By Richard Larsen

Published - Idaho State Journal, 09/05/10

An old Buffalo Springfield song from another tumultuous time in American history starts out, “There's something happening here. What it is ain't exactly clear.” Judging from the hundreds of thousands who turned out at radio and TV commentator Glenn Beck’s “Restoring Honor” rally in Washington last weekend, something’s definitely happening here. And while it may not be exactly clear, there are some pretty good indications of what it is.

What’s amazing is the fact that Beck’s rally was more of a cultural event than it was a political one. He asserted that it was a “reflection of who we are, where we are, where we're going, what each of us have to do. How do we get our way out of this? And it's not politics, gang. It's not politics.” It was a visual and aural feast for anyone who feels we’re forgetting our roots as a Judeo-Christian nation, codified by our founding documents and the writings of our Founding Fathers. Indeed the whole rally centered on a need for this God-fearing nation to return to the faith of our forefathers, and the need for all of us individually to live with honor and integrity. As Beck asserted, those were traits in ready abundance at the time of our founding but seem in short supply today.

While not overtly political, the political underpinnings were clear. And it’s not just that our national leaders have been lying to us about what Obamacare is going to do or not do, or the promises of no more than 8% unemployment if the stimulus was passed. Misrepresentation and dishonesty is all too common from the ruling class in order to bring us lowly subjects into accord with their statist and big government solution ideas.

There is a backlash that is building like a tsunami in the country, and it’s represented only in part by the contemporary Tea Party movement. And again, it’s not just over policy and politics, it’s fundamentally about what America is as a nation and what we as Americans are all about. This notion that we all have to think a certain way, because the power elite in Washington states it, the mainstream media parrots it, academics teach it as orthodoxy, and we’re all supposed to abandon our common sense and our sense of values to be good subjects and an acquiescing proletariat.

Americans are tired of being called every pejorative name in the book because we have opinions or values that don’t ape those of the ruling, reporting and academic elite. We’re tired of being called homophobes because we believe in the sanctity of traditional marriage. We’re tired of being called bigots or racists because we believe the nation needs protection at the borders. We’re tired of the attempts to belittle, disparage, and trivialize our beliefs because they don’t happen to coincide with those of the effete self-identified “elites” and “enlightened” of the country. We’re tired of the mischaracterizations of us, and abject incomprehension of our traditional values and belief systems, as “bitter clingers” and as people who have “antipathy toward people who aren't like them.”

As Charles Krauthammer said in the Investor’s Business Daily last week, “liberals have lost the argument in the court of public opinion. Majorities — often lopsided majorities — oppose President Obama's social-democratic agenda (e.g., the stimulus, ObamaCare), support the Arizona law, oppose gay marriage and reject a Ground Zero mosque. What's a liberal to do? Pull out the bigotry charge, the trump that pre-empts debate and gives no credit to the seriousness and substance of the contrary argument. The most venerable of these trumps is, of course, the race card.” And those cards are played, pardon the pun, liberally.

We’re unifying as a country, but not on the coattails of those who want to strip us of our liberty and convert us all to collectivists. No, we’re an obstreperous bunch and likely to become increasingly so as more force is exerted to make us cower in the shadows of the burgeoning monolithic government, calamitous national debt, and a godless society. If, as Hillary Clinton has said, dissent is patriotic, we’re the most ardent of patriots for we object to the hijacking of our nation and imposition of tyrannical, liberty-destroying statutes and court judgments that denigrate and invalidate the will of the people.

Arthur Brooks of the American Enterprise Institute claims we live in a 70/30 nation, where poll after poll indicates 70% of us are supporters of the free enterprise system, and 30% prefer European-style statism. And it’s not just regarding economics, it spills into cultural and social areas as well, he asserts. In other words, we are not a minority to be whipped into submission by the statists, we’re a clear majority and it’s high time for us to stand up and defend what has made America exceptional.

Published - Idaho State Journal, 08/08/10

But there are exceptions, and Steve Wynn, founder of Wynn Resorts, is one of them. In a CNBC interview recently he accurately observed, “It’s common sense that’s disappeared in Washington DC. We’re inheriting the awful results of wild, uncontrolled spending, unbelievable, unsustainable debt.”

