By The Constitutional Avenger | June 10, 2011
United States foreign aid can be divided into two broad categories: military and economic assistance. It is given by the United States government to a variety of recipients, including developing countries, countries of strategic importance to the United States, and countries recovering from war. In fiscal year 2009, the U.S. government spent more than $45 billion in foreign aid.
For the first hundred years of the United States’ existence as a country, government aid was practically nonexistent. It was generally considered that the Constitution did not authorize the government to use the people’s money for foreign charity. There was, however, some private aid from charitable foundations and religious organisations.
Please vote in the following poll and let us know what you believe is the most Mainstream Conservative position.
By The Constitutional Avenger | June 7, 2011
Recently, there has been alot of talk about what is mainstream in the Republican Party. We will be publishing a series of polls over the next few weeks to determine what the true mainstream position is amongst conservative voters.
I hope you will help us by casting your vote in the following poll.
By The Constitutional Avenger | May 16, 2011
COMMENTARY | It has been a great month for Rep. Ron Paul (TX-14), who announced his candidacy for president May 13., 2011. The candidate, who is now on his third run following a high-profile grassroots building race in 2008, has seen his poll numbers continue to climb as more and more Americans hear and understand his message of Liberty.
In a single day, during the recent South Carolina debates, Dr. Paul received more than $1 million in contribution. The amazing thing is number and diversity of supporters who made donations that averaged less than $100 each. These are people who donate because they love his message and not large corporations who hope to get some windfall payback after the election. According to a recent CNN poll, Ron Paul is the candidate most likely to win in a contest against Barack Obama.
November 2012 is a long ways off, but it is looking more and more likely that Ron Paul will eventually secure the Republican nomination and face Obama. However, the outspoken former obstetrician still faces intense opposition from party bosses and from the political media. Fortunately, Ron Paul is so secure in his philosophy that questions that would produce standard politic nonsense answers from other politicians are answered by him with no hesitation. He doesn’t need to formulate answers based on how the wind blows, because he has the truth on his side and he does not deviate from it.
Ron Paul has mastered the “money bomb,” which is a concept of securing huge amount of donations from regular people via email and social media networking in coordination with a particular day or event. By implementing these tactics early in the process, he is capturing the imagination of many Republican , Democrat, and Independent voters in this election cycle.
Of course, enthusiasm for Ron Paul gains extra traction because his ideas have proven to be true. American citizens are realizing that Ron Paul is the only candidate who has consistently been correct in his assessment and the methods of dealing with issues such as the economy, jobs, inflation, health care, FEMA, Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. Paul’s message of small government and limited spending are resonating with the masses now more than ever
Popular Political Stands
Foreign Policy is one of Ron Paul’s strongest issues. His stance on ending undeclared wars is finding strong support from persons across the political spectrum. He says that the money saved by bringing our troops home and ending foreign aid could be used to balance the budget and support Social Security and Medicare. This message has been warmly received by America’s Seniors who deserve to have our promises to them kept.
Shortly after the capture and killing of Osama bin Laden, Paul who was delighted that America’s public enemy #1 had been eliminated, suggested that there could have been a better way to achieve our goal that would have achieved the goal more quickly, at a lower cost, with fewer American deaths, and a way that would not have violated International Law. Many pundits in the media tried to paint Ron Paul’s statement in a negative light, but after listening to Ron Paul’s explanation, most American’s quickly realized that Dr. Paul had in fact, offered a better solution back in 2001 when he introduced his constitutionally correct “September 11 Marque and Reprisal Act of 2001″.
Certain Republican Credentials
During the 2008 debates, Paul made waves by stating he opposed the Iraq War, a stance that put him in contrast to every other candidate on the stage. Now, 70% of the American people agree with Ron Paul’s position. In fact, the Republican Party has always been the anti-war party, and now the party is moving back to its roots. Many of his views are also refreshing to most Independents and Democrats who are opposed to continuing these expensive military operations. His willingness to hold to his conviction, even in the face of harsh criticism has endeared him to many in the mainstream of all parties.
