Boomtown – Washington DC - where cash is king

“While one out of every 6 Americans wonder where their next meal is coming from, Washington DC has the highest rate of fine wine consumption in the United States,” said author Peter Schweizer of the Government Accountability Institute. Mr. Schweizer also pointed out that one out of four Americans has a mortgage that is underwater, while 7 out of 10 of the wealthiest counties in the nation are in the DC area. Furthermore, DC now has the highest per capita income in the US, recently passing Silicon Valley.

How was this wealth created in a geographical area that doesn’t produce a product or create anything the public wants to purchase? Other boomtowns in our history became prosperous because they offered something to build upon. DC, however, offers nothing but connections to power and patronage. The result is a permanent political class invested in the growth of government as they grow their personal portfolios.

The federal government employs 245,000 people, and the average pay and other compensation is about $120,000. Keep in mind, in addition to the president and vice-president there are only 435 members of Congress and 100 Senators. That leaves over 244,000 others being paid handsomely by the taxpayers, most of whom earn considerably less than the people working for them.

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

Austin Hill - Could This Be Like Nixon In 1972?

President Richard Nixon won a second term in the White House, by being the avenger of left-wing cultural chaos.

Will challenger Mitt Romney win a first term as President, because he provides a similar alternative?

This year’s election will mark the fortieth anniversary of another historic contest. In November of 1972 President Richard Nixon defeated his opponent George McGovern in the Electoral College by a landslide margin of 49 states to 1. Setting the U.S. presidential record for the widest margin of victory among the popular vote, Nixon received nearly 18 million more votes than McGovern.

While Nixon is most often remembered for his downfall and near-impeachment following his second inauguration, his re-election victory – and the cultural conditions that led up to it – was nonetheless dramatic. And in an age where overwhelming majorities believe that America is “heading in the wrong direction,” it’s worth noting how concerns of “right and wrong” shook the election of 40 years ago – and how these concerns might play out this year.

During Nixon’s first term, a great awakening began among a broad sector of the American population. After decades of having been disengaged from politics and public policy debates, and without much in the way of formal organization, millions of faith-based Americans—at that time mostly white, middle-class, Protestant and evangelical Christians—had become increasingly alarmed at the cultural trends and growing civil unrest of the late 1960's and early 1970's.

The challenges to marriage and Judeo-Christian sexual norms posed by the so-called “sexual revolution;” the youthful rebellion against societal authority structures brought about by the so-called “hippie” culture; and the Vietnam War protests by the first generation of American youth who thought it was something less than “honorable” to fight on behalf of the country—all these developments and others proved to be quite unnerving to these millions of Americans.

In the midst of this upheaval, Nixon delivered an important address to the nation during his first term in office, on November 3, 1969. In the speech, Nixon famously made reference to a so-called “silent majority” of Americans—people who supposedly agreed with him on issues of culture, “law and order,” and his desire to fight back against Communism, even though the views of this “silent majority” were largely ignored by political, media, and academic elites.

In using the “silent majority” language, Nixon sought to politically awaken and unify this huge chunk of the American population that had little or no voice in American media and who often did not vote. This sector of American society was very real, and very frustrated by what they believed was a degradation of America and its institutions. Nixon successfully conveyed that he understood those frustrations, and the bond he created with the “silent majority” helped bring about his landslide re-election.

So does today’s cultural upheaval compare to that of 40 years ago? There’s no doubt that the United States of 2012 is quite different from the country Nixon served.

In 1972 the nation’s population was slightly over 200 million, while today there are over 314 million of us. In 1972 over 80% of the American population was White and of European descent. Today, according to some demographic reports, Whites make up as little as 74% of the population, while there is universal agreement that this majority is rapidly eroding.

In 1972 roughly 90% of Americans identified themselves as Christian. Today that figure is approximately 73%, as other religions, and a preference for no religious affiliation at all, become more prevalent.

So the United States of 2012 is more racially and ideologically pluralistic than was Nixon’s America. Yet concerns about the degradation of America are as prevalent today as they were in 1972. And while the radicalized influences that sought to upend the foundations of America were playing out on college campuses and in local communities across the country forty years ago, today they are in the White House, itself, and Americans sense the dangers that this poses.