Referring to the financial reform just passed, which does nothing to solve the problems which led to the financial markets meltdown two years ago, he said, “And yet, here we are, doing it again, $20 billion a month to the FHA. On top of what happens to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. We’re doing it again today for $20 billion a month! We’re destroying the housing market, again; under the name of a stimulus, phony misrepresented names.”

Controversially, Wynn recently announced that he was moving some of his corporate offices to Macau, China. When asked by the interviewer about that move, Wynn responded, “Macau has been steady. The shocking, unexpected government is the one in Washington. That’s where we get surprises every day. That’s where taxes are changed every five minutes. That’s where you don’t know that to expect tomorrow. To compare political stability and predictability in China to Washington is like comparing Mount Everest to an anthill. Macau and China is stable, Washington is not!”

He continued, “Is there a businessman in America that isn’t frightened about the next crazy idea that is coming from Washington? The financial institutions, the cars, the businessmen, the taxes, the health care, everything is Coo Coo. And God knows what’s next!”

Wynn was next asked what the healthcare reform was going to cost him. He responded, “A lot. It’s going to produce the exact opposite of what they said. Health costs, because of that 2,700 pages, are going up not down. In the simplest possible terms, they added 32 million people, the amount of doctors is going down and the amount we’re paying them is less. When demand goes up and the supply of doctors goes down, what happened to the price? High school students out there, children? Price goes up!”

He continued, “The one thing that would’ve saved us money, the control of frivolous lawsuits, they didn’t touch with a ten foot pole. Those hypocritical SOBs and the Congress didn’t touch it with a ten foot pole. Every insurance company, every businessman in America said doctors are doing testing in fear of frivolous lawsuits that are unnecessary that is jacking up the price of medicine. Please do something about that. In Texas they put a cap on punitive damages and the malpractice insurance dropped by 45% in one year. But did they do it in Washington? No.”

Explicating the obvious, that the business world is not willing to hire because of so much uncertainty in the country, he concluded, “So when you ask me today about predictability and uncertainty in China compared to Washington, I take China. Washington is unpredictable these days. Washington is… No one in the business community from one coast to the other has any idea what’s next. And what’s even worse, the people that do business with us that buy our bonds in other countries don’t even know what’s next. The uncertainty of the business climate in America is frightening, frightening to everybody. And it’s delaying the recovery.

“We’re on our way to Greece, in the hands of a confused and foolish government that is living up to the prediction of Alexis de Tocqueville who in 1909 said: ‘The American system of democracy will prevail until that moment when the politicians discover that they can bribe the electorate with their own money.’ And boy it’s in full bloom today. So extreme that it would probably have an end unto itself. The public is frightened. This Tea Party business is all about fear. There is a sense in the land of discomfort. There is a sense of fear that the politicians are ruining us. And the people are right. It’s got to stop. It’s got to stop!”

Only 1 in 10 of the Obama administration has worked in the private sector, and none, that I’ve been able to ascertain, ever ran a business or had to meet a payroll. It’s obvious that they know nothing about how the economy works. In all likelihood, we’re heading into a double-dip recession because of all that is emanating out of Washington. If the administration were to declare an outright war on capitalism and on the business community, it’s hard to imagine what they would do differently. Wynn is right: It’s got to stop!

Nowhere in recent memory has this been more self-evident than in dealing with the oil spill disaster in the Gulf of Mexico. Time and time again the government has proven Dr. Boren’s aphorism by getting in the way of any progress to clean up the mess down there.

For example, early on, the state of Alabama conceived a plan to erect huge booms offshore to protect their coastline, which is about 200 miles long, from the drifting blobs of oil. They searched the world, scouring sources for the massive booms, some weighing tons and as high as twenty feet, to help protect their coastline.

No sooner had Alabama gotten the booms into place then the Coast Guard, who had helped them locate the equipment, mandated that they be moved to protect the Louisiana coast instead.

This led Alabama to devise a backup plan, where they would procure snare booms to catch the oil as soon as it began to wash up on their beaches. Low and behold, another federal bureaucracy snatched that solution away from them. The Fish and Wildlife Administration nixed that plan because they said it would endanger sea turtles that nest on the beaches. Never mind that the entire ecosystem of the turtles is endangered by the encroaching mass of oil blobs invading the Alabama beaches!

