrinsic dignity to having a job and that is why we need to jump start the job creation now.  A good paying job provides a sense of purpose, a sense that you’re making a contribution no matter how small to the well being of the country as a whole.  America’s very promise is that in this country opportunity is open to anyone who is willing to work for it.  That’s why I’m running for president, to restore that promise for all Americans.”

Contrast his answer during the debate with what has taken place in the stimulus bill that he recently signed into law.  Robert Rector of The Heritage Foundation has written the following: A major public policy success, welfare reform in the mid-1990s led to a dramatic reduction in welfare dependency and child poverty. This successful reform, however is now in jeopardy: Little-noted provisions in the U.S. House of Representatives and U.S. Senate stimulus bills actually abolish this historic reform. In addition, the stimulus bills will add nearly $800 billion in new means-tested welfare spending over the next decade. This new spending amounts to around $22,500 for every poor person in the U.S. The cost of the new welfare spending amounts, on average, to over $10,000 for each family paying income tax.

Why would someone admit to a mistake in policy yet implement that very mistake?  It is simple.  It is all about ideology.  Barack Obama has socialism in his bone marrow.  When he answered Joe the plumber that he prefers to spread the wealth around we saw his soul. 
Obama is Jesse Jackson in camouflage. 

In reversing the successful welfare reform of 1996 Obama is showing his real stripes.  His motivation as President has less to do with what is successful policy but instead reinforces his ideas on what America should be like.  He is willing to accept less favorable results as long as it grows the size of government in a manner consistent with his core beliefs.  The neighborhood organizer is all about the collective rather than personal liberty.  He is a magician.  His words are used to keep your attention and distract you from “the prestige”.  His words aim to make you think he is a Washington outsider who will turn the system upside down but when this “magic trick” is over the ones who haven’t already will realize it was all a con.  A con that if not stopped will bring a very liberal agenda to a middle, right country.