Categories
Freedom Government Truth

Both Parties Have Unleashed The Beast On America

Rod Thomson

The Founding Fathers understood. The monster must be imprisoned, shackled and padlocked in multiple ways. If it is not securely and soundly constrained, it will break free and terrorize the countryside. We see their increasingly ignored forewarnings brightly highlighted in draconian shutdown orders.

The monster of course is government, by nature a truly monstrous being. This gongs in the ears of Americans who have not been taught history, or refuse to learn from it. But from the beginnings of time, governments under kings, queens, emperors, chieftains, despots and potentates of every stripe have caused more death and misery than all of the famines, plagues and catastrophes of nature.

The history of the 20th century alone is soaked in the blood of governments terrorizing their own citizens, quite apart from the wars of conquest they embarked on. Mao, Stalin, Hitler, it is often forgotten or ignored, were the heads of government and could have accomplished none of their genocides against their own people without a gigantic government accountable only to itself. Pol Pot, Ho Chi Minh, Castro and a host of others did the same on a smaller scale.

This is the history of big and unaccountable governments. Always. The most enlightened government in history to its time, the British Empire, still allowed its own citizens few individual rights, and those it granted and it removed. It ran press gangs to snatch even its own people out of pubs and dives for essentially slave sailors on its ships.

As often as not, the most tyrannical governments were those supposedly “protecting” us — from potential invaders, from religious heresy, from poverty, from “others” such as Jews. Their dictatorial powers frequently derived from the people’s fears, our fears. Such as fears of a deadly virus. Perhaps fears of “catastrophic” climate change.

But it always ends the same. Pick your empire (run by governments, all) and the rights-crushing, soul-sucking terror that follows the squashing of individual rights is inevitable. Only the scale differs.

Until 1776, that is, when for the first time in the history of mankind, a nation created a government by and for the people, not for itself. It created a government on the principles that all of mankind is created in the image of God and therefore has rights emanating from God, not from government. These rights were inherent to all mankind and government was to play the role of ensuring those rights were not encroached upon — mostly by constraint as a government, including an American government, would be the largest threat.

As history had taught Madison, Jefferson, Adams, Franklin, Washington and the rest, the government monster would always be a threat to those rights, to the individual’s liberty that comes from God. It was by its nature monstrous, and so while it had to exist, it had to be imprisoned, locked up deep in a vault far from the people and with no ability to terrorize the American citizenry.

And the Framers created such a prison by establishing a separation of powers. Creating three equal branches of government that would harness human nature’s lust for power to keep each in check, while also creating a strong state’s rights system that would further act to keep the federal government in check. 

This system was brilliantly designed by the Framers to imprison the monster away from the people by creating constant friction within the government and between the government and the states. Over the course of the centuries, we’ve seen how marvelously it has preserved individual rights and freedoms and created a magnificent Shining City on a Hill. 

Like The Revolutionary Act on Facebook

However, we have steadily been loosening the chains on the monster, slowly freeing it from these restraints while at the same time providing it with weapons to use against the American people. The courts have done this through extra-Constitutional rulings. Congress has done this through legislation. Presidents have done this through executive orders. And to a degree, each branch has allowed the other to take these powers — Congress giving the most away.

And we the people allowed it all. It was all in our power to stop, but we let it slip away. Why? How did human nature turn this power over? More human nature, but within a changing dynamic. 

The Framers almost universally agreed that this arrangement of freedoms and representative democracy was only fit for a Christian and moral people. It’s not clear we are either of those things anymore. We’re certainly not nearly as much as we were in 1776, or even 50 years ago. The loosening of the chains on the government monster has occurred in part because we lost the knowledge, through purposely lacking education, of why the cell was locked in the first place.

Part of the calculation is political expediency on the part of politicians who, with the growth and power of the monster and decline in Christian influence and morals, find more prestige and financial gain from being in office, and so re-election trumps all other considerations. Therefore Congress, filled with people of declining moral character, reflecting the country, has foisted off on the presidency or the courts the tough decisions that can have political blowback. The power and prestige far outweighs doing the right thing for the nation.

This has been bi-partisan. Each party is culpable as it attempts to gain control of the reins of power to bend the monster to its will. Democrats openly seek to free the beast, while Republicans tend to only slow the pace at which it is freed. And the American people are responsible for electing these people. They truly are representative. They are a reflection of us — a nation of people who are increasingly forgetting the monster behind the locks.

But in doing so, both parties representing the people who chose them, feed the monster while loosening its bonds, and it grows and grows and grows until the monster itself is the one in control — unbending and willful itself, unbound to the people or even the parties. 

This is not a warning of where we are heading. We are here.

The monster is loose on the American people. It is not completely free, but the locks are off and it’s chain is long and weakening. It is shutting people into their houses, telling them what they can and cannot say. Stopping them from going to places of worship. If it is not re-imprisoned very soon, we the people will be incapable of restraining it. At that point, the great American experiment ends. The greatest power for good on earth, will cease to be that nation anymore. And the world will descend into the bloody chaos of unchained monsters and enslaved peoples around the globe.

No this is not our future. This is our present. And we’ve almost missed it. The creep has been so steady, we are as frogs in warming water. It has been going on a long time.

When the monster disapproved of the choice of the American people for president, it reacted via its nature and sought to devour that choice. As is being unveiled more every day, what we saw was a concerted, coordinated effort through different parts of government, from the FBI, CIA and other intelligence agencies, to the State Department, Justice Department and individual federal judges blocking presidential actions to the pliant FISA court. Or consider the mini-tyrants unveiled in the COVID shutdowns, or the IRS targeting political opponents of the former President, or the NSA broadly spying on everyone to the shock of many in Congress.