Ron Paul is a well-argued speaker, with consistent principles and appeal, who will prove to be the best candidate for the Republican nomination for 2012. Should he secure the candidacy, which still seems very likely, it is probable he would also unseat Obama whose arm flailing has proven totally ineffective in improving the economy, despite trillions of dollars wasted on programs such as cash for clunkers.
By The Constitutional Avenger | May 7, 2011
When Ron Paul talks about legalizing drugs, as when he speaks on most topics, he is generally speaking to the role of the Federal government. Some have incorrectly reported Ron Paul made the case for legalizing drugs, even heroin at the first GOP debate held on May 5, 2011 in Greenville, S.C.
In an exchange with Fox News’ Chris Wallace, Paul made the point that people should have the freedom to do things to themselves that might seem crazy to others. Think about all the things we allow that can be very harmful to the individual, alcohol, cigarettes, vitamins, teenage driving, marriage. All of these things can be very harmful if used unwisely. Alcohol and cigarettes do more harm to our society than any other drugs. In fact, there is no known beneficial use for cigarette smoking and yet we allow it.
“You have a right to do things that are very controversial,” Paul said.
“Are you suggesting that heroin and prostitution are an exercise of liberty?” asked Wallace.
Paul then addressed the audience, “How many people here would use heroin if it were legal?” Paul asked. “I bet nobody would.”
Then Paul continued humorously.
“Oh yeah, I need the government to take care of me,” he said. “I don’t want to use heroin, so I need these laws.”
At that, the crowd burst into applause, and even Chris Wallace had to laugh.
“Who thought heroin would get applause here in South Carolina?” he said.
But Chris Wallace got it wrong. The audience was not cheering for heroin. They were cheering for liberty, and for getting back to a constitutionally controlled Federal Government.
Ron Paul has made his position clear many times. In 1988 he stated, ” It’s sort of like alcohol. Alcohol’s a deadly drug, kills more people than anything else. And today the absurdity on this war on drugs has just been horrible. Now the federal government takes over and overrules states where state laws permit medicinal marijuana for people dying of cancer. The federal government goes in and arrests these people, put them in prison with mandatory sentences. This war on drugs is totally out of control. If you want to regulate cigarettes and alcohol and drugs, it should be at the state level. That’s where I stand on it. The federal government has no prerogatives on this.”
By The Constitutional Avenger | May 3, 2011
During a recent interview held at his office in Washington DC, Representative Karl Childers strongly endorsed Ron Paul.
By The Constitutional Avenger | April 22, 2011
Earlier this week, Members of the TEXAS Senate Finance Committee proved they could outdo the House when it comes to spending the public’s money. On Wednesday they produced the senate version of the state budget for the next biennium. While the House version was better than nothing, the same cannot be said for the mess coming out of the Senate.
Chair Steve Ogden, R-Bryan, disappointed many Texans by announcing he wants to attach a contingency provision to their spending plans that would withdraw $3 billion from the Rainy Day Fund to balance the budget for the next two years. Maybe Steve needs to consider the contingency plan used by his fellow Texans when they run out of money. STOP SPENDING STEVE! Did you think of that contingency?
On Wednesday, the Senate Finance Committee also passed several revenue bills. Just to be clear, when you see the words, Revenue Bill, think higher taxes and fees. One of the most interesting bills was SB 1811. This bill actually contains the following wording:
Notwithstanding any other statute of this state, each state agency to which this article applies is authorized to reduce or recover expenditures by: adopting and collecting fees or charges to cover any costs the agency incurs in performing its lawful functions.
Steve, did you ever consider this amounts to double taxation. We already pay taxes to fund the operation of those agencies, now you want to make us pay a fee to actually receive the services we have already paid for. How about this: refund all the tax money you guys have charged the citizens of Texas to operate these agencies and operate them on a fee for services basis. If they don’t take in enough fees to operate then shut them down.
The senate also came up with another great idea. They want to impose a 5 cent tax on every individual serving of an alcoholic beverage served on a passenger train inside the state of Texas. You must be kidding. That will raise at least 80 cents. After reading that, Texans will probably need a drink. Hey, does anyone know where I can find the nearest passenger train?
