.

The Revolution of 2012

We did it July 4th, 1776; we can do November 6th, 2012.

 

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present US Government is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States.

Since the signing of the constitution the progressive movement has attempted to re-write our founding document.  Piece by piece they have added more and larger control to a heavy handed centralized government.  On June 28th, 2012 the third and final branch of the US Government gave its approving nod to the destruction of state sovereignty.  Against the will of the people and against ideals that founded this country we have seen an act of betrayal the likes of which King George III would be proud.

For as our founding fathers refused to allow tyranny to dictate the land they loved, we also must refuse the tyranny of the US Government.  This November is the chance for revolution.  The battle lines are drawn.  Do you wish follow the failed course of socialism in favor of the fabled state of equality no country has ever attained?  Or do you want the country that through self determination, hard work and personal responsibility has carried the world for the last 225 years?

We have been told that holding ideals such as personal responsibility and self determination were archaic and backwards.   We have been told that progress comes through the government determination of what is equality.  We have been told that our constitution is living document up for interpretation based on the whims of the ruling class.  All the while the progressive systems crumble around us. 

Take your American ideals and fight for your country.  Either we are United States of American or we return to a colonial oppression under a government more concerned with its own political power then desires of its people.

This post is contributed by a community member. The views expressed in this blog are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Patch Media Corporation. Everyone is welcome to submit a post to Patch. If you'd like to post a blog, go here to get started.