So, Alabama state officials, not to be outdone by bureaucratic obstacles, resolved they would try another, less high tech effort to prevent the oil from caking their beaches. They decided to hire 400 workers to patrol the beaches and, by hand, scoop up the oil residue that washed ashore.

So how did that plan turn out, you ask? Well, you probably guessed it: another federal bureaucracy hampered that backup plan to the previous backup plan, which was the backup plan to the original plan aborted by federal bureaucracy. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) wouldn’t allow those workers to work more than 20 minutes per hour. They further demanded that the state allow said workers an hour-long break after every 40 minutes of work. OSHA’s requirements had the affect of reducing manual cleanup effort efficiency by more than 60%, with just 40 minutes of work for every three hours on the clock.

As Richard Morris, former Clinton administration advisor has said, “Every agency — each with its own particular bureaucratic agenda — was able to veto each aspect of any plan to fight the spill, with the unintended consequence that nothing stopped the oil...” Rather than facilitating the cleanup, federal bureaucracies have thwarted state and corporate cleanup efforts, as they engage in an apparently uncoordinated tug-of-war jockeying for control and exercising their bureaucratic “epoxy” power. Consequently, the ineptitude hampers cleanup efforts as the assault on our southern shoreline advances.

Alabama Gov. Bob Riley characterized the situation by stating that the administration’s “lack of ability has become transparent” in its handling of the oil spill.

Even more disconcerting is the fact that we’ve been enlarging federal bureaucracy at an unprecedented pace over the past two years. The new health care mandate creates over 100 new government agencies and bureaucracies to implement the dictates of that onerous legislation.

The new financial reform package passed by congress creates another 20 new government agencies to beat financial institutions into submission because of the way they implemented the last set of federal regulations congress foisted upon them. Most of the costs of this additional bureaucratic morass will be borne by us. Not just in the form of taxes to cover government cost of implementation and enforcement, but through additional banking fees and charges to cover the anticipated 20% increase in costs to affected financial institutions, which will be passed on to the consumers. That’s us. 

Ronald Reagan recognized intuitively as well as empirically how destructive to freedom and liberty bureaucracies can be. He said, “Man is not free unless government is limited.... As government expands, liberty contracts.” And that’s not just for individuals. Just ask the state of Alabama. All of this gives added significance to another of Ronald Reagan’s statements, when he referred to the phrase, “I’m from the government and I’m here to help,” as “the nine most terrifying words in the English language.”

An efficient and effective bureaucracy is critical to the proper function of government in serving citizens. We have obviously far exceeded that. For those who love government and bureaucratic micromanagement of our lives, this is your heyday. For those of us who love freedom and actual solutions, we’re living a nightmare.

While that was a humorous exchange, it may have revealed a sentiment that has already proven very troublesome to any of us who claim fealty to the United States of America. He obviously feels that he has absolute authority over whatever he chooses.

Our country is a constitutional republic established by a literal document, the Constitution, which specifically itemizes the limits of governmental authority, and delineates that power across the three branches of government. The executive branch, of which Obama is the head, executes the laws which are codified by congressional legislation, which laws are also ascertained by our judiciary to be either constitutional or illegal based on interpretation of our founding documents and judicial precedent.

As such, the president cannot make laws by fiat, or declaration. He executes or enforces the laws established by Congress. For example, it would have been entirely proper for Congress to pass legislation either encouraging or demanding that British Petroleum set aside $20 billion for legitimate claims related to the gulf oil spill. But when the White House conducted their “shakedown” of British Petroleum and demanded it, where was the legal foundation for him to do that? Irrespective of the logic of BP stepping up to the plate to handle such claims, the president had no legal authority to make such demands. He also has no legal authority to pressure BP into not paying dividends to shareholders. This certainly resembles a Chicago-style “offer you can’t refuse” more than it resembles the rule of law in a constitutional republic.

Speaking of the oil spill, last week the president told Matt Lauer that he was wanting to know “whose tail to kick” for the gulf oil spill. He may not have to look very far, if we consider what led up to the catastrophe. He and his comrades in the Congress have coddled and embraced the radical environmental movement for years, and it was due to pressure from those groups that Gulf oil exploration has been pushed into ever deeper waters, as far away from coastlines as possible.