That’s not all folks. They also propose to charge the same ridiculous amount for every alcoholic drink served on commercial airlines within the state. I will admit this one will probably raise more loot for the politicians to spend. My main objection to this law is its timing. I usually require a drink before I let some government goon pat me down. Perhaps citizens could charge the TSA a fee. What’s the going rate for Lap Dances now days?
Another creative way of raising taxes was the implementation of higher taxes on cigarettes. Wow! That must have taken a lot of thought. No politician has ever thought about taxing cigarettes before.
Ogden told the committee he could not think of another way to balance the budget. Well, Steve, like the government, I’m here to help.
According to the Federal Government, Smoking causes death!
The adverse health effects from cigarette smoking account for an estimated 443,000 deaths, or nearly one of every five deaths, each year in the United States. More deaths are caused each year by tobacco use than by all deaths from human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), illegal drug use, alcohol use, motor vehicle injuries, suicides, and murders combined.
I propose we eliminate all tax supported care for diseases that result from smoking. If you smoke, you don’t get Medicare or Medicaid to care for smoking induced illnesses.
Cigarette smoke contains what is probably the most dangerous and addictive drug know to mankind. Use of this drug will require a prescription issued by a physician. The prescription will be good for artificially shortened life of the patient and will allow for unlimited refills. Use of the prescription after a 1 year quitting period will negate any rights the patient has to any government provided health care for smoking induced diseases.
We as a society do not have the right to tell an adult that they can or cannot smoke. We do have the right to refuse to subsidize bad behavior in the form of tax payer supported health care.
This single change in our law would balance the budget, and it is fair and humane. In a 10 year period, we could save the lives of more than 4 million persons, reduce the cost of health care, and balance the budget.
By The Constitutional Avenger | April 11, 2011
Long ago, there was a very powerful and prosperous nation. It was called Andrewa and its people were called Andrewans. For many generations, the Andrewans conducted themselves with respect for the rights of every individual and their nation grew strong and the peoples of every other country either hated Andrewa for its prosperity or wanted to come into Andrewa to live, even if that meant breaking the Andrewan laws in order to do so. After all, they were just seeking a better life for themselves and their families.
After some few years passed, some of the Andrewans grew fearful. They perceived that some of their individual rights were being stolen away by sneaky politicians and replaced by group rights which most Andrewans detested as being cancerous and blighted by nature. They knew that group rights would cause contentious behavior and eventually their sacred individual rights would be trampled upon.
A few wise and courageous men came together and were inspired to create a document that would codify the terms under which the Andrewans could continue to live and prosper together. They called this document the Constitution. The wondrous beauty of the document was that it put no constraints on the individual, but instead put mighty bonds upon the newly created central government to constrain its ability to tread upon the individual rights of the people. But even then, some of these wise men were wary and demanded further constraints be placed upon the central government. The wise men called this the Bill of Rights.
For 200 years, the Andrewans were ruled by three political bodies who believed in and swore to protect and defend the Constitution. These three bodies were called the sons of the Constitution and their names were Exec, Legis, and Jude, and these three sons ruled the people in the name of Liberty, and the nation prospered.
Eventually, the Constitution grew old and the Sons walked not in the way of Liberty and Lawfulness, but turned aside after lucre, and took bribes, and perverted judgment, and worked to make themselves more powerful.
On one sacred day in Andrewa, which is called Election Day, ten or fifteen percent of voters gathered themselves together, and said, Behold, the Constitution is old, and the sons walk not in its ways. They cried out for the sons to work together to build up a more powerful central government. Make us a government to rule over us and spread the wealth. Give us Liberty schooling, and Liberty health care and Liberty food and all other manner of Liberty. Some people were not happy with those Liberties and they demanded special Liberties.
But the thing was an abomination to the Constitution and a small number of people who loved the constitution knew that Liberty had been perverted. What the misguided voters had asked for was not Liberty. Instead, they were actually asking for Free Education, and Free Health Care, and Free food, but the Constitutionalists knew there was no free lunch. Someone always pays.
One day, a man of good will read the Constitution and became so concerned he stood upon a box which had held bars of soap and cried out to all the people, “Do not pray for a government to take care of you and rule over you from cradle to grave.”