Jay Sykes July 01, 2012 at 02:52 PM
Both sides are selling a mythology, Lyle. One side uses Greek characters, the other Roman. Neither side can point to concrete, measurable, sustainable results as a function 'their legislation';both are guilty of traveling a bridge too far. On the right, we moved from a 70% marginal tax rate to 28%;we know that neither of these rates are sustainable;the high rate kills incentives and the low one does not generate enough revenue to support our governmental needs. The left has multiplied the social programs,especially since the mid-60's, and fortunately, now, very few live in poverty. Do you think people today or those at its inception would think Social Security was a good idea if they knew that 75 years later, people were going to pay 21 times more(inflation stabilized;for the Retirement,Disability,Survivors programs;the numbers on Medicare are much worse) than they were paying in 1935?
Mike Knight July 01, 2012 at 03:31 PM
The States have the law of the 10th amendment behind them. If only enough of them would join together in an alliance they could take back the Federal government which has committed treason on thousands of counts with it's perversion, and twisting of the Constitutions words. The Barry Obama Administration is the greatest violator of the supreme law of the land. The Federal government is limited by what the Constitution says it can do. The Commerce, Welfare, and Supremacy clauses can't be used to do anything they want. What was the point of the Constitution if that's the case?
Lyle Ruble July 01, 2012 at 05:51 PM
@Jay Sykes...I can't disagree that both positions rely on a mythology. What I want to know is how would you define poverty? I also understand the marginal tax rate, yet the political right generally doesn't acknowledge that it has been too low for too long largely contributing to the under funding of government, thus increasing the debt. We will probably have to exceed the marginal tax rate for an equal amount of time to restore the solvency of the government. I had the opportunity to speak with some of the people who worked on legislative staff during the debate and adoption of the Social Security Act. I posed a question which mirrors the one you just raised and essentially they didn't envision the rates climbing to what they had at the time (prior to 1983). The original plan was to build the trust fund for four years before begin any payment of benefits. Congress changed the program and began paying out after only two years and the fund's principle did not build to a great enough level. Also, the program was based on a longevity of an average of 68 years. The other issue causing the rise in contribution rates based on longevity was the change in the nature of employment. Hard physical labor was one of the greatest contributors to short life spans and early onset of disabilities. In short, the ones who developed the program couldn't see far enough in the future to plan for every contingency that would come. Good comment on your part, I appreciate it.
James R Hoffa July 01, 2012 at 07:55 PM
@Lyle - "However, our system has created a permanent underclass; about 5.5% of the total population." The system didn't create this situation - those people did it to themselves by giving up and refusing to better themselves and their situations. The Chicago public housing projects are a perfect example. As you already know the situation, I'll spare you but ask that you watch this documentary by lefty liberal Dr. Henry Louis Gates, Jr., as I believe this documentary fully exposes the situation. http://digital.films.com/play/DGDUWS Instead of using the government handouts as intended, as a stepping stone, and working hard to achieve a life of modest self dependence, as the Italian immigrants that came before them did, these people demand that they should either be paid lots of money to do very little work right off the bat or else they prefer to live off the government. As seen by the interviews in the documentary, that's the mindset of these people - 'It's the gangs and police's fault,' or 'I want the government to pay for my home in a nice neighborhood,' or 'even though there's mouse holes in the public housing unit that I'm allowed to live in, I can't fix or plug the holes myself - the government should do it for me,' or 'work is too far away so it's easier to complain than to find a way to get to the work,' or 'I'd rather deal drugs and live off the government than work hard at Popeye's Chicken.'
James R Hoffa July 01, 2012 at 07:55 PM
We've already thrown trillions of dollars at helping these people, and instead of taking advantage of the help that we've given them, like the housing projects, they've trashed and abused them. And instead of working to better their own situation, they just sit around and blame everyone else. And some of these people realize that it's their own fault, as seen in the video, but still refuse to accept personal responsibility for the life they've chosen to make for themselves. You can't help people that refuse to help themselves. And those that are footing the bill are getting fed up with it! Maybe if we actually saw effort from these people…
Lyle Ruble July 01, 2012 at 08:19 PM
@JRH...What is your solution to the 5.5%?
J. B. Schmidt July 01, 2012 at 08:29 PM
@Lyle Why must there be a solution? If you are capable of giving back to society and you choose not to, then society chooses not to assist you.
J. B. Schmidt July 01, 2012 at 08:42 PM
@Lyle You identified the Greatest generation and those, "willingness to sacrifice and make it better for future generations". I accept that from the stand point of protecting freedom from tyranny. However, they have failed when it comes to social issues. Your attempts to cure social injustice have only created non sustainable systems (college loans, equal pay via taxation and entitlements). I think your time has past and the next generation needs to clean up the mess. There will be short term pain, but that will save the country from bankruptcy in the long term.