Readers may bristle at this, but they are all part of the monsters. Not all of the individuals, of course. Not by a long-shot. But in measuring the actions they have taken to destroy the people’s choice, it is difficult to dispute that, as organizations, they are part of terrorizing the American people and threatening the representative government bequeathed to us by the Framers.

Republicans and conservatives reactively, and not inaccurately, blame Democrats and the media working in conjunction with Democrats inside government to explain this. Yes. There’s plenty of truth to that. We’ve reported much of it on this site. However, this is the reality: Neither Democrat politicians nor the media were part of the launch of the Russia collusion hoax played on the American people. That was launched and steered entirely by the monster — acting on its own.

That is the key piece of evidence.

The other reality is that if a Democrat president ever moves against the goals and desires of the monster, the beast unleashed will do what it deems necessary to undermine, block or destroy that president. Right now, it has allies in the Democratic Party and media. But remember, the previous president willingly used the FBI and courts to pursue journalists in the AP and at Fox News that it did not like. The media glanced away because they perceived themselves on the side of the titular head of the monster — oddly, what they considered the right side of history. But the monster is greater than any president now, and certainly greater than a media that has burned down trustworthiness with the American people.

The monster is not loyal to any party or people. It is for itself. Period.

It is not clear that President Trump truly understands the depth of the threat to the American future. But he might. He certainly does more so than other politicians in Washington. But he cannot re-imprison the beast by himself. I don’t think he knows how to. He needs an iron-backboned Congress that also sees the desperate need to chain up the monster, even at great political risk. And he needs to keep appointing judges and justices who will rule on the Constitution and who also see the threat of leviathan unleashed.

If we do not bend history back and remember why the monster was chained in the first place, we will pay a very steep price.

Rod Thomson is an author, past Salem radio host, ABC TV commentator, former journalist and is Founder of The Revolutionary Act. Like him on Facebook .


Drudge Got You Down? / Try WHATFINGER NEWS


Categories
Coronavirus Government Truth

Five Key Lessons We May Not Learn From the COVID Pandemic

Rod Thomson

We may still be in the throes of COVID-19 pandemic in the U.S., but five huge lessons are already veritably slapping us in the face, ready to teach valuable lessons to all those willing to learn. These should be mandatory college courses.

Unfortunately, too many of them will be washed away through the flood of partisanship or the Get Trump Mafia in the media.

But these are virtually unassailable lessons.

Lesson 1: The American people still know how to rise to the occasion. 

Private enterprise, private organizations, religious institutions all took the lead in response to the pandemic long before the giant behemoth of the federal government could begin to lumber into action. Some people see this as a failing of the federal government. It’s not. It’s the best of Americana. 

So we had the NBA, March Madness, the NHL, college sports, Disney, Six Flags, Busch Gardens and other theme parks, fairs, conferences, and so on all voluntarily cancelled their events long before the government at any level lumbered into action. 

This is an amazing approach. Apple closed all of its stores. WalMart and Publix, probably others, reduced open hours so they could do more thorough overnight cleanings and re-stock depleted shelves. Again, all before the government acted. No government told any of these groups or companies they had to do so.

The Republican Party across the country in hundreds and thousands of jurisdictions (and presumably the Democratic Party) cancelled all meetings, dinners and fundraisers, a very painful decision, all before federal or state governments acted.

We’ve already virtually forgotten this one, because all media focus is on government and what did Trump say or do, completely missing a huge lesson.

Lesson 2: State governments remain a better response mechanism than the federal government. 

While Democrats will use this opportunity to try again for universal government healthcare, it should be noted that the federal leviathan was slow and incompetent for a long time in response to this. (See the CDC and FDA bungling of initial tests and treatments.)

But states, including generally badly run ones such as California and Washington, moved much more quickly. Washington state, hit very hard when the virus got into a nursing home before it was identified, killing dozens of elderly people, enacted strict policies on event size, travel, etc. and California soon followed. In Washington, D.C., however, it was nonsense as usual. 

Now whether you think some of these state policies went too far or not, is a different question. The point is they reacted much more quickly than the federal government. This is classic historical Americana — and a great real-world study in the strengths of federalism.

Lesson 3: Big government is slow, inefficient and incompetent. 

When finally the fat lard of federal government roused itself, the nation discovered it was both incompetent, corrupt and hopelessly politicized inside and out.

This may be the point when history will look back and see that Americans had seen enough of the permanent bureaucratic state and endless volumes of environmental rules, regulations and procedures that throttled life-saving actions early in the pandemic. It was this paper-gushing bureaucracy that, in January, blocked the CDC and FDA from COVID-19 testing.

Once those rules were kicked aside and the CDC got its tests created, it managed to bungle the first ones, sending out kits that had very high false negatives. Ridiculously, they refused to use the tests that Washington was already effectively using. They wanted to create their own — because that is how government bureaucrats think. Turf protection and expansion.

Imagine putting these sorts of people and systems in charge of all Americans’ healthcare. Well, not Congress of course. They’ll exempt themselves with platinum plans on the backs of taxpayers.

Add the CDC and FDA to the FBI, IRS and other federal government agencies that have badly failed the American people in recent years. The picture becomes deadly clear.

