Dave Bing doing a Corey.

Perhaps a better title would be Rick Snyder doing a Christie
Either way.


Detroit going Conservative???

In an article by Matthew Dolan in the Wall Street Journal, Mayor Dave Bing is shown to be supporting Conservative initiatives of long standing.
-----llink-----
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703702004576268770126239098.html?mod=WSJ_hp_MIDDLENexttoWhatsNewsSecond
---------------
Such things as privatizing failing schools, or making “substantial cuts in city workers' health care and pensions…”

That's enough to make Governor Walker of Wisconsin proud.

The article even said that Mr. Bobb the Emergency Financial manager has “raised the possibility of making unilateral changes to the collective-bargaining agreements signed with teachers less than two years ago.”

This seems to be going past the actions that the Governor of Wisconsin dared go.
Where are the protestors? Where is the outrage and vitriol that the unions hurled against Governor Walker in Wisconsin? Where are the chants, “HO HO HO Bing must go”?
The new power that the Michigan Governor has created along with the recession has threatened not only the rank and file but the leadership as well. Now facing a chance of losing their jobs if they continue to force the monopoly the unions have on education; they are backing down.

The reality of a budget shortfall in the hundreds of millions has forced them to the table.

That reality, as it did in New Jersey, has forced upon us the bipartisan-ship that both sides have given lip service to for so long. As in New Jersey a Michigan Republican Governor has fought for and won the tools needed by the ailing major cities controlled by Democrats to start to fix their problems. New Jersey Republican Gov. Chris Christie has enlisted the aid of Democrat Mayor of Newark Corey Booker in helping to fix their Schools; so to has the Republican Gov. of Michigan Rick Snyder and Democrat Mayor of Detroit Dave Bing joined forces.

During the campaign for Governor Rick Snyder was with NJ Governor Chris Christie a couple of times. When I had a chance in Muskegon to ask Rick Snyder if he planned on pulling a “Christie” in Michigan he shied away from the answer. In retrospect he seems to be doing just that very same thing albeit in his own quieter style.

Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative.

Divide and Conquer or Desperate and Sloppy

Divide and Conquer

The Liberals are getting desperate and sloppy. Desperate because they aren’t taking the time to come up with new arguments. Instead they are just dusting off their old failed catch phrases of the past. Sloppy as evidenced by Dick Schumer’s “foot in mouth” moment caught telling other legislators what to say.

-----link-----
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2011-03-30-teaparty30_ST_N.htm?csp=34news
--------------

This desperation and sloppiness has become more apparent to the public over the years and is actually creating the opposite effect than the Liberals wanted. These two motivators when combined are looking more like condescending political sniping at a time when the American voters are demanding real change and politicians willing to do the hard work of actually balancing budgets, paying off the debt and cutting out the waste and corruption that makes up our bloated government.

The majority of Americans (ie voting public) in the past understood this but due to the Democrat controlled House and a Veto proof Senate couldn’t do anything about it.
Well now after the sweeping political change, in 2010 the voting public made their voices heard. The Tea Party was the driving force behind that change. They were the ones who got the boots on the ground. They were the ones that gave voice to the crucial “Independent” vote during the last election. They were the unpaid answer to the millions donated to Liberal politicians from the unions and the likes of Billionaire George Soros.

-----link for below-----
http://patdollard.com/2011/03/reid-throws-tantrum-demanding-gop-ditch-tea-party/
------------------------

So when the Schumers of the world talk of “extreme actions” or Harry Reid uses the word extreme to put the blame on the Conservative for shutting down the government, the public knows which party OWNS the word Extreme. We the People have learned through their actions which party uses extreme thuggish methods to bully their will upon the public and which party actually came up and voted on a budget.

Speaker of the House Boehner had the following to say to Reid.
“Now the Senate says, ‘we have a plan.’ Well, great! Pass the damn thing, all right?!” Boehner blasted. “And send it over here and let’s have real negotiations instead of sitting over there rooting for a government shutdown.”

-----link-----
http://blogs.abcnews.com/george/2011/03/pass-the-damn-bill-boehner-unloads-on-senate-democrats-over-looming-government-shutdown.html
--------------

Through these increasingly thinly veiled attempts to divide and conquer the Republican majority in the House; the public is seeing the real difference. People are now seeing through that veil. The new media promoted through Fox news nationally have made the reality of “old politics” visible to the public.