Considering Obama received massive political donations from BP, and how lax federal inspectors were with their operations in the Gulf, a logical person might wonder if the donations bought that laxity by inspectors, which placed the Gulf in jeopardy with precisely the kind of disaster we’re facing there now. You combine those two factors alone, and the president may only have to go as far as his bathroom mirror to see whose “tail to kick.”

The shakedown of BP closely resembles the shakedown of the auto industry after we, with our tax-dollars, and without our approval, bailed out Chrysler and GM. With a phone call, the president essentially fired the chairman of General Motors, wiped out all the equity of the owners of the company (the shareholders), and wiped out the principle that bondholders held in company bonds. Where was the legal authority to do that? There was no statute, no congressional action granting him that authority. Do we have a president to execute the laws of the land, or do we have a dictator in a totalitarian regime who does whatever he wants, regardless of legality?

Even Senator Robert Byrd recognizes the Chicago-style power grab occurring from the Oval Office. In a letter to the president last year, Byrd denounced the 36 “czars” appointed by the president over nearly every aspect of our lives. Byrd said such positions “can threaten the Constitutional system of checks and balances. At the worst, White House staff have taken direction and control of programmatic areas that are the statutory responsibility of Senate-confirmed officials.” But in spite of the recognition of this Chicago-style executive branch power grab, Congress does little to curtail presidential totalitarian actions, and serves as little more than a rubber stamp for anything he bothers to seek authorization on, like the takeover of our health care system.

Executive branch power has been increasingly steadily over the past century, but the acceleration and extent of it over the past two years is alarming. We are rapidly losing our republic, as governmental actions nearly daily expand the scope and breadth of government intrusion into our lives, limit our liberty and ability to choose, and commit multi-generational larceny against our posterity to pay for the largesse of government. We apparently are no longer a land ruled by law based on constitutional principles, when the president without legislative or constitutional authority, but by diktat can destroy equity ownership, shakedown companies for political purposes, and reshape national policy with his cadre of czars in the White House.

Published - Idaho State Journal, 06/20/10

Perhaps the best way to understand the role of the Constitution is in the context of a contractual relationship between the government and the governed. This is validated by the Preamble to the Constitution which states, “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

We sometimes need to be reminded that the Constitution was not just an itemization of rights for citizens and limited governmental powers for that earliest generation of Americans, but that it was to “secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.” It was designed and intended to be no less of a contract between the people (collectively and individually) and our government today than any other contractual relationship. Strictly defined, and strictly applied, with assurances made to the contractual parties and recourse for violation of those terms.

When it is argued that the Constitution is a “living” document, implication is made that the precepts and principles of the Constitution are not applicable to today and provides an excuse for all types of scurrilous and specious assertions for expanded government largesse at the expense of our freedom and our money. To say that the Constitution is a “living document,” hence, not to be taken literally, is akin to asserting that the Ten Commandments are really just “Ten Suggestions.” It also affords proponents of the “living document” theory latitude to pick and choose cafeteria-style which rights established by the Constitution are legitimate or applicable today. They like freedom of speech, but not freedom to bear arms, for example.

Judicial precedent and daily judicial decisions are judged against the basic principles and rights specified by the Constitution and statute to provide applicability to today’s milieu. In that way alone is it a “living document.” Statute is how the fundamental principles of the Constitution are codified in a changing social structure, but the Constitution provides the baseline.

Provision for changing the text of that social contract was made through the amendment process, which has been done 27 times to date. To assert that the words of the Constitution are not binding is absurd, especially when itemized authority of federal governmental powers are assessed individually. The legitimacy of freedoms of speech or right to bear arms are no less legitimate than the clauses that state there are to be three branches of government.

The validity of the social contract theory is born out each time a suit or judicial decision upholds those rights assured under the constitution. Each time a citizen wins a case of free speech, it reestablishes and reaffirms the nature of that social contract between the government and the citizens, individually and collectively.

James Madison, regarded as the Father to the Constitution, said, “There are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations.” We have witnessed this over the generations since the founding of the country, and we see that process of “silent encroachment” of government on the freedom of the people accelerated over the past two years in a way never before witnessed. We see government dictating terms of property ownership, dictating terms of access to health care, dictating terms of energy use and private consumption, for starters.

Madison must have anticipated our current form of federal governance when he said, “If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will promote the General Welfare, the Government is no longer a limited one, possessing enumerated powers, but an indefinite one.” It appears that the majority in Washington no longer considers the Constitution valid, as they are hell-bent on unlimited government authority over every aspect of our lives.