Or should. But because the media coverage only touched on these issues, while spewing like an uncapped oil strike about Trump, too many Americans will miss the lesson. They will be propagandized to think it was all because of Trump, when it was actually the federal bureaucracy — which will always be slow, incompetent and corrupt.

Lesson 4: American companies are leading the way out.

This pandemic is reminiscent of how big business mobilized the nation during World War II. For all his faulty policies, FDR was spot on in some areas. He recognized that to defeat Imperial Japan and Nazi Germany, the government needed the help of the guys who knew how to make things happen and get the job done. And he was right.

President Trump called on business leaders to help lead response efforts by responding in ways the government is incapable of — quickly, efficiently retooling to begin manufacturing ventilators, N95 face masks, sanitizers and a range of other needed medical equipment. (These appeared to be needed. The more we learn, as we note in Lesson 5, the more we find the numbers were apparently vastly overstated.) 

In fact, we are already seeing that we now have plenty of medical supplies. The reality that the experts got the projections badly wrong does not take anything away from how quickly American companies responded. This was just not seen in other countries. 

Trump created partnerships with manufacturers such as General Motors to build ventilators, with tech giants like Google to develop a national website for coronavirus screenings and with Walmart to use their parking lots for drive-through testing.

On a small business scale, distilleries around the country shifted part of their production from whiskey, rum and other products to mass-producing hand sanitizer or surface sanitizers after reports of shortages. Many of them were giving the sanitizer away for free. There are hundreds of these stories.

Private enterprise is almost always the better path to a solution than government.

Lesson 5: The experts can be wrong, very wrong, even in their area of expertise.

This is maybe the toughest lesson for many Americans to swallow. We turn “experts” and “scientists” into little gods in whom we put our trust.

I examine this one in-depth here: The Evidence Is Coming In: Virus Experts May Have Been Badly Wrong.

This is not a knock on them getting it wrong. The truth is they were always doomed to get a lot wrong early on with this virus, because it was brand new. But as experts, they should have known that. Instead, they spoke authoritatively, put out numbers that were wildly inaccurate we now know, and we listened and followed as though it came from On High. 

The consequences of the experts being overconfident, the media hyping the worst case scenarios of wrong data as though it was fact, and the rest of us following too sheepishly is having devastating consequences on our businesses, jobs and lives.

Further, we only listened to experts and scientists in the area of viral infections. But from the start of conversations of shutting down, we really needed to also be hearing from economists, businessmen, government tax revenue experts and so on. A broad range of experts would have led to a balanced approach to the outbreak, which is looking more and more like the route we should have taken.

Because the pandemic response has naturally become politicized, the challenge will be learning these lessons when every one of them can break down into tribalism and cherry-picking, and using Trump as the pinata for every failure of the bureaucracy. That is the path toward learning nothing.

Rod Thomson is an author, past Salem radio host, ABC TV commentator, former journalist and is Founder of The Revolutionary Act. 


Drudge Got You Down? / Try WHATFINGER NEWS


Categories
Coronavirus Government Truth

Non-Covid-19 Patients Are Being Ignored

by Julio Gonzalez, M.D., J.D.

On Friday night on The Ingraham Angle, Laura Ingraham reported her conversation with an unidentified doctor in Queens who shared his concern that non-Covid patients are being ignored in the United States as the medical community reacts to the surge of viral cases that are either overwhelming them or are predicted to do so in the near future.

The physician was ultimately restricted from openly sharing his opinion by his hospital so a live discussion was ultimately stymied.  And although Ingraham did not definitively answer the question on Friday night, the New York physician is absolutely correct.  

As a physician, I can confirm it. I see it happening to my patients. Non-Covid-19 patients are not getting the treatment they need.

Since the predictions made by the CDC and publicized by the likes of Drs. Anthony Fauci and Deborah Birx, our various governments, the medical community, and the general public have entered into a state of general quarters where the economy has been trounced and the usual conduct of medical care paralyzed.  

But the predictions foreseeing 2.5 million deaths in the United States as a result of inaction are nonsensical.  This is not to say that the United States is not faced with a serious challenge to the health, welfare, safety of the American people, but either the calculations or assumptions of these predictions are leading to indefensible results.  

Consider that at the time of this writing, over four months, in the whole world, there are 50,489 deaths.  So, after four months of free reign at the global population with infiltration into many underserved, third world, poverty-stricken countries, the Wuhan Pandemic has caused 50,489 deaths.  With this backdrop, it is inconceivable that 2.5 million Americans would die in April in the United States alone unless harsh and almost draconian mitigation efforts are undertaken.  

Although I review many cases of negative government interventions on healthcare in my book The Case for Free Market Healthcare, this present response overwhelms the magnitude and misguidedness of any other.  The reality is that any time an intervention is undertaken by fiat there will be negative repercussions.  Thus far, much of the nation’s attention has centered on the economic effects.  But it is true that the effects on the health of many non-Covid-19 patients are significant.  I know this because I see this personally throughout my community on a daily basis, and I am active in the implementation of this plan locally.  

Throughout the country, hospitals are no longer performing “non-essential” procedures.  People in need of pain-related surgery, low-grade cancers, many diagnostic procedures, orthopaedic interventions, prostate cancer, and hysterectomies, to name a few, are being prohibited from undergoing necessary interventions.  Note that just because a procedure is non-essential does not make it unnecessary. Despite this reality, patients are unable to access them regardless of whether their state has 185 reported cases like in Alaska, or 123,000 like in New York.

Meanwhile, hospitals throughout my community are actually laying off people because the ban on “non-essential” has caused a dramatic decrease in their patient loads while still treating relatively few Covid-19 patients.