Lyle Ruble July 01, 2012 at 08:50 PM
@J.B. Schmidt...I ask you for a solution and you parse the question. So if I understand you correctly, we must abandon all who we think are unable to take care of themselves? Do we just let them live on the streets, starve and die of diseases? Does this include the children too? You do realize that they will find ways of surviving even if it means preying on the rest of society? What then, build poor houses and prisons? Or, better yet, wide spread eugenics. C'mon, don't beat around the bush with your answer; say what you mean and mean what you say!
Lyle Ruble July 01, 2012 at 09:20 PM
@J.B. Schmidt...You claim the greatest generation failed because they attempted to implement social justice. Isn't that what they fought and died for? Didn't they have a vision for the future that included making everyone equal. It was the greatest generation who passed the legislation to institute social justice and paid for it. All I can say is your position is one of the ungrateful spoiled child.
James R Hoffa July 01, 2012 at 09:56 PM
@Lyle - You have very little fate in the so-called under-class, don't you? To presume that if we took away their government benefits that what they would do to survive would be to prey upon others instead of working hard, living modestly, and bettering themselves, and that such a presumption is coming from you - well, it's just mind boggling. But if what you're saying is that the only way that these people would be able to care for themselves is to prey upon others, well, isn't that the problem right there? If they're capable of preying upon others, then certainly, they're capable of asking people if they want fries with their order, aren't they? But they refuse to start at the bottom. And in the fairness of justice, the working shouldn't have to subsidize their starting anywhere else. So, we come to the inevitable impasse. According to statistics, over 95% of what you call the 5.5% are somehow able to live a life not unlike millionaires, with cell phones, pay television programming, dvd players, cars, etc. The only difference is that they didn't have to work or sacrifice for any of it. And yet, you're saying that these people are disadvantaged and need our help - sorry, but I'm not buying it anymore.
James R Hoffa July 01, 2012 at 09:56 PM
If you watched the video, then you'd realize that these people clearly don't want to help themselves, even after some of them are truthful enough to admit that they are causing their own problems! We gave them homes - they trashed them. We gave them an education - they skipped out or didn't take it seriously. We gave them money for food - they buy booze, cigs, and narcotics. We give them money to care for their children - they spend it on other things. We give them access to medical care - they abuse their bodies. We've thrown trillions at the problem over the last 50 plus years! And again, things get worse - not better. What more can we do? How much more money from the working class do you want? In reality, only .275% of our population honestly needs help, is deserving of help, and should receive help. And most people are willing to help those in real honest need. If people simply exercised common sense and stopped having children that they couldn't afford - well, our problem would be solved, wouldn't it? But those people have to want to solve it, we can't do it for them, unless we started administering forced reversible sterilization and only allow those that demonstrate a willingness to help themselves to procreate. Is that what it has come to?
Lyle Ruble July 01, 2012 at 10:07 PM
@JRH...It's not that I don't have enough faith in the underclass, but there aren't enough jobs already for those who want to work. Where do you suggest these jobs come from? In any case, you pretty much answered the question and in such a way as to not take any responsibility for what will happen to them. Pontius Pilot anyone!
James R Hoffa July 01, 2012 at 10:13 PM
@Lyle - "Didn't they have a vision for the future that included making everyone equal." Are you honestly trying to sell us on the notion that the so-called greatest generation is comprised of nothing more than a bunch of radical communists? Again, it's about equality of opportunity - not equality of outcome. Whenever I point to a specific isolated example, you howl about how that example represents the exception and not the norm. But if the opportunity wasn't there and wasn't equal, then how would I be able to cite to such examples in the first place? No one said that pulling oneself up from the gutter would be easy or wouldn't require loads of hard work, did they? The difference is that the exceptions were willing to put in the work and not give up despite obstacles, unlike those that you call the norm, that in reality are really the foolish and lazy. But, if the goal of that generation was actually for equality of outcome, as you appear to be arguing, then clearly, that generation was very anti-American wasn't it? Thus, instead of fighting and sacrificing for American principles and foundations, they must have been fighting to transform America into a pure communist state. However, I don't think that was the case, regardless of how hard you'll try to argue it was.
James R Hoffa July 01, 2012 at 10:39 PM