In plain English, Americans have come to understand that the Democrats have been overrun by the Far Left. The Schumer “extreme” remarks are a perfect example for how well real transparency works in giving the public the truth to help them decide issues. Thanks Chuck too bad you did it by mistake. Now if they could only harness all the energy they spend on obfuscation and put it towards actually realizing the goals they professed such as transparency, bipartition ship, efficiency and public involvement the country would be better off.

The desperation comes from realizing the public itself understands and sees the Conservatives as the ones who are actually trying to create transparency, bipartition ship, efficiency in government and public involvement.

The Liberals have finally come to understand that The Public (We the People) have seen that the Conservatives are the ones who are in favor of smaller government and are the ones wishing to unshackle and free them from the ever increasing chains placed upon them by “big government” liberals. (Think of the old Scrooge movie where Jacob Marley's ghost explains to Scrooge why he had such a heavy chain and weights which he had to carry around. The ghost said they were added one link at a time throughout his life).


In repose I have to add that we can get rid of these chains only one link at a time through working hard and learning all we can and insisting our elected officials start tearing down government bureaucracies one brick, one regulation, one tax or one staff at a time.

Then again the Left’s unity as evidenced with the remarks above of Schumer, Reid (and also don’t forget about Howard Dean secretly hoping the government does shut down because the Republicans will be blamed) is turning into a good thing for conservatives. By continuing to use those tired old dusty thinking that worked back before the alternate media became mainstream -- well let me just say that is the unity and wet of talking points that Americans have had enough of.

I hope and actually think the leadership of the Republicans is finally getting the idea.

Regards, Live Dangerously Be a Conservative

Best of Intention

“Best of Intentions”

Doing what we didn’t do during the Regan Revolution.

I.e. Following through with the idea of making it personal.

The dream of Conservatives for less government and more individual freedom can only be achieved through political means. It is then held through individual effort.
Much like the 1990’s now is a time of great promise for turning conservative thought into constructive programs or lack thereof (i.e. nongovernmental programs). In order not to revisit the failures of the previous revolution during this new renaissance in the belief of “Constitutional Government” and individual rights we should study what had brought about the past mistakes, in efforts of both the left and the right.

A plethora of writing was done in the 1980’s/90’s about the evils of “collectivism” or “stateism”. After the People had their fill of the failures of the “Great Society” the Conservatives under Reagan had the chance to govern using alternate conservative ways to attain the same lofty goals through different means. The Reagan Revolution also failed to fulfill its promises.

It was that failure and sense of broken trust that caused the majority of the public to “change sides” and become willing to give the Liberals another chance.

This broken trust first led to the Regan Revolution and when that failed to fulfill its promises led to the Clinton years, then back to Bush and ultimately out of frustration with both parties we put our blind faith put into the untried hands of Obama simply because he was different and he promised change.

The failure of Obama to fulfill his promises brought us back around to the 2010 election cycle and a new chance for conservative theories to be tried. This time it was the Spontaneous creation and rise of the Tea Party that demanded change again and the public was willing to back those politicians that subscribed to the Smaller Government agenda.

The question remains will this just be another “same old, same old” swing of the pendulum; or will some real change take place. Will the people the Tea Party helped elect stay true to their promises or not?

In his new book, “the Battle” http://www.amazon.com/Battle-between-Enterprise-Government-Americas/dp/0465019382 Arthur C Brooks carries on the conservative promises and arguments Charles Murray put forth in the 90’s so well in his seminal book “Losing Ground”. http://www.amazon.com/Losing-Ground-American-1950-1980-Anniversary/dp/0465042333/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1300651812&sr=1-1Both books were and are excellent, putting forward many usable ideas to help wean us from our reliance upon big government to solve our problems which were previously solved without such pervasive government intervention. Together these two books show the progression in the thought of our quest to revamp education along conservative lines.
The goal as with all is to have individuals or private groups solve the problems we as a country face because the bottom line is that the problems we face are individual problems and can be best solved on an individual basis and not the cookie cutter approach all large bureaucracies are so enamored by.

As a blogger friend of mine loves to state, “It’s the spending Stupid” when talking of the only realistic way of making government smaller. Simply by being more efficient with the money the government has will not shrink government. We need to cut some programs out totally and prune others drastically where the programs are most needed. To make up for the shortfall, we as individuals and small self governing groups need to step up. Only by this “drastic” action will we feel forced to step up and accept the responsibility for this action.