The needs of non-Covid-19 patients are being placed on the backburner while the nation responds to what has become a massive pandemic.  Whether this is appropriate, and whether this prioritization ought to be undertaken in a blanket fashion or regionally tailored, is an analysis that needs to be completed.

Dr. Julio Gonzalez is an orthopaedic surgeon and lawyer living in Venice, Florida. He is the author of The Federalist Pages and The Case for Free Market Healthcare.  He can be reached through http://www.thefederalistpages.com/contact.html or at [email protected]


Drudge Got You Down? / Try WHATFINGER NEWS


Categories
Government Truth

The Real Reason For Hospital Shortages In The United States

by Julio Gonzalez, M.D., J.D.

An article published by the Kaiser Family Foundation on Wednesday showed the United States ranked eleventh in the world in per capita distribution of hospitals.  That article pointed out that the United States had a “lower hospital density than almost all comparable countries.” 

Predictably, there are a slew of other hospital-related resources in which the United States is lacking, including the number of hospital-employed nurses and the number of physicians.  Although the Kaiser article does not detail the cause of these shortages, I do so in my new book, The Case for Free Market Healthcare.  

The reason is actually quite simple and predictable: government intervention.  

Although the details of the dynamics are too extensive to cover in this forum (I therefore urge you to explore them further in The Case for Free Market Healthcare), there are a few observations that can be gleaned regarding the degree of error with which we have approached healthcare delivery in our country.  

First, government has been openly hostile to hospitals, particularly private hospitals, viewing them mostly as vehicles for greedy investors to make money off the sick and the poor.  This hostile and destructive attitude led to the passage of the Health Planning Resources Development Act in 1974 that actually rewarded states for implementing “certificate of need” (CON) programs to restrict the abilities of entrepreneurs to build hospitals.  

Within a few years, forty-nine states enacted CON laws, and their models for governmental interference have since been shown not to lower prices for inpatient services and not improve hospital financial investment in communities as had been touted by the bill’s advocates.  

But the damage still persists. To this day, despite the certificate of need program’s total failure, only thirteen states have rescinded it demonstrating the difficulty of undoing misguided legislation after it has been passed.  

Government also has and continues to manipulate the market in ways that have destroyed projects aimed at improving the availability of hospital emergency rooms.  In 2018, the Medicare Payment Advisory Board advised Congress to cut reimbursements to freestanding emergency rooms operating within 6 miles of their parent hospitals by 30%.  Why? Because, according to MedPAC, “such systems would encourage providers to treat lower intensity rooms rather than urgent care centers.” Which begs the question: what business is it of Medicare, an insurance company for seniors and the disabled, where the market decides that it is more efficient to treat urgent and emergent patients?

As a result of MedPAC’s misguided market manipulations, over 250 shovel-ready or unfinished projects were canned, robbing America of greater healthcare access — and a lot more beds to deal with today’s crisis.

To be sure, the federal government has also engaged in a wide variety of activities that favor hospitals over other models, but in each of unnatural interventions, the consequences are the same:  government continues to impose delivery models upon the population and with it, its bias of how healthcare is provided to the consumer.  

As a result, the market is not free to respond to consumer demands and cost-saving opportunities in an efficient manner.  Thus, we are never given the opportunity to develop the right number of hospitals and the correct number of physicians, nurses, physical therapists. . .you get the point.  

Now, we are faced with the challenges of a pandemic where many, including President Trump, have observed that we were not ready with a coordinated response mechanism.  In point of fact, we weren’t even ready with a baseline set of operating resources with which to handle the larger numbers that would present themselves, and the blame lies squarely on government for attempting to impose upon us its ideas of what those numbers should be, instead of allowing the market to settle upon them by itself.

If it had allowed the market to freely operate, we would have more hospital capacity, more medical personnel and more supplies. 

Dr. Julio Gonzalez is an orthopaedic surgeon and lawyer living in Venice, Florida. He is the author of The Federalist Pages and The Case for Free Market Healthcare.  He can be reached through http://www.thefederalistpages.com/contact.html or at [email protected]


Drudge Got You Down? / Try WHATFINGER NEWS


Categories
Government Republicans Truth

Republican-Run Florida Is Pushing Vaping Ban?

By Dr. Julio Gonzalez, J.D.

As of this writing, the Florida Legislature is considering bills that would prohibit adult Floridians over the age of 18 from purchasing non-combustible nicotine products or nicotine dispensing products (“vapors”). The legislation may include an artificial definition of these products as “tobacco.”  Such a move would be in error.

As conservatives, we demand that government’s intrusions upon our lives be as small as possible. Yes, government has a bona fide role in ensuring the health, morale, welfare, and safety of the people, but such an intervention in this case would do neither.  

During the late twentieth century, government played an active role in discouraging cigarette smoking.  This campaign was met with resistance from those who believed that it was not government’s role to meddle in their lives. Nevertheless, in that campaign there was direct and incontrovertible evidence that smoking was intimately tied with lung cancer, not only for the smoker, but for those who secondarily inhaled the smoke. In the end, most agreed, because of the incontrovertible, causative correlation between cigarette smoking and cancer, both its regulation and the active discouragement of its use was an appropriate role for government. 

In the case of vaping, no such correlation exists.

The tars that plague cigarette smoke are not present in vaping products, nullifying the cancer links. Additionally, the American Cancer Society has stated that that giving up combustible cigarettes is the single most important thing a smoker can do to improve her health, even it if she accomplishes this goal by using e-cigarettes.