Despite his promises of unifying America, President Barack Obama has exacerbated our divisions and violated many of our common understandings of right and wrong. When Arizona and Alabama sought two years ago to clarify the rule of law as it regards legal and illegal immigration, our President sided with the U.N., China, the dictator of Venezuela and Mexican President Felipe Calderon in opposing these two states, and then punished the residents there with costly federal lawsuits.

When South Carolina and Florida pursued voter ID laws so as to prevent non-citizens from voting, President Obama sued them to prevent the laws from being implemented. When Ohio sought to streamline early voting for military service personnel, President Obama sued Ohio to stop the troops from voting.

President Obama praises government employees, but calls private business owners “greedy.” As his policies have expanded government dependency, removed the work requirement for welfare, decreased the workforce participation rate and run-up over $5 trillion in deficit spending, he insists that he is moving our country “forward.”

Mr. Obama has undercut our nation’s ally Israel in the Middle East, but calls militant Islamists in the region our “friends” – even as they kill American civilians, military personnel, and a U.S. Ambassador (Christopher Stevens). And while his predecessor oversaw the construction of an offshore detention center (Guantanamo Bay) in which to detain and interrogate foreign terror suspects, President Obama has sought to welcome those very dangerous characters into the domestic U.S. and grant them access to American courts.

Indeed, we are surrounded by left-wing cultural chaos. What was once wrong is now right, and right is now wrong, in Obama’s America. If Mitt Romney can continue to convince America that he is as keenly aware of America’s degradation as millions of the rest of us are, he may find a majority of us standing with him in November.

Austin Hill

Austin Hill is an emerging American voice, addressing culture-defining questions through books, talk radio, web, speaking, and interviews. His recent books "White House Confidential" and his new title "The Virtues Of Capitalism" show his range from whit-infused writer to thought-provoking expert on the intersection of philosophy, religion, politics & culture. Hill helps to make the complex seem simple when exploring capitalism, socialism, and other "Isms".

He is an editorial contributor to national publications such as U.S. News & World Report, a columnist with TownHall.com, and is a popular expert-host on radio from leading stations in Washington DC, Chicago, Phoenix and Los Angeles, and nationally with networks such as Fox NewsTalk Radio.  He hosts the "Austin Hill Show" weekday mornings at Fresno, California's Talk Radio 105-9 KMJ-FM,  and weekday afternoons at Boise, Idaho's Newstalk 580 K I D O radio.

Hill holds a Bachelor's Degree in English Literature from California Polytechnic State University at San Luis Obispo, and a Master's Degree in Philosophy of Religion and Ethics from Biola University in California.

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

Star Parker - Defining Deviancy Down

In 1993, then Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan published a paper in which he coined the phrase “defining deviancy down.”

He was ringing an alarm about what he saw as a dangerous social unraveling as result of our redefining deviant behavior as normal, rather than doubling down on traditional standards of behavior.

It’s through this lens that we should view the Obama administration mandate that employers provide free contraception and sterilization and its refusal to grant an exemption to morally opposed religious institutions.

Our audacious president, as part of his ongoing enterprise to transform America, has gone beyond defining deviancy down. Abortion, sterilization, and sexual promiscuity have not just been redefined as normal. They are considered “reproductive rights” for which we all should foot the bill.

Consider Rush Limbaugh’s much ballyhooed verbal assault on a Georgetown law student for testifying before Congress in favor of forcing her Jesuit university to provide students free contraception.

In a Gallup poll done in 1969, 68 percent said pre-marital sex is wrong and 21 percent said it is not wrong. Few young women in 1969 would have felt comfortable to publicly declare they sleep around and it’s doubtful that any politician or media personality would have condoned her behavior.

By 2009, in response to the same question, 32 percent said pre-marital sex is wrong and 60 percent said it is not wrong.

Are we a fairer and more progressive nation today, or have we defined deviancy down?

If you think we’re a better nation today because sexual promiscuity is viewed as normal and acceptable, so you must also be comfortable with the rest of the social developments that go along with this.