Many will rightly claim that the problems weren’t solved by private means in the previous conservative cycle, therefore necessitating government intervention. The problem I see is that in the mind of the American people, “government intervention” has become the “default” solution to more and more of our problems. That is what we must fight by example.

My default position will always be Individual Freedom.

The default position I have is “What can I do”.

For this new conservative effort to last and to actually make a difference it needs to be done from a Bottom Up point of view. To be crystal clear on this point, people themselves have to get involved in the political process; control of the bureaucracy has to wrested back by and for “We the People”.

We not only have to cut government but actually individually step up and lend a hand first with helping ourselves and then others in our orbit. If you think that is unrealistic, how realistic has it proven to be that simply throwing money at education will produce better results? Who really believes that anymore? Both Murray and Brooks with their books debunk the idea that the government programs work, by showing factually how those programs haven’t been solved, in fact in many cases they exacerbated them.

Good stuff that, but only the beginning.

The lesson I see that I need to learn from the failure of the past is that debunking the left’s concepts such as the “Great Society” or Social Justice is only half the battle. If we want to win the war we need to understand that debunking those arguments is only the beginning.

To complain about the status quo is the easy part while coming up with workable nongovernmental solutions is quite another, and learning how to implement those alternatives at all levels is quite another and a very labor intensive effort. That effort by the way takes the work of many people at all levels.

It involves in the hard real work of taking care of ourselves.

Ask not what your country can do for you; but rather what can I do for my own damned self?

If when faced by a problem we continue to allow the default solution to be “government intervention” we not only help the left but hurt the cause of individual freedom. This constant pilfering of our individual rights saps not only both our willingness and ability to solve our own problems by ourselves but blinds us to the notion that we even can.

Historically reliance upon one’s self to take care of life’s problems has been the measure of how ready a person is to cut the apron strings of adolescence and advance to the adult world. Still today in our daily life the measure of respect we may earn from our peers is by how well we accept the consequences of our actions. (So too are nations judged)

The individual has the right and the duty to involve themselves in the workings of their community. As far as education, we need people to assert themselves on school boards, township, village city and county boards demanding to be heard and making their cases whatever they may be. What we don’t need is for another National Education Association plan.

This country and its constitution were founded upon the sovereignty of that idea.

The best book I’ve read lately is “Self Governance” by Scott Rassmussen. This short book explains what conservative thought is all about. Namely freedom from government, and the responsibility we as individuals need to pick up if we truly want that freedom.
http://www.amazon.com/Search-Self-Governance-Scott-W-Rasmussen/dp/1449593542/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1300652923&sr=1-1Rasmussen gives great insight in why we have gotten all the government we have and then ways to get rid of what we don’t want.

All of these books allude to the unique American belief that we can solve our own problems at an individual and community level better than can be done at the national level.

Rasmussen’s book talks of Alexis de Tocqueville’s admiration for American’s self-reliance as evidenced by their forming of groups and organizations to tackle a problem and not relying on the European default position that the government or persons of noble rank is needed to get the job done.

If we truly examine the American landscape today we must admit that we have been slowly legislating away that uniquely American trait of reliance upon the individual. How many laws do we have to follow now if we want to gather together and do something we feel needs doing? How many forms for safety and tax reasons do we have to comply with how much will we have to pay just to get a group started. How much time and effort do we need to expend just to comply with all the regulatory laws of the land?

We all know the horror stories of small businesses getting so over run with red tape that they never open. The oil rigs and power plants not built or construction stopped because no one can afford the extra time and trouble to follow the sometimes contradictory red tape to its conclusion. At a personal level the bureaucracy shutting down a 10 year olds lemonade stand, to telling a mother she can’t let neighborhood children wait for the bus in her house without filing the appropriate forms. Absurd? Farfetched? Well read this which happened in Mi.

-----link-----
http://www.uppermichiganssource.com/news/story.aspx?id=356288
---------------

Pay attention to the line near the end.
“The stay-at-home mom said DHS officials ordered her to stop watching the kids, obtain a state license, or face possible penalties.”
All this in the name of “Protecting us – For our own good.” Both government and individuals make mistakes. The question is which is more harmful to the public? My decision to do something even if wrong will only affect myself and at most a limited few; if the government’s decision is wrong thousands if not millions will be affected.