Additionally, Moffitt Cancer Center’s Thomas Brandon, PhD., Director of Moffitt’s Tobacco Research and Intervention program in Tampa, Fla., stated on February 28, 2018, that “…e-cigarettes represent the most important change in the landscape of tobacco use [in decades]” and encouraged society to harness this change “to maximize the public health benefit from it.”

Somehow, the discussion regarding e-cigarettes and government’s role in regulating it has gone wildly wrong. Here we do not have a product, as best as science can tell, that is killing people, but one that may be helping them and even saving lives. We have a product that stands unlinked to cancer and may serve as a needed substitute for another that is. For the Florida legislature to consider banning the sale of these products absent the causative link present in smokable and chewable tobacco (and perhaps even representing a net societal benefit) is a clear example of an overstep of government’s proper role. 

Yes, there are many who find e-cigarette vapors annoying, but a local annoyance is no reason for government to step in. Rather, it is up to business-owners and individuals to regulate themselves. 

Florida ought to avoid policy changes that would inhibit adults from exercising their freedom to access vaping products known to have health benefits and devoid of proven, life-threatening consequences relied on by many, including member of our military, to kick the smoking habit.  

The Florida legislature to reject this invitation to excessively intrude into the lives of its citizens.

Dr. Julio Gonzalez is an orthopaedic surgeon and lawyer living in Venice, Florida. He is the author of The Federalist Pages and served in the Florida House of Representatives. He can be reached through www.thefederalistpages.com to arrange a lecture or book signing.


Drudge Got You Down? / Try WHATFINGER NEWS


Categories
Government Truth

Opportunity For Federal Government Reform — Eliminate, Disperse, Privatize

Rod Thomson

The federal government’s partial shutdown is affording the opportunity for Americans to see some of the D.C.’s most self-serving politics, but also the reality that we have large swaths of the federal government that are non-essential.

And some of it really, really is non-essential — as in unneeded — and should be simply eliminated to the benefit of taxpayers and all Americans who are not politically connected.

But perhaps even more portions of the federal government could be radically altered to make the behemoth far more responsive to Americans, rather than holding them hostage to the deplorable and corruptive condition of D.C. politics.

And then, of course, privatize portions of the federal government that can be handled better by private companies.

Eliminate parts, disperse more parts around the country, and privatize yet more operations.

Here are some departments and agencies of the federal government that could be and should be eliminated. Both fiscally and regulatorily, Americans would be better off if these did not exist at the federal level.

 

Eliminate

➾ The Department of Education. This should never have been federalized. Education is a local responsibility, not something to be bribed and blackmailed by politicized bureaucrats in the distant capital.

➾ The Department of Commerce. Totally unnecessary. Spends about $9 billion annually helping politically connected corporations.

➾ The Department of Labor. Again, unnecessary. The federal government should not be allowed to be referee and judge over labor disputes. Let private companies, employees and unions battle it out, using the courts if laws are broken.

➾ The Department of Energy. Politicians claim we need “an energy policy.” But what happens is that politically connected companies get a bunch of taxpayer money for politically correct business (i.e., the Solyndra solar company debacle.) The free market has continued to be the best energy policy for Americans.

➾ The Small Business Administration. Created in 1954 to foster small business development, it is totally irrelevant today, as it probably always was. Out of about 800,000 new businesses that form annually, more than 98 percent did so without SBA loans.

Of course, it would take a special kind of principled politician to make these happen — a lot of such politicians. It’s not clear we have more than a handful of those right now and hardly trending in the right direction.

 

Disperse

Something less radical, perhaps, but way outside the box and something that would dramatically remove the corrupting impact of so much power concentrated too far from Americans: Disperse departments that cannot be eliminated around the country to relative geographic locations — the key being to get them away from D.C.

Any inefficiencies from this — which are realistically very few with modern, highly connective technologies — are overwhelmed by getting employees/bureaucrats away from the corrupting, power-hungry atmosphere of the central capital.

Join the fight for American ideals 

It is all but assured that the departments would be more responsive to those they are regulating if they were in the communities most hit by their regulations — not the distant capital. The only real downside would be the upfront costs associated with moving the departments.

So here are few examples of those:

Move the Department of Agriculture to Des Moines

Move the Department of Energy to Houston

Move the Department of Labor to Detroit

Move the Department of the Interior to the interior: Kansas City or Cheyenne, Wyoming

Move the Department of Veteran Affairs to Fayetteville, N.C.

Every one of these departments staffed by lifer bureaucrats would feel more connected to the people they were regulating — from those writing implementing language for new regulations to those enforcing them. They would essentially be more customer-responsive.

 

Privatize

And finally, privatizing some federal operations makes considerable sense. First up in that arena would be the Transportation Security Administration at the nation’s airports. The airports and the airlines have far more skin in the game of airline traveler security than bureaucrats in D.C. Their motivation to create safe flights is greater than a government agency.

And airports have been chafing to run their own security operations because of the inefficiencies and lackluster performance of the national TSA apparatus. Eliminate the TSA and allow airports to run their own security operations — perhaps making them responsive to the states, if need be.

Another great example for privatization is Medicare. The “Empowering Patients First Act” proposed privatization through providing tax credits, based on age rather than income, to help purchase private health insurance. Dealing with private insurers can be no fun, but it’s usually better than the Medicare monstrosity. And it would provide a more natural mechanism to keep healthcare costs in line.