Historical context is no less crucial in historical methodology than it is in constitutional interpretation. Madison recognized this as well when he said, “Do not separate text from historical background. If you do, you will have perverted and subverted the Constitution, which can only end in a distorted, bastardized form of illegitimate government.”

The Constitution is not a “living” document. The Founders were specific in their language and did not mince words. They meant what they said. It was written precisely to prevent the incursion of government into our lives to the extent that we see it occurring today proving it is not an anachronism. It is a social contract to assure and guarantee fundamental freedom and liberty for all generations of Americans. We need to be intimately familiar with it and hold those accountable who seek to subvert the freedoms of those who are intended to have ultimate power in this republic: We the People!

Published - Idaho State Journal, 06/06/10

The alacrity for government spending illustrated by the self-purportedly educated elite in this country displays alarming naiveté and ignorance on fiscal matters. A recent column in the Journal provided a superb example.

While walking around his neighborhood almost impishly marveling at the public parks, the roads, and his ability to dial 911 for assistance, a Journal columnist rhetorically questioned, “I am lost! I love what the government does for me. Would someone please tell me where to seriously reduce government spending?”

As my adorable 3-year-old granddaughter Addisyn would say, “Are you kidding me?” Let’s start by turning off the spigot! If your basement is being flooded due to a broken pipe, you don’t start bailing out the water, you first turn off the source and then turn your attention to reducing the water level.

Since this administration took power less than 1½ years ago, the Federal Budget has ballooned by over 60%. The yearly deficit has more than quadrupled to $1.2 trillion. The federal debt has grown from $11 trillion to over $13 trillion, and with all the Obama spending promises, that debt will burgeon to $23 trillion in the next ten years, according to the Government Accountability Office. Current debt amounts to $42,000 per American, and over $118,000 per taxpayer.

And what do we have to show for all that “wonderful” government spending? A jobless rate hovering around 10%, which Obama promised us wouldn’t go over 8% if the “stimulus” was passed, and a horrible job outlook for the foreseeable future. We have an economy that is statistically out of recession, but the recession mentality is alive and well.

The private sector, meantime, refuses to hire new workers not only because of the moribund economy, but because Obama and his facilitators in the Congress have essentially declared an all-out war on the private sector and the regulatory environment is at enmity with economic growth. Obamacare has led to the write-down of billions of dollars by American companies, including $1 billion by AT&T alone. Congress’ penchant for regulation increases the costs of operation for small businesses and large businesses alike, further hampering economic recovery and shooting job creation prospects in the foot.

The heralded financial reform recently passed by congress amounts to little more than government control of the financial sector, which banks have already said will impact their bottom line by another 20%. And you thought your bank fees were high before? Where do you think they make up that lost revenue? You pay it!

Gratefully the Idaho Constitution prohibits deficit spending, otherwise, judging from the clamor in the public sector, our lawmakers would have been pressured into doing what California, New York, and other states have been doing: maxing out the state credit cards pushing them to the brink of financial ruin.

That’s precisely what Obama and his congressional minions are doing. But the laws of fiscal restraint that apply to the rest of us don’t seem to apply to them. If we max out a credit card, not only are we unable to charge any more on it, but we eventually have to pay off the debt accrued by our imprudent and insatiable appetite for spending. Congress, however, can just increase their own spending limits, and continue to charge away.

If we as individuals do the same thing as Washington is doing these days, we’re irresponsible. Yet to the statists in our midst, our politicians are to be praised for all that wonderful government spending they do. Which begs the question: why are we held to a higher standard of fiscal responsibility and accountability with our own money than they are with someone else’s?

Margaret Thatcher, former British Prime Minister once said, “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.” While arguments abound as to whether government takeover of the auto industry, the student loan industry, the health care industry, and the financial services sector constitute socialism, the mentality is more than evident. And who can argue that the politicians in Washington are spending other people’s money? Ours, our children’s, and our grandchildren’s!

The president said a few months ago, “It would be a terrible mistake to borrow against our children's future to pay our way today....” Yet that’s exactly what he’s doing! Didn’t Bernie Madoff just go to prison for doing the same thing? The president is committing multigenerational larceny and funding a federal government Ponzi scheme.