@Lyle - Just because I speak the truth I'm now equated to the man who tried and convicted Christ? That's an outright lie - you're ignoring reality, as the jobs do exist: http://www.mcstate.com/careers/jobs?stateid=48&type=all&locales[]=48%3AMilwaukee&Search= And that's just one employer in one city! But as I've already stated, these people refuse to take such jobs under the mistaken belief that they're entitled to something more or better than starting at the bottom. Didn't you watch the video - why work at Popeye's Chicken when the government will give you most of what you'd otherwise have to work for? And if you want a little more than what the government will give you, just deal drugs - after all, it's easier than working a legitimate bottom level job and paying taxes! Bottom line - these people refuse to help themselves because they think they deserve more/better than starting at the bottom. That's the wrong attitude to have. You also never answered any of my questions about what more we could do or how much more it would cost us to try to help these people. Everyone started at the bottom at some point in time, either themselves or prior generations of their lineage. Why shouldn't these people? Why do you advocate that those who worked hard/sacrificed/saved/etc to pay for these people's false perceptions of fairness/equity/justice? What is your solution?
J. B. Schmidt July 01, 2012 at 11:47 PM
@Lyle The Greatest Generation fought for the freedom to fail. They fought for the right of individual to put every last penny into a life's dream with a chance of becoming the biggest and best. They fought for the rights of the wealthy live in big houses, drive fancy cars and play on big yachts. They did not fight for the right of the government to tax on whim in order to take from a guy in one state and give to a guy in another because his fat butt must be forklifted out of his house. They did not fight for an altruistic dream that all men would live equally. No Lyle, they fought that all men COULD make it big, not that all men WOULD make it big. Country after failing country has proven that creating a society where outcome is equal (thanks JRH) creates a poorer society with less freedoms and the same if not greater level of poverty.
$$andSense July 02, 2012 at 01:00 AM
"I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing" - Thomas Jefferson I like TJ. Simple question for you Saul. Are you willing to back your words up with your life and livlihood because the "non-violent" ballot doesn't get it done? The French, American colonists, Russians, etc. all resorted to shooting to make things happen because the status quo didn't work. Are you willing to take on the system with your bare hands and not your words?
Greg July 02, 2012 at 01:18 AM
The CCC concept may work again. It may be more expensive than having them just sit around, but it may provide incentive to get out of the system. The massive amounts of single parents would require local projects and/or education. The stigma of being on public assistance is gone. There needs to be something that can be done to get the next generation to want education and a career. I know I will get attacked for my generalizations, I do not think that all disadvantaged people fit in a single category and many are good people who need a foot up, not a handout.
James R Hoffa July 02, 2012 at 01:31 AM
@$$andNonSense - We all know that you're still mad about Walker's second triumph over Barrett. So, here's something that should make you smile a little - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VC_ult6-Tb4
The Anti-Alinsky July 02, 2012 at 02:07 AM
Hoffa, who was that, Mike Tate? Lyle, did you mean the mythology of the Declaration of Independence? $$andSense, I don't need to use violence to make the right change. I just need to appeal to enough people's intelligence and logic.
Brian Dey July 02, 2012 at 03:12 AM
Lyle- First of all, you will never eliminate poverty. Second, you must know that there is a segment of society that has no intentions of bettering themselves. Third, knowing one and two, it is not the government's responsibility to solve their problem. If they choose, YES CHOOSE to be a scumbag, then they live with the results. You lefties constantly blame, make excuses for or try to solve the unsolvable by throwing our money at them. You have killed personal responsibility. We need to bring that back. Your bad choices/your rotten life. Blunt? Absolutely. Why is it that you only define freedom by what government can or cannot do? It's freedom to kill an unborn child, but not freedom to better one's self? Really Lyle, the left is soooooo far gone. I would be ashamed to call myself a liberal, and you should be too.
$$andSense July 02, 2012 at 03:29 AM
@$$andNonSense - “We all know that you're still mad about Walker's second triumph over Barrett. So, here's something that should make you smile a little.” JRH What kind of slander are you posting? I never posted anything about the recall other than it was a waste of time and tax dollars, that I would not partake in the recall and that I voted for Walker in the actual legal election. Is memory your weak point? I see you have not lost your high school craft of name calling, just like your bed mate Saul. Am I supposed to come back with some stupid name for you to prove “I am better than you”? Anyone using the name of a union gangster that claims to be anti-union is a wide open door. Saul “ $$andSense, I don't need to use violence to make the right change. I just need to appeal to enough people's intelligence and logic.” Yeah, the French, American colonists and Russians tried to avoid violence too. History is what it is and will be repeated. The 2nd Amendment exists for a reason. Are either of you proficient with firearms? I doubt it. Probably would shoot yourselves. Maybe not such bad thought after all.
Tonto July 02, 2012 at 03:46 AM
LOL, LMAO, history repeats :)
Denise Lockwood July 02, 2012 at 03:51 AM