When asked I will tell a child to open a lemonade stand.
When it comes to it I will vote against those who say otherwise.
Even if they say it is for the best of intentions.

I believe I have the right to decide what is best for myself regardless of others intentions.

Regards, Live Dangerously Be a Conservative

OOPS

I must admit this proposed Earmark moratorium in the Senate Republican Conference (SRC) has me in a bind.

When I wrote the article before I should have seen the writing on the wall. Once Sen. DeMint put out the proposition against earmarks, there was no stopping it. In this political environment even those opposed understood that to not vote for it would be way more harmful to them and the party. What I didn’t like was the way I was being treated.

People were acting towards me like I was in favor of earmarks; I’m learning what the baby feels like when it’s thrown out with the bath water. Or more fittingly I’m feeling like the messenger getting shot for carrying the wrong message.

Either way I don’t like it. But then again in a free country I don’t have to.

One more time, I HATE EARMARKS. I applaud the house under Boehner’s efforts to cut out earmarks. I will fight in the trenches alone if need be to ban earmarks. I will back any effort to have separate votes on each and every spending bill – alone and by themselves – without adding all the extra spending to it.

One more time, I LOVE JIM DEMINT. I contributed to his Senate fund wholeheartedly and rejoiced when most of his candidates won.

For the first time, I’LL KEEP MY RESEARCH TO MYSELF.
Let me give you an example to illustrate what I mean.
In the run-up to the 2008 Presidential Election I was working the County GOP HQ handing out signs for the candidates etc. when in walked a pissed off UAW union member. He said he was a lifelong Democrat but wanted all the Republican signs we had to put in his yard.

I was curious so I asked him why and he said that at a union meeting he had asked a simple question about something Candidate Obama had said. This guy told me he was just asking a question but everyone got angry with him. So he shut up and went home to bed to forget about it. When he and his wife woke up the next day his yard was covered in Obama/Biden signs. That he didn’t forget.

I felt like that guy when I asked fellow Tea Partiers about the arguments Inhofe and McConnell were using in favor of earmarks. I was asking for reasoned responses based on facts and I got the same kind of “How Dare You” response my new Union friend received.

In my previous article I did make a bad judgment call in that the “moratorium” was approved by the Republican Senate Conference. McConnell changed his mind.
Sen. DeMint has been proven right again. I applaud that and I applaud the outcome. My fear had been that McConnell would carry the day and the Republicans would be seen to be in favor of earmarks. This was a nonbinding vote of only the Republicans and only in the Senate. I did not think it was the right way to go about it. I wanted to see it come up on the floor of the Senate and voted on there.

This time the power and rhetoric forced a good conclusion that however, is not why I’ve been fighting for grassroots government. If I had wanted to follow thuggish ideology blindly I would have voted liberal. Like my UAW friend however I’m always willing to travel the road less traveled to try to get the facts under the rhetoric. For that right I will keep fighting. I hope the Tea Parties will continue to be my ally in this.

Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative


RSC Chairman Lamar Alexander put out this release last Wed about what he is also proposing at the upcoming RSC meeting.

-----release------
http://alexander.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=056defea-23f0-417b-b153-49db66833738&ContentType_id=778be7e0-0d5a-42b2-9352-09ed63cc4d66&Group_id=80d87631-7c25-4340-a97a-72cccdd8a658
---------------------

This resolution goes directly to the cause of overspending. This too will cut government spending and intrusion into our life.

Earmarks.

The Republican Earmark Moratorium

Why it will fail; and Where DeMint went wrong.




During the last Senate session a ban on earmarks was voted on by the entire Senate and was defeated. Everyone knew it would lose even if all the Republicans voted for it so they did.

They looked good then and can say today that they were part of the Conservative Revolution that swept the last election.

Now there is another vote by some Senators coming up on Earmarks. This is quite a different vote however.

At first blush, I said great, we have to start cutting spending and stopping corruption through lobbyists etc. that banning earmarks seem to facilitate. I also am a fan of Sen. Jim DeMint who put forth this measure because of the tireless effort he made during the last election backing Conservative candidates early on when no one else gave them a chance; his proposal in the RSC seemed like a “slam dunk”.

That is the courageous leadership I was looking for.