And the man said, “This will be the manner of the government that shall reign over you: It will take your sons, and appoint them for fighting in illegal wars and interfering in the rights and affairs of other countries and they shall be hated upon the earth, and you will cry out in pain and suffer when thy sons are returned to you in boxes made of wood.
And the government will appoint him captains over all of you; and will set the captains to abuse you and reap 40% of all things that are harvested, and 40% of all things that are made, and 40% of all services that are performed, to make instruments of war, and instruments to police the world.
And he will take your fields, and your vineyards, and your olive yards, even the best of them, and give them to his servants who will build stadiums and shopping centers for their own profit.
And the government will take the tenth of your seed, and of your vineyards, and give to government supporters and to government servants who are known as Union bosses.
And he will take your menservants, and your maidservants, and your goodliest young men, and your asses, and put them to government work performing the Patriot Acts, and they will know every secret of every man. And you will pay.
Then the government will take the Bill of Rights and mock it and destroy the 10 Amendments: and ye shall be its servants.
And ye shall cry out in that day because of your government which ye shall have chosen you; and there will be none to hear you because you must be silent except in Designated Free Speech Zones.
By The Constitutional Avenger | April 10, 2011
Whenever the Politicians start talking about the budget, they almost always decline to do anything about Military spending. The American Public supports our military men and women and well they should. However, this does not mean we should ignore the colossal spending that goes on year after year in the name of Defense Spending. We call it Defense Spending because it sounds so much nicer than Aggressive Intervention into the Affairs of Other Countries Spending.
Now before anyone accuses me of being anti military, let me say emphatically I am not. My cousins have served during the recent conflicts in the middle east. I served during the Vietnam Conflict. My brother was a member of the Green Beret’s. My Uncle and cousins served as combat troops in Viet Nam. My father was a POW in the Korea conflict. My grandfather was wounded 4 times in the second world war. In short, members of my family have served in every conflict in the history of this nation since 1635.
Instead, feel free to accuse me of being anti-war, because I am. I am not against all wars, just all the ones we have participated in since WWII.
So let’s look at the budget and decide how we can change our thinking about it. Defense Spending usually amounts to about 20% of the total budget, so if we are serious about getting spending under control, we must take a look at how we spend this money. By the way, these numbers do not include many military-related items that are outside of the Defense Department budget, such as nuclear weapons research, maintenance, cleanup, and production, Veterans Affairs, payments in pensions to military retirees and widows and their families, interest on debt incurred in past wars, or State Department financing of foreign arms sales and militarily-related development assistance.
First, about $50 billion of the current budget is spent on all the nifty weapons programs that really do qualify as Defense Spending. These are the American Technology Weapons and systems that allow us to defend ourselves with the least possible risk to our soldiers. This would include such items as fighters, submarines, space based systems, and other kinds of war machines. There is probably some waste and fraud these, but at least the programs are worthy of funding in the name of defense.
Secondly, we spend vast amounts of money maintaining military bases in other countries. According to Chalmers Johnson, a political scientist and former CIA consultant, as much as $250 billion per year is used to maintain some 865 U.S. military facilities in more than forty countries and overseas U.S. territories. Do you think those Germans and Japanese really need us there protecting them? We need to close all these overseas bases and bring the troops home. Germany and Japan and all the others can defend themselves, and if they can’t, let them ask for our help. Then the U.S. Congress can do its job and declare war before sending my children and grandchildren into harm’s way.
Next on the list is the so called overseas contingency spending. This currently amounts to about $150 billion per year. Overseas Contingency Operations are how we refer to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. To date, we have spend more than $900 Billion on these wars. The indirect costs of these wars such as interest on the additional debt and incremental costs of caring for the more than 33,000 wounded borne by the Veterans Administration are additional. Some experts estimate these indirect costs will eventually exceed the direct costs.
Well, it took the Constitutional Avenger 30 minutes to do it, but by bringing our troops home and closing all our foreign bases, we can save more than $400 billion per year. We will actually save much more than that when we realize we don’t actually need the 200,000 military personnel who serve in Japan, Korea, and Europe.
During a recent discussion with a dear friend, she suggested that the United States had to kill Saddam in Iraq. While I agreed that Saddam needed killing, I did not agreed it was the job of the United States to do it.