Unfortunately, President Trump does not seem particularly inclined to be cutting costs, or government. He’s outlined a handful of fairly obscure agencies to eliminate, outlined by The Hill. Sure, please do. But almost no one has heard of any of those and they don’t amount to a hill of  beans.

And those attempts obviously should have been made when the GOP controlled Congress.

But this is an opportunity, right in front of us to do more. Much more by starting the process of building an American coalition around dramatic federal government reform. There may be no better time for Americans to be sympathetic to it then at a time when dysfunction seems to be at its maximum.

Start now, to win hearts and minds on rebooting the federal government in a whole new, American-friendly way.

Rod Thomson is an author, host of Tampa Bay Business with Rod Thomson on the Salem Radio Network, TV commentator and former journalist, and is Founder of The Revolutionary Act. Rod also is co-host of Right Talk America With Julio and Rod on the Salem Radio Network.


Drudge Got You Down? / Try WHATFINGER NEWS


 

Categories
Border Democrats Government Immigration Trump Truth

Bleeding Support In Shutdown Battle, Democrats Need Rebuttal Tonight

by Julio Gonzalez, M.D., J.D.

Tonight, the President of the United States will be addressing the nation regarding the issue of border security.

It is expected that the President will provide a defense of his tough stance on his demands to fund the wall. He will likely paint a dire picture of conditions south of the border. He will share with the country the challenges faced due to inadequate resources and the lack of a physical barrier.

In all likelihood the President’s message will make sense and will resonate with the American people who, although squeamish on government shutdowns, overwhelmingly demand that the federal government enforce our borders and ensure our safety and welfare.

In response, Democrats have asked the networks for an opportunity to rebut; an opportunity they will surely be given. But their request brings up two issues; one an inductive conclusion and the other an inescapable paradox.

The conclusion is that Democrats worry they are losing the war of words regarding border security. With every week that passes, the Democrats lose what they have always deployed as their greatest weapon regarding government shutdowns: shock value. Theirs is the tactic of equating a government shutdown with the end of the world. They do this, not only to paint the Republicans as evil, uncaring, and irresponsible, but also because to Democrats, the role of government is indispensable to life in society. Even a partial shutdown, for them, is tantamount to a cataclysmic natural disaster.

But as the weeks grind on, the American people continue to see that the partial government shutdown, by and large, is not a threat to their daily existence. People are continuing to get their healthcare. Their banks are still doing business. The military is still operating, and yes, the IRS is working on delivering those precious refund checks.

But despite the fading, fake cataclysm of the shutdown, the permanent truth of the inadequacies of our border’s security continues to shine. The problems south of the border continue to exist, and the multi-thousand-member caravans preparing to attempt to stroll into the United States continue to form.

Help us keep fighting for truth

The net effect is a nasty, rancid, and tumultuous loss for the Democrats, and Democrats know it. Add to their losing effort a presidential address on the matter from the Oval Office, and the result is potentially catastrophic to their indefensible cause. It is for this reason that Democratic leaders wish to speak to the American people tonight, bringing us to the second issue: how can they speak when they won’t even listen?

Democratic leaders, chief amongst these are Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, have engaged in the highly obnoxious and potentially destructive strategy of not listening to their political opponents, particularly to those may have developed an expertise on the field. When border security agents appeared at the White House Press Room and discussed their first-hand accounts regarding the indispensable importance of a barrier to border security, the Democrats’ dismissive answer was simply to say that the agents were wrong. No facts to back them up; just the assertion.

And when President Trump invited Secretary of Homeland Security Kirstjen Nielsen to a meeting with the President and leaders from both parties at the White House, Pelosi’s and Schumer’s response was to repeatedly interrupt her, and again, claim she was wrong.

So now, the two leaders who have recurrently demonstrated an unwillingness and incapacity to listen to opposing points of view want us to listen to them.

Why should we?

The fact is that I, as opposed to them, will listen to what they have to say. I will do this out of respect for our political process and because I recognize that our country has devolved to a state where we have refused to listen to each other, and Pelosi and Schumer have made themselves integral to the problem.

In the end, however, I am confident I and most Americans will side with the President for, amongst other reasons, his opponents’ demonstrated reluctance to learn from what the President and those charged with working directly on the issue of border security have to say.

Despite their appearance tonight to rebut the President, I and most Americans will likely conclude that Pelosi and Schumer are part of the problem; not the solution.

Dr. Julio Gonzalez is an orthopaedic surgeon and lawyer living in Venice, Florida. He is the author of The Federalist Pages and cohost of Right Talk America With Julio and Rod. Dr. Gonzalez is presently serving in the Florida House of Representatives. He can be reached through www.thefederalistpages.com to arrange a lecture or book signing.


Drudge Got You Down? / Try WHATFINGER NEWS


 

Categories
Government healthcare Truth

Overweening Government: Scottish Docs Now “Authorized” To Prescribe…Nature

by Julio Gonzalez, M.D., J.D.

If you’re looking for a doctor to prescribe medical marijuana, you might find one in Florida. But if you want a doctor to prescribe a calming walk in the woods, or a visit to the beach to touch the sea and feel the cool salt water, then your government-run doc is in Scotland.

Yes, Scottish physicians have now been authorized to prescribe nature!

Of course, the benefits of “nature” on mental and physical health have long been known and espoused. Conditions such as hypertension, depression, pain control, and immune disorders have been found to benefit from outdoor explorations and attempts at relaxation.