Then another Senator whom I greatly admire for his courage came out against DeMint’s “earmark moratorium” that is in front of the Senate Republican Caucus (RSC). That Senator is Jim Inofe from Oklahoma. I admire him because he is one of the most conservative Senators and he was the lone, loud and unafraid voice against the whole “Global Warming” hysteria – Way before it was cool.

That also is the courageous leadership I was looking for.

The link below from Politico sums up the obvious.
-----link-----
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1110/44975.html
--------------
Now I’ll sum up the obvious.
1. This is only a vote within the Republican Caucus or Conference as they call it.
A. The Dems will still be free to earmark to our pocketbooks disdain.
2. It will be a secret vote so the public will not know who voted for or against the measure only the outcome will be known.
A. Individuals will not be held accountable, but the Party will be next time they try to raise this issue.
3. The outcome will be non binding on the members.
A. This will lead directly charges of Republican hypocrisy by the left and they will be right.

Obviously I’m conflicted. I assume some of the RSC are also wondering what to do. Initially it was Senate Minority leader Mitch McConnell who came out against the DeMint moratorium. That was the first voice of dissent I heard and I immediately chalked it up to the power struggle going on within the Republican Party between the insurgent “Tea Party”/conservative wing led by Sen. DeMint and the established Republican leadership aka Sen. McConnell. I obviously sided with DeMint.

But when I saw Sen. Inofe coming out against it and on the side of McConnell I knew it was more than just a political power squabble.

According to Politico, Sen. Inofe is passing around to the members of the RSC a 20 page essay on the reasons not to vote for the moratorium. I would love to read it, but it hasn’t been made public yet.

-----link-----
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1110/45017.html
-------------

I still am conflicted, but I understand the issues better now after some research.
I don’t know the workings of the SRC but I hope they have a way that DeMint and Inofe/McConnell can compromise and change the measure to one that would force a vote in the entire Senate on Earmarks that will be open and binding on all members.

A statement needs to be made against earmarks, but this proposal as written seems as if it could actually be unproductive in the fight against earmarks and a distraction in the main fight - to cut spending.

The first Politico article I linked seemed confident that the DeMint measure would pass. Since Senator Jim Inofe joined the fray I’m sure the measure will go down to defeat. The reason I believe this is that now Sen. Inofe has provided the political and more importantly the ideological cover to those who needed it to vote against it.

The second Politico article I linked talked of Sen. Inofe promising very specific spending cuts in a bill he was going to introduce Monday. This tells me that he thinks the whole earmark thing is detracting from some very “specific” spending cuts the Senate should be taking up. On this I agree too.

We should keep our eyes on the target which is to shrink the size of government in our lives. Until we have the Senate and the Presidency behind us we must not get distracted with the likes of this. Yes Earmarks increase spending but cutting only Republican earmarks seems counterproductive. We would be better served to cut all earmarks including the executive earmarks in the likes of those found in the Stimulus Bill.

Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative

Charge

I would like to echo what George F Will talked about in his article for the Washington Post Nov. 7th, entitled “Democrats in Denial”. I would however take his assumption and expand the scope of the people in denial to include the Republican apparatus in general. Below is the link to Mr. Will’s article

-----Link-----
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/05/AR2010110507653.html
--------------

From his vantage point overlooking the national scene I agree with his assumption. From my vantage point at the local County level, I see however more than Democrats are in denial as to the just ended election.

There seems to be an undercurrent about the role the Tea Party played in this election throughout the Republican Party. Both the self congratulatory literature put out by the State Party and the narrative of their representatives at the County level do not mention the Tea Party, either pro or con as to its role in the past election. I might add here to buttress my credibility that at the county level in my neck of the woods, the Tea Party was responsible for half of the precinct delegates at our Republican County Convention, and I would add 3/4ths of the excitement about this election and 4/5 of the new faces at the County meetings came directly from the Tea Party or were motivated by what the Tea Party was saying. I was there and know full well how late the State and County Party came to the Tea Party table.

Most of the education of the electorate was spread or disseminated not by the GOP but through the hundreds of individual Tea Parties throughout the country. The anger and frustration of the electorate was focused upon and brought to the fore not by the Republicans but by the Tea Party. This was done almost exclusively through the “Alternate Media” in a remarkable grass roots effort. This buzz was created and fanned by the Tea Party through what the Republican Party dared not do in its blinkered effort to “go along to get along” with the Liberals; namely protest rallies and an in your face to anyone from whatever party who told lies.