Think of how you would react if the shoe were on the other foot. What if Muammar Gaddafi determined that our president is not doing enough to curtail violence towards American Muslims. Perhaps he determines that the those of the Islamic faith are being discriminated against. As a result, Libya sends a crack death squad into the United States and kills the President. How do you think the American people would react? Personally, I would be the first in line urging congress to declare war on Libya, and it doesn’t matter that Gaddafi might feel justified in some manner. We would not stand for it! Why do we think other countries should put up with our interference in their affairs?
I am reminded of Stonewall Jackson’s speech to the Men of the Valley in the movie, Gods and Generals. I have paraphrased it here:
“Just as we would not send any of our soldiers to march in other countries and tyrannize other people, so will we never allow the armies of others to march into our country and tyrannize our people.”
By The Constitutional Avenger | April 9, 2011
A few years ago, the federal government decided that Americans were too stupid to pick their own toilets and so they legislated the wildly popular low flow models that are now loved by all our citizens. Because of that success, the Federal Government followed up with regulations to prevent the sale of incandescent light bulbs. They said Americans are too stupid to select their own light bulbs. Now they have decided it is time to select the kind of car you are allowed to purchase.
To prepare for this, the Obama administration recently engineered a gigantic financial depression which enable them to gain control of the majority of American automobile companies. There are rumors that our government used its nuclear technology to engineer the Japanese earthquakes and that soon, Toyota, Mazda, and Nissan will also be property of the American Government. The Avenger does not neccessarilty believe this rumor, but you never can tell.
The next time you drive down to the local auto dealer, be prepare for a shock. Beginning with the 2014 model year, there will be only one model available and it will not matter which dealership you visit. The Ford car and the Chevy car will be exactly the same, and so will all the imports.
Why exactly has the Federal Government decided to select your next new car? Mostly, because Americans are very stupid. Don’t believe it? Then check this out:
1. Thirty percent of all student who enter American High Schools drop out before graduation. President Obama says we have a “dropout crisis”. His administration is currently taking steps to end this crisis by spending more money. The Obama Administration recently committed $3.5 billion to fund transformational changes in America’s persistently low-performing schools and will additionally budget $900 million to support School Turnaround Grants. Wow! $4.5 Billion! That’s a lot of money. I sure hope it helps, because as it is American are getting stupider every year. It is a good thing we can count on the Federal Government to step in and make these tough car buying decision for us.
2. You are probably thinking, “Yeah, but 70% of our kids do graduate. What about that, Mr. Avenger?” You are absolutely right, but let’s see how they compare in the brains department with students from other developed countries. Hmmm… my oh my. After testing graduates from 16 developed nations, the US Department of Education provided the following distressing data:
a. No countries scored below the United States on the assessment of advanced mathematics.
b. No countries scored below the United States on the physics assessment.
c. On the mathematics portion of the general knowledge assessment, U.S. students scored below the international average, and among the lowest of all countries.
d. On the science portion of the general knowledge assessment, U.S. students scored below the international average, and among the lowest scoring of all countries.
“Yeah, but I’ll bet we do better in English Language skills that those other countries!”
Sorry, actually students in Germany, Holland, and Belgium do better on English Language skills than American kids.In fact, more than 50% of American kids did not know the difference between to, too, and two, or which and witch, or they’re, their, and there, or accept and except, or effect and affect, but the foreign students did. To be fair, we did do better than Somalian students.
We just have to face it. Americans are stupid. Whew… I feel better already. Confession really is good for the soul.
So, what kind of car does the Federal Department of Energy have in mind for us? Well, it will be an electric car. Here are the specs:
|Vehicle Range||90-120 miles2|
|Top Speed||80 mph (Electronically Limited)|
|Charge Time||6 hours from 220V (30AMP)4|
|Limited Vehicle Warranty||3 years/36,000 miles|
|Limited Battery Warranty||8 years/100,000 miles|
Future Conversation between Government Car Salesman and Stupid American Citizen
“Now here is the really good news. THIS CAR REQUIRES NO GASOLINE!!!!”
” Waahooo! But wait a minute how does it get fuel?”