So, how can you possibly prescribe nature? You can’t take it.  You can’t swallow it.  (Or probably shouldn’t.) You definitely can’t administer it rectally (or again, really shouldn’t!) So then: How can you prescribe it?

The fact is you can’t. You can only recommend that a patient undergo outdoor activities for all of its benefits. I suppose you can make recommendations for particular activities at certain locations and seasons, but requiring those recommendations in the form of a prescription, one that is in need of being authorized by government, goes to both the danger and the absurdity of bureaucrats running medical care.

So here’s the overarching question and the point that really struck me about this story: If you can’t take it home with you, if you can’t buy it, if you can’t possess it, then why would a health care provider need authorization to prescribe it? The concept defies credulity, doesn’t it?

Well that’s exactly what has happened in Scotland, another European country where one-payer and provider government healthcare has taken hold. The Health Board for Shetland, Scotland, just authorized its doctors to be able to prescribe nature.

More Good Stuff On Facebook

One must wonder what preceded this that required government intervention in the form of authorization, and why it would be needed. Were doctors irresponsibly telling their patients to take a walk in the woods or enjoy a babbling brook or ocean waves? Were doctors actually not doing it because when government bureaucrats run the show, no one feels safe or motivated to do anything beyond what is required and covered in “the book.”

Sure, this is sort of funny. But it’s also an eye-opening object lesson.

If it doesn’t alarm you that a governmental organization would have such overwhelming control of your health care that it can decide when your doctor may or may not prescribe something as all pervasive as nature, then I don’t know what will.

I’m a practicing physician and I am sure of this: Whatever you do this November, fight for your healthcare. Don’t let your government take control of it. It just might decide that you need authorization just to access nature.

Dr. Julio Gonzalez is an orthopaedic surgeon and lawyer living in Venice, Florida. He is the author of The Federalist Pages and cohost of Right Talk America With Julio and Rod. Dr. Gonzalez is presently serving in the Florida House of Representatives. He can be reached through www.thefederalistpages.com to arrange a lecture or book signing.


Drudge Got You Down? / Try WHATFINGER NEWS


 

Categories
Gender Government Schools Truth

Florida Schools: Transgender Children’s Choice Must Be Hid From Parents

Rod Thomson

A Florida school superintendent in very conservative coastal Sarasota County is implementing a radically leftist transgender policy without public input or a vote of the School Board, a policy that among other things strips parents of their right to know what their child is doing in school and turns over a fundamental right of parenting to the government.

At the recommendation of the Sarasota County School District’s LGBTQI Task Force, School Superintendent Todd Bowden is issuing “guidelines” today to govern how the district’s more than 50 public schools handle transgender and gender questioning students — starting as young as kindergarten.

This surreptitious radicalization of local policy comes at the very moment that the Trump administration is considering rolling back the Obama administration’s baseless, un-scientific and lawless expansion of Title IX, the federal civil-rights statute that bans sex discrimination in federally funded education programs. Obama also did that very quietly in 2014, on his own, after Congress failed to get it changed to Obama’s satisfaction.

These are called “guidelines” presumably because an actual policy would have to go through the School Board and be subject to public hearings and public input. (The tactic is akin to when President Obama created a treaty with Iran over nuclear weapons, but called it an “agreement” to bypass the need for Senate ratification.)

Superintendent Bowden appears to be using the Obama playbook on the issue.

But while called guidelines in practice it is a policy, and it implements a full-blown transgender protocol allowing students to use whichever bathroom and locker room corresponds with the gender they “identify” as, forces everyone else to use the pronoun of the students’ choice — including “their” if they are just not sure— and checks the box of everything LGBTQI activists want.

The policy also says that parents must not be informed of their child’s decision to identify as a different gender. The student’s gender identity will be accommodated entirely in the school, which activists and some school leaders claim is a “safer” environment than the home.

If John wants to be known as Sue, his teachers and all staff must call him that. But the parents cannot be informed. John/Sue can use the girls’ bathroom, the girls’ locker room, and participate as a girl in extracurricular activities. But the parents cannot be informed. It’s all up to the child and school.

More Original Content On Patreon

The just-released document obtained by The Revolutionary Act, entitled “Creating Safe Schools for All Students:  Gender Diverse Student Guidelines,” reads: “It is up to the student, and the student alone, to share her/his/their identity.” No parents allowed.

This policy was intended to be quietly rolled out Friday to principals overseeing 43,000 students, until one courageous School Board member was so outraged that she went public with it.

“That is completely stripping the rights of families, parents and/or guardians to be a part of this discussion,” said School Board Chairman Bridget Ziegler. “The district has no place in cutting out parents.”

If a student needs an aspirin, they need parental permission. If they want to sit out the Pledge of Allegiance, they need written permission of the parents. But if their son wants to change his gender and identify as a girl at school and use the girls’ bathrooms and locker rooms, then the parent must not even be told.

Remember, there was no vote or discussion by the elected Board, and no public or community input — in a county where Republicans outnumber Democrats 130,000 to 93,000 as of the 2016 election and that Trump won in a landslide. It was meant to be such a quiet rollout that many parents would not even be aware of it. (Part of this is due to the peculiar breakdown of the so-called “non-partisan” Board, which is 4-1 Republican, but 3-2 puppet-like supporters of the superintendent.)

Get More Truth On Our Facebook Page

Here are the core controversial parts of the new policy. Read the language. These are not guidelines, they are policy rules.