Congress has to be recomposed with members who aren’t so cavalier about spending without regard to the ultimate multigenerational cost. Somehow they need their limitless credit cards taken away to prevent them from bankrupting the country. Let’s turn off the spigot, and then we can talk about reducing the $45 trillion in unfunded entitlements, and odious debt they’ve run up.

Tens of thousands of protestors looting, pillaging, wantonly destroying property, chanting anti-government slogans, and cursing the president. The images are not pretty, as even the mainstream media are finally covering the monumental story. With obvious regret that it isn’t the Tea Partiers being covered, international media are reporting the meltdown of a socialistic economic system.

The president of Greece has warned that his country stands on the “brink of the abyss” as anti-government mobs protest government efforts to reduce government spending, entitlements, and wealth redistribution. The mob is comprised of employees of the government they’re protesting. Civil servants and public employee unions have mobilized in opposition to governmental efforts at curtailing spending.

Even though Greece is relatively small on the global economic scale, it figures prominently as the portent of eventual European Union dissolution. The nation has only 11.3 million people, and its GDP is estimated at roughly $333 billion. Thanks to EU and U.S. taxpayers, Greece is in the process of being bailed out. First indicated at $60 billion, then $100 billion, then $120 billion, and finally $150 billion is now being promised by the U.S. funded International Monetary Fund and EU member nations to bail out the nation.

It’s impossible to know where this will all end. Portugal, Spain, and Italy are in nearly as bad of shape, as their appetite for spending has also far exceeded their ability to generate the revenue to finance it all.

Some states in the U.S. are in just about as serious of financial disorder. California, New Jersey, and New York are not in much better shape than Greece, and will undoubtedly be beating a path to Capital Hill to panhandle Congress on behalf of their debt-laden state coffers. Taxpayers will be hit up yet again to bail out those who have no logical grasp of reality or comprehension of simple laws of economics who have sought to create dependency on the government at the expense of those who really produce.

One of the most pathetic aspects of this mess is the fact that even the United State of America is rapidly approaching that same break-point. The Social Democrats in the European countries most in trouble have not only spent their nations to the brink of bankruptcy, but their promises for entitlements and continued wealth redistribution ensure financial instability and sovereign insolvency at some point in the future.

Our Social Democrats in Washington have proven as adept at illogical financial excess and fuzzy math as their European counterparts. Not surprisingly, since they took control of Congress in 2006, the nation has lurched into a left wing nose-dive. If not corrected by a more reasoned and logical congress in November, the U.S. will be facing the same prospects as Greece, yet with much more catastrophic consequences. A report issued in March by the Congressional Budget Office indicates that Obama’s 2011 budget will generate nearly $10 trillion in cumulative budget deficits over the next 10 years, $1.2 trillion more than the administration projected!

Over a third of Greeks work for their government, a figure not that far out of the realm of possibility for the U.S. The “stimulus” from last year has proven to be stimulative only to government growth. And like their Greek counterparts, American civil servants are the most represented segment of the workforce organized into unions. And as economic historian John Steele Gordon points out, “Federal workers now earn, in wages and benefits, about twice what their private-sector equivalents get paid. Government workers often have Cadillac health plans and retirement benefits far above the private sector average: 80 percent of public-sector workers have pension benefits, only 50 percent in the private sector. Many can retire at age 50.” While private employers were shedding jobs during the recession, state and local governments hired 110,000 new workers.

Mona Charen, in a Wall Street Journal column noted last week, “And in a corrupt feedback loop that may not be so very different after all from the Greek practice, public employee unions give generously to Democratic candidates, both in cash contributions and by manning phone banks, getting out the vote, and so on. It's no coincidence that the states with the most powerful public sector unions -- New Jersey, California, and New York -- are facing the most severe budget crises.”

The nations’ politicians have got to get a grasp of reality, shake off the imprudent and fallacious Keynesian notion of a nation spending itself out of a recession.  And unlike the anti-government demonstrators in Greece, who are employees of the state and are fighting for continued excess, American Tea Party demonstrators are speaking out in opposition to the kind of spending that is giving new meaning to “Greek ruins,” in hopes of staving off the same fate in our country. The Social Democrats in our Congress, of both parties, must be removed from office and replaced with people who know how to balance a checkbook.