We assume that the healthcare industry is a "free market," but the reality is that it is not. Sustainability is often called into question because we often don't want to carry the burden of caring for others, but we are. The law says hospitals have an obligation to stabilize patients. I'm not making a judgement about the law, but rather saying this is the reality. I've reported extensively on issues regarding medicare and medicaid. We're seeing hospitals that have higher percentages of uninsured patients move to hospital-based billing, which means they are containing those costs. This means, if you get a blood test at a hospital with a higher level of people who don't have insurance, you pay more than if you went to a hospital that was in an area that didn't have a high level of people with insurance. So they costs are being shifted to people who have insurance. From the AMA: "Congress enacted the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA) [1] in 1986 to address the growing concern that hospitals were discharging patients before stabilizing them and refusing to care for poor people with medical emergencies. Although a general duty for hospitals to provide emergency care had been established a few decades prior to the passage of EMTALA, Congress believed that the common law rule, as well as various state statutes mandating care, did not go far enough to prevent “patient dumping” practices." http://virtualmentor.ama-assn.org/2006/11/hlaw1-0611.html
Lyle Ruble July 02, 2012 at 11:56 AM
@The Anti-Alinsky...The political right mythology that I am speaking to is the mythology of American Exceptionalism carried to the nth degree. It begins with the tenants of Calvin Christianity and the principles that financial success and wealth are the determinate of who is in a state of grace. Also part of the right's mythology is that we should be led by the wealthy since the success in one area means success in another. Yet another myth is that the founders of our nation were special men who were inspired by G-d and that the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution are divinely written and are too sacrosanct to be changed. The final major myth is that each individual is wholly responsible for what happens to them. The political right wants to narrowly interpret the constitution and the founders intent, making the document immalleable and fixed in the 18th century.
Bob McBride July 02, 2012 at 12:02 PM
I recently ran into an example of just that, Denise. Had an injury, went to CSM on the east side of Milwaukee and was hit up immediately for $250 once they verified I was insured. When I needed further treatment for the same injury a week later I went, instead, to CSM in Ozaukee County. No such charge. Talking to one of the nurses there about the service I received on the East Side I was told I had been put into an area that predominantly serves people who walk in with cold and flu symptoms and have no ability to pay for the service. A good number just get up and leave before they're discharged. This is part of the problem I have with further intrusion into the healthcare field by the government. There is very little realistic concern for the unintended consequences of what seems, on the surface, to be the right thing to do. "Stabilizing" a patient now includes, apparently, treating anything and everything that walks in the door, whether it needs treatment or not. Nobody in a position to make decisions on this stuff is held accountable for negative results and the expenses associated with them. Just stick it, once again, to those whom it is assumed can afford to pay.
Lyle Ruble July 02, 2012 at 12:36 PM
@Brian Dey...I don't disagree that we'll always have a certain segment that always will be in poverty. However, we don't have to accept that it is a continuous generational condition that force and maintain an underclass culture. People do go through bad times and if those conditions don't change then the problems persist. For those who criticize the culture of poverty, need to begin to understand the complexity of the problem. Bettering themselves has to be a process with the proper incentives and penalties closely supervised. The very minimum that all citizens are entitled to is healthy food, adequate shelter, clothing, an education and healthcare. There is nothing wrong with demanding that the healthy and able work in exchange for their benefits. Most likely in community work projects. Your bandying about this notion that everyone who finds themselves in this underclass is because of their bad choices is just plain incorrect. People find themselves in these circumstances for all sort of reasons. You claim that everyone who are in this group are part of the undeserving poor, this couldn't be further from the truth. The approach that you and others that share your view is like the immature adolescent who wants absolute freedom to make decisions and to take actions based on only their desires and wants. The government works as a super parent to contain those actions that are detrimental to society.
Brian Dey July 03, 2012 at 01:07 AM
Sounds pretty much like King Obama and his hench man Eric Holder. Don't like a law, don't enforce it; or better yet, declare it by the King's decree as invalid.
The Anti-Alinsky July 03, 2012 at 08:00 PM
Lyle, I had to do a little research on American Exceptionalism. Do you really think using a Stalinist term really is the right way to describe your opposition? The Conservatives I know do not believe that just because you have "success in one area means success in another". What we do believe is that if you are a successful businessperson that has created jobs and wealth, that you are capable of creating more jobs if egregious regulations are lifted and you are allowed to make logical, productive choices in your business. And I do believe if you are successful in business, then you are likely to be successful in public service. If the founding father's truly believed "the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution are divinely written and are too sacrosanct to be changed", why did they build in a mechanism for change? You may believe the American dream is a myth, but I believe that despite being kicked in the teeth, it is alive and just waiting to be unchained by the Feds!!!
Annie Nominous July 29, 2012 at 06:34 AM
Hey J.B. - you received a phenomenal response - congrats! And to Lyle...you are so predictable!

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something