PRONOUNS: “A transgender student shall be addressed by the name and gender requested. All relevant teachers and administrators and staff shall be informed of a transgender student’s name and gender pronoun. The student’s name and gender pronoun does not need to correspond to the student’s birth certificate and other official records. It is up to the student, and the student alone, to share her/his/their identity. In the case of elementary-age students often the student and parent are involved, however, this is on a case by case basis.”

At the elementary level, the parents are involved only if the child informs them. School leaders are blocked from doing so.

BATHROOMS: “All students, who want to use the restroom in accordance with their consistently asserted gender identity, will be provided the available accommodation that best meets the needs and privacy concerns.”

Of course, this is a serious problem all on its own. But implementation will also be problematic, because in the open-ended forms of gender identity allowed in the guidelines there is “non-binary,” which “refers to anyone who does not exclusively identify as male or female. This term can include multiple gender identities, not limited to gender fluid.”

So apparently any bathroom can be used, based on the feelings of the moment?

LOCKER ROOMS:All students, who want to use the locker room in accordance with their consistently asserted gender identity, will be provided the available accommodation that best meets the needs and privacy concerns.

FIELD TRIPS: “Day field trips and overnight field trips are opportunities for educational endeavors and social engagements and it is important to make sure that transgender students have both components. This can require some planning to ensure affirmed name, gender pronouns, room assignments, chaperones and showers are accurate and aligned with the student’s core gender identity. School administration will directly guide the process. Administration will review case by case to determine how to work with all parties involved.”

Because the School Board elections were just completed in the Florida primary, there is little that can be done to overturn this superintendent-driven policy. But expect a strong reaction from the conservative community on the loss of parental rights with their own children.

Rod Thomson is an author, TV talking head and former journalist, and is Founder of The Revolutionary Act. Rod is co-host of Right Talk America With Julio and Rod on the Salem Radio Network.


Drudge Got You Down? / Try WHATFINGER NEWS


 

Categories
Constitution Government States Truth

Secret TSA List Violates The Constitution

By KrisAnne Hall

According to a memo received by the New York Times, in February of this year the TSA developed a brand new “secret watch list.” This list is for special people who don’t necessarily qualify for the big “No Fly” list, but for people individual agents of the TSA feel have been “offensive” or have created “challenges to the safe and effective completion of screening.”

So if you don’t like where the agent’s hands are roaming, or you question a TSA agent’s authority, motives, or honesty, you get to be on this new list.  

According to the memo and anonymous TSA agents interviewed by the New York Times, being on this list allows other TSA agents to identify you as a “problem.” The TSA claims the list cannot impel “extra screening” at checkpoints, but those of us who fly often know how ridiculous it can become when you are “randomly chosen” to for extra screening.  

The feds already have multiple “watch lists” and being on this new list won’t put you on the “no fly” list, so why does the TSA need a new, super-secret one?

Kelly Wheaton, TSA deputy chief counsel, says the TSA needs a list for passengers who have been demonstrably unruly at, or near, checkpoints. Matthew F. Leas, a TSA spokesman, said in an email to the Times, that the agency “wants to ensure there are safeguards in place to protect Transportation Security Officers (TSOs) and others from any individual who has exhibited disruptive or assaultive behavior at a screening checkpoint and is scheduled to fly.”  

According to the Times, Federal security directors, top TSA security officials at airports and top Air Marshals’ supervisors can nominate individuals to be put on the watch list. Only the TSA administrator, his deputy and the top two officials at the agency’s Office of Intelligence and Analysis may add or remove people from the database.

Like Us On Facebook

This is clearly unconstitutional. There is no notice given that you are being put on a list, and no apparent way for you request to be removed from this list. If the government can secretly put an American on a list that could lead agents to identify that American and impose regulations or even lead to some kind of discriminatory activity, this is a violation of every American’s Right to Due Process; Rights that are expressly enumerated in the 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th Amendments.

Rep. Bonnie Watson Coleman, Democrat of New Jersey, said during a House homeland security subcommittee hearing: “What I don’t want — what I think no American would want — is an excuse for unfair, secret profiling that doesn’t even offer a chance for people to contest their name appearing on such a list…I am concerned about the civil-liberty implications of such a list.” Hugh Handeyside, an attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union, told the Washington Post, the policy gives the agency wide latitude to “blacklist people arbitrarily and essentially punish them for asserting their rights.”

Please Help Us Fight For American Values!

Those who fought for the foundations of America lived through a nearly identical exercise of federal power. For those living under British Rule in 1761, they called these laws, “the worst instrument of arbitrary power, the most destructive of English liberty and the fundamental principles of law, that ever was found in an English law-book.” (For a history refresher to see the alarming parallels with today’s TSA, read this article on the history of our 4th Amendment.)

We all should be concerned about the implications of a single agent, within a federal agency, possessing unlimited and unchecked power over Americans!

KrisAnne Hall is a former biochemist, Russian linguist for the U.S. Army, and former prosecutor for the State of Florida. KrisAnne also practiced First Amendment Law for a prominent Florida non-profit Law firm. KrisAnne now travels the country teaching the foundational principles of Liberty and our Constitutional Republic. She is the author of 6 books on the Constitution and Bill of Rights, and has an internationally popular radio and television show. Her books and classes have been featured on C-SPAN TV. KrisAnne can be found at www.KrisAnneHall.com. Get the book “Sovereign Duty” to learn what the designers of our Constitution wanted Americans to do when their federal government became bloated and out of control. Find this book on Amazon, Barns & Noble, Wal-Mart, and many other merchants.


Drudge Got You Down? / Try WHATFINGER NEWS