I remember when the American Dream was more than two cars in every garage. I remember when the freedom of the average citizen to say what was on their mind to their representative was an integral part of the American Dream. Before the Tea Party brought that to the fore at the rallies and Town Halls, we had forgotten that. Not only forgotten but let it be suborned for “the common good”.

Individual rights and individual freedom is what this election was all about. That is what the Tea Party is all about. That is why people got excited about a talk Alan West gave in October 2009. This talk crystallized the emotions freedom loving Americans had about the “over reaching federal government”.



Here was someone not saying why we as a nation can’t do something, why it is too complicated to undertake, why we must “go along to get along”. Lt. Colonel West was reminding us of the American Dream before McDonalds; reminding us of the power each and every one of us has if we choose to use it.

Well a lot of citizens did flex that Freedom muscle once and then over and over - through repetition that muscle grew. We also had a perfect tool, the alternate media and we exercised that too till we refined our initial attempts into something beautiful.

I think Allen West would agree that now is not the time for newly elected Representatives of the people to “go along to get along” but rather to fix bayonets and charge.

After the charge we will have the perfect opportunity to pick up the pieces and with a clear conscience – with resolve – Finish Taking America back in 2012

Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative

Party of No We Don't Want To Do Nothing.

We think therefore we are, to paraphrase Rene Descartes.

To that I would add,

We act then only do we become.

Both are scary to politicians when they think of voters doing either, let alone both.

Both presume an individual freedom to think and do as one wishes, in the context of this blog – simply people can change only through thought AND action.

Voters this time round said, "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what we can do for our own damn selves".

Both thinking and doing are necessary for real change to occur.

So far both Obama and Boehner have thought and spoken of Change but it will only be through action that we will tell if they are serious; or whether we need to take action again against one or the other or both.

What was new this election was that the citizens not only thought but by an increased number were willing to actually do the work to affect change.

Since the election I’ve heard a lot about how the new majority in the US House should consolidate their new found power so they basically can do the same to the Liberals as has been done to them.

We saw this in ‘94’ and we saw what happened.

This is nothing new in the history of man. When given power people and parties abuse it – Gleefully. Revenge is sweet I must confess. Now I must learn to say Enough is Enough for the Revenge. Time to get to work.

What was new under the sun was the American Constitution which came to grips with that reality and tried to set up a framework that would work against itself enough to keep the power base split.

Their magic ingredient, the glue that was to hold that government together was the citizenry – the people. You remember that quaint phrase “We the People”? From citizen militias to citizen office holders, to citizens leading our schools, business leaders and just plain everyday people.

It was the founders dream that all citizens would take part in the governance of our Republic, to keep themselves part of the system. We need to keep things simple, not because citizens are simple but because complexity exists to hide hidden agendas. Elites are formed through the use of the idea that the problems we face are so complicated, only they have the wisdom and skill to steer a proper course. I think the election showed us one thing above all else, we the people know we are not on the proper course.

While this complexity may be true in laser surgery, it is not in regard to political decisions such as earmarks. In this example the “complexity” excuse is merely a subterfuge to keep doing the same ole same ole.

Does anyone still think that the 2500 pages of ObamaCare couldn’t have been a bit shorter? Does anyone still think the complexity of this bill is not hiding a hidden agenda along with enough extra unrelated pork to sink a battleship?

Talking or “speech making” is another good analogy where simplicity denotes truth and complexity usually means someone is hiding something.

Listen for example to a Reagan or Churchill or a Lincoln speech then compare them to an Obama, Neville Chamberlain or a Douglas speech and see which man you believe – which man leaves you with a feeling that this can be done – whatever it is.

This new majority in the House needs to lay the groundwork to get things done by reforming the rules for example; then learn how to get things done by actually doing them.

I voted for these public servants because I want them as well as myself to be able to read and understand the bills that become law.

The Speaker to be, John Boehner caught some flak for stating how difficult it will be to change how congress works. He is right and that truth seems simple enough.

Simple is not always easy. The power brokers hate simplicity.

I like it – so what?

I voted, that’s what. It was simple enough, I would ask no more of whom I voted for.

Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative

No I don't want to do nothing.