“Stupid American. It doesn’t need fuel. Don’t you know that burning a gallon of gasoline will emit 19.4 pounds of C02 into the atmosphere. We certainly can’t allow that. This car is battery operated. All you have to do is plug it into a wall outlet.”
“Well, I am certainly relieved to know that. I want to do all I can to protect the environment. It sure is fine of the government to help me with this decision. Say? Where does the electricity come from that feeds the wall outlet.”
“It comes from the power company, silly.”
“Oh. Well, where do they get it?”
“Well… they burn coal… which emits… well, we will certainly figure out some kind of clean coal strategy eventually. Besides, you are too stupid to be asking these kinds of questions. Do you doubt the wisdom and intelligence of your government? I warn you, to do so will be considered treasonous!”
“Oh, no sir! I would never do that. Just show me where to sign.”
“Don’t you want to know the price?”
“No, I trust the government completely. I’m sure the price is very fair.”
By The Constitutional Avenger | April 7, 2011
Does Prayer Belong in the Public Schools? Absolutely Not!
Why not? The short answer is because there should be NO public schools.
The government owns the public schools. They hire and pay the teachers and the administrative staffs, and the government uses this power to indoctrinate our young people in ways that are abhorrent to many parents.
Think about it. If you talk about prayer in American public schools, most people will be thinking of the Christian faith and prayers to God in the name of Christ. If you are a Christian, do you want your tax dollars spent that supports the Islamic faith and traditions? What about the 13 principles of Wiccan belief. What about Abortion Rights, Diversity, Multiculturalism, Integration, Sexual Preference, and dozens of other controversial subjects.
In a nation with true Liberty, you would not be able to force me to contribute my money to educate your children and I would not be able to force you to educate mine. Each parent should be responsible for the education of their own children and refrain from placing that burden on their friends, neighbors, and even strangers. If you can NOT afford to educate your children, don’t bring them into the world! Educating your children is YOUR responsibility, NOT mine or anyone else’s.
I can hear the wailing and gnashing of teeth. “But my children deserve a free education.” Deserves got nothing to do with it.
So what does the Constitutional Avengers suggest?
1. Our first order of principle should be to entirely eliminate all public schools and all of the bureaucracy and taxes that go along with it. The expense and decisions relating to the education of children should be returned to the parents where it belongs. The Avenger’s brother and his wife educated their five children with no aid of any kind from the state and those five children are as well or better educated than most of the young people I run into. The truth is, you don’t need help from the government to educate your children. You can do it yourself!
2. If we must have public funding of education, then the Avenger’s second order of Principle comes into effect. We must eliminate all Federal government activities relating to education. All of it must go. We do not need any of it, and NONE of it is authorized by the U.S. Constitution. In fact, this is one of the powers that is specifically reserved to the states and the people by the 10th Amendment.
All independent public school systems would be privatized, or they would be closed and their assets sold off. All local school boards would be eliminated. We don’t need them.
Then we must implement a education voucher system funded and administered at the state level. The state will determine how much to spend on education per student and that amount will be issued to the parent or guardian of every child. The parent will be the sole authority on where the money is spent. They will be responsible for selecting the school that will educate their children.
Under the voucher system, the Market for educational services will blossom. Teachers and entrepreneurs will work together to provide products to the marketplace. These schools will prosper or fail based on how well they design and deliver their educational products to the consumer. We will no longer need state sponsored testing to see if the schools are doing their jobs, the Parents will decide that.
This system would eliminate so many problems. If prayer in school is important to the parent, then they will select a school that encourages that activity. If sports are important, then the parent will select a school where that activity is promoted. If a parent does not like the education their child is receiving, they can take their child and the voucher funds to another school. This is the same thing you do if your grocery store sells you crappy vegetables. You take your money elsewhere.
Let parents control all educational funding
Education is best provided by the free market, achieving greater quality and efficiency with more diversity of choice. Schools should be managed locally to achieve greater accountability and parental involvement. Recognizing that the education of children is inextricably linked to moral values, we would return authority to parents to determine the education of their children, without interference from government. Parents should have control of all funds expended for their children’s education.
What can you do?
Write and call your elected officials. Tell them you agree with the Avenger. They need to get out of the education business and let you decide how to educate your own children.