The show today did create one thing, a headache. In the last 15 minutes of the show I said the words "God Damned" and, while I will not apologize as they are simply words I can see where it might have been offensive to someone whose belief system tells them that this is Blasphemy. For the offence I will apologize.

That being said, I did in no way forget myself MIC, I simply did not allow Michelle to roll over the top of me. Her statement of "it's my show" was an invitation to sit and be quiet, something of which I will not do even if it does lose me the opportunity to return to the show. I have a freedom of speech, whether I decide to exercise it on that show is her call but my choice, but she asked me to be on and I was on. Therefore I will take advantage of that opportunity and say my peace. You do with it what you will. But no one shuts me down especially if they just don't like my view. That's what her God Damned show is for.

Indie, I am surprised you think me so naive on the constitution. I assure you it was not designed to help the down trodden nor was it designed to be the club of liberal or conservative activism it has become. What it was designed to do was give us the rule of law and to limit the government not us. In not one spot in the Bill of rights does it say what we the people may or may not do, it does however make clear those things that the government will not do. As a mater of fact it is the last two amendments in the Bill of Rights we should be most familiar with. It is these two that set the stage for our role in governance...

Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

It is these two that make clear our responsibility to work things out ourselves for we have the responsibility to do so.

Liberalism has taken words and changed their meanings over time. General Welfare means a level playing field devoid of laws causing encumbrance to one over another, not taking care of those who can't or won't try to take care of themselves. When changing the definition isn't strong enough Liberalism creates controversy where there should not be and isn't any as in the First Amendment.

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

From this and a letter written by Thomas Jefferson where he mentions a "separation of Church and State" they established a need for a religion free government. This is not at all what the 1st Amendment says. We just read it. It says government will not make any laws about the establishment of a religion or the free practice of any one religion. It does not say there will be no religion in government.

It goes on to protect our God given right to freedom of speech, of the press to do their job and our right to get together in protest or praise or get the government to address our complaints. I see nothing there that says there needs to be a separation of church and state, but Liberalism creates this issue from the ether.


And it goes on and on. Point is, the Constitution is not the place where we go to address problems with each other, and it is the mechanism that keeps the government from running rough shot over the population.

Indie complains about business not being good stewards, well in the past I world have agreed with her. We needed some law put in place to stop child labor and to make safety an important issue, but we have those laws in place. What we don't need is to pas additional laws that go too far and start to place emphasis personal decision making of which we have the ultimate responsibility.

You hate me talking about smoking but there is an important clue here to the future of legislation in this country. When you stop allowing the owner of businesses to allow something legal to happen inside its walls under the illusion of helping another class, in this case the poor children of the country, then you have turned government into an entity that molds personal freedom into a money raising racket. What would happen tomorrow if all the smokers stopped? They would have to raise that money somewhere and would employ the same tactic that has worked in the past, only this time it would be against drinkers. /soon alcohol would be taxed so high to "save the children". When they stop because of the cost they will go after high fat foods or those with other addictive or anti health results of use, like coffee drinking or soda. This is no longer about the health of any one person but about making people do what others want them to do at the cost of that other persons choice.

We pass laws about so much personal responsibility issues that it has become second nature.  Forced usage of seat belts, come on, I'm an adult, I know full well what the possible injuries are if I get in an accident, I don't need the government to tell me to be careful and use a safety restraint, but if I chose not to, that’s my business. The law should have been if you don't use a seat belt, your insurance company does not have to pay your insurance bills if in an accident. Or Motorcycle helmets, same story. I don't need Nanny Government to tell me it's smart to wear a helmet, I am a grownup. This is Nanny Government playing the role of mother and father to the masses who are just as smart as those in government.

Another example is Social Security. Originally it was designed to stop the elderly from being forgotten and left to fight for themselves, it was to assist them in their old age and to relieve the states of the financial responsibility they had taken upon themselves. Noble beyond belief. But today it is given to drug addicts, the injured who can still work and to the old who don't need the money. It's sad, but every time government tries to help they create a bigger problem. Today the SS problem is financial. It’s going to go broke. Plain and simple.

My wife and I are in our mid 30's and have no expectation of getting Social Security. We live our life in a manner where we can save more than Social Security takes out because we have done the math and know that we can and have created a situation where our return on our investment will be 10 times that of what Social Security will give us in retirement, plus it will continue to gain returns when we start drawing from it. This is what needs to be told to my generation, not lies about how we will fix it before then, we can't. It's a numbers game. Less people paying in and more people taking out, it goes broke real quick. I have taken that responsibility on myself but am still forced by the Nanny State to pay for those who will not take personal responsibility for their futures and it is wrong.

These are just a few of the examples of what lies ahead for this country if we do not stop taking care of everybody who drops their own ball. There will always be those who need help and we need to allow for them, but not to the rate we do now. Education in basic life skills like handling a check book, your credit rating and the horrors and benefits of compound interest should be mandatory in all schools from 3rd grade forward or at the very least in high school.

And law passing should stop period for one year while we review the laws we already have. Deletion of those that either do not work, are out of date like parking horses on a street after night fall, or be revised with no nee laws until we can show that all other laws are being utilized and funded properly at 100%. Stop the madness of spending on stuff that grown adults can handle. Period!!!

 

But what would I know; I’m just an Average American.