Over-Stepping the Boundary Line
The anti-Federalists recognized the dangers of arbitrary, capricious or whimsical actions by a nation’s ruling class. The anti-Federalists also understood that it didn’t matter if the ruling class was comprised of an individual like our US President, or a monarch like King George III. They knew danger could also arise from oligarchies, or democracies when government oversteps it’s boundaries.
Over-stepping occurs constantly because of Republican traitors and Democratic idealists. The Democrats love big government and they are simply following their natural ideological bent.
“Miserable is the lot of that people whose every concern
depends on the WILL and PLEASURE of their rulers.”
– Dissent of Pennsylvania Minority
In the article, Under the Guidance of an Arbitrary Government, I mentioned the anti-Federalists and I have received several questions about their ideas. Aside from, "Who are those guys?", I received many questions about the motivations of the anti-Federalists, and their recommendations during the Constitutional convention of 1787.
Conservative Challenger to the Establishment's Gang
Rep. Louis Gohmert (R-Texas) said Sunday that he will challenge John Boehner (R-Ohio) as Speaker in the new Congress.
“I’m putting my name out there today to be another candidate for Speaker,” Gohmert said on “Fox and Friends.” Gohmert said that after “years of broken promises, it’s time for a change.”
This is Good News
This is important for all Americans and especially for Republicans.
My opponent recently released a letter to the FDA, declaring that their new rules on brewers and ranchers will hurt Oregonian businesses.
He's absolutely right - but my question is, why has he been funding the FDA with printed money from Washington, and then writing flimsy letters against it?
Wouldn't the logical solution be to cut off the funding for unConstitutional entities like the FDA and EPA? Why is our Congressman of 16 years so scared to take these Federal behemoths on?
Last week, your current US House member sent out a puff piece attempting to justify his recent votes. These kinds of word games are exactly what's wrong with Washington — in an age when more and more people are demanding honesty from their elected officials, why are we accepting these kinds of false claims? Rep. Walden asserts that this deal is a series of “common-sense cuts and reforms in the plan” that will “reduce wasteful government spending by $23 billion more and when passed will avert another government shutdown.”
An analysis by Republicans on the Senate Budget Committee (SBC) details where, the proposal identifies two specific years “(2022 and 2023) to reduce deficits by $28 billion.” Do you think that's going to happen? Do you believe that politicians will keep these promises, when right now they are misleading us about the nature of the bill itself?
Only in Washington can a legislator put the phrase "reduce wasteful government spending” and omit the gutting of the sequester law. Also, Rep. Walden purposefully hides the $63 billion in spending hikes over two years. Where did those "common-sense cuts" go again? This budget increases spending by $64B over 2 years and proposes to reduce spending $23B over 10 years. Only from an out-of-touch political class can this be labeled as a common-sense “step in the right direction.”
If you drive anywhere in Oregon, you’re likely to see massive billboards touting “Long Live Oregonians”, using cute cartoon scenes.
The trouble is that while the ads are attractive, all the clever marketing in the world can’t mask a bad product, which is what we’re seeing at the Federal level. Obamacare is an unmitigated disaster, one that even Democrats are running from, as more and more individuals lose their health insurance and rates continue to skyrocket. As liberals flounder, they see what they think is an escape and they grasp on to it - the accusatory question to conservatives: “what would you do to fix healthcare?”
In response, many establishment politicians are apologizing to America. Both Democrats and Republicans are expressing dismay at the dismal outcomes of a poorly-written policy and badly-executed technology. Still others are trying to convince us that they are truly outraged by the price increases, or that they “understand the pain” of Americans who are experiencing rising medical costs and lost coverage.
Professionals in our timber industries are the best-equipped stewards of our forests. However, in Oregon, more than 50% of the state is owned by the Federal government, so this means that private industry, state and local governments have ultimately no control over most of Oregon’s resource-rich landscapes. As a county commissioner I regularly see the tragic results from ill-conceived federal policies and the high costs of unintended consequences.
In Klamath County, and throughout the 2nd District, we find ourselves begging for favors from the Federal government instead of being allowed to create jobs, build communities and see prosperity flourish at the local level. The political establishment prefers rewarding national or regional special interest groups rather than local communities because that creates a culture of power, money and control for themselves. Federal control and regulation diminishes the effectiveness of those most likely to steward natural resources well (loggers, miners, ranchers, etc.).
Last week, in a letter to the Herald & News editors, someone commented that:
“[Linthicum] never seems to use the word ‘we’, but generally expresses his personal feelings toward issues and starts every objection with ‘I’.”
Frankly, I find this odd, because, surely, my objections belong to me. While various individuals might agree, or disagree, with my positions, I am voicing them because they are mine. I see no problem with owning my opinions as my own.
Each of us as an Individual
We are all different and we all carry different ideas. We are different in height, weight, body-type, talent and skill. We each come from different educational backgrounds; we have different life experiences, families and, hence, different perspectives.