Most notably, the transformation and breakdown of the traditional American family.

In 1960, 72 percent of American adults were married. Today 51 percent are.

The most dramatic transformation here has taken place in those communities most likely to be supporting Democrats and Obama - blacks and Hispanics.

In 1960, 14 percent of white adults had never been married. The percentage of never married blacks and Hispanics then was not much different – 17 percent.

By 2008, the percentage of never married white adults had increased to 23 percent. But among blacks it grew to 44 percent and among Hispanics 34 percent.

If you see family breakdown as a negative development, so it is clear that defining deviancy down has had the most deleterious effects on those communities in which traditional institutions were weakest to begin with.

As part of the process of defining deviancy down, the words don’t change – only their meaning changes.

So the website of Law Students for Reproductive Justice, the organization of Sandra Fluke, the young woman Limbaugh attacked, says “all people are entitled to equal protection of the law, the free exercise of rights, and the enjoyment of economic, political, and social well being.”

These noble words, which sound like they could have been written by Thomas Jefferson, are perversely interpreted to mean religious freedom may be denied to a Catholic University, while forcing it to pay for contraception and sterilization for students.

Our nation is drowning in debt, with unfunded liabilities of our Social Security and Medicare programs estimated in the range of $70 trillion.

Yet Ms Fluke’s idea of injustice is a student relating “how embarrassed and powerless she felt when she was standing at the pharmacy counter, learning for the first time that contraception wasn’t covered….”

This warranted a personal call from the President of the United States to assuage her hurt feelings from Rush Limbaugh’s tough language.

Today deviancy has been defined so far down it has been turned on its head. The Obama administration idea of deviant is any presumption to religious liberty and any sense that individuals should be personally responsible for the costs and consequences of their own behavior.

Star Parker

Star Parker is founder and president of CURE, the Center for Urban Renewal and Education, a 501c3 think tank which explores and promotes market based public policy to fight poverty, as well as author of the newly revised Uncle Sam's Plantation: How Big Government Enslaves America's Poor and What We Can do About It.

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

Lurita Doan - The Gimme Something Congress and the Public Service Failure

Once upon a time---public service in America was understood by all to reflect a decision by those in government to put civic duties ahead of personal gain. Unfortunately, our elected members of Congress, in word and deed, are showing Americans how the system really works as they rush for personal gain.

Public service is morphing into crass expediency in which some of the members of congress expect to be rewarded with great personal wealth by exploiting information received in closed-door sessions or hearings, dodgy links to businesses run by relatives and family members, and skillful sleight-of-hand with campaign donations.

This group of elected members of Congress and senior Administration officials expect to get rich from their period of public service. What a pity.

It was not always like that.When Americans think of patriots, we think of our Founding Fathers (and Mothers) whose sacrifices made this country the greatest nation on the face of the earth. Both my husband's family and mine have long lines of ancestors who served and shaped the history of this country-- Pilgrims, Free Men of Color, Revolutionary War soldiers--all who seemed to think that this country was worth shaping, sowing and saving with their sweat and blood. Countless other Americans have ancestors, with similar pasts, who contributed much.

What we seem to have now are folks in positions of power with little interest in the longevity of our republic, but are only interested in how much they can squeeze out of public service for their personal gain.Compared to the early days of our country where public servants were the leaders in sacrifice of personal gain, we have fallen far.

The Paymaster's registers in the National Archives are immensely interesting, for they tell not only the names, ranks, salaries and locations of those who served in the Revolutionary Way--from Private to General, now long dead, but they also tell who paid for what.

While much of the Revolutionary War was paid with borrowed funds, it also becomes clear that a large part of the war effort was paid for by private citizens.Whether supported by little-known patriots such as Haym Solomon or the most famous, documented and arguably the most generous, patriot, George Washington,;who advanced the money needed to fight the war and accepted no salary for his War service.

Contrast Solomon's and Washington's kind of dedication, altruism and public service with Congress' most recent financial scandal. Sadly, Congressman Spencer Bachus and former Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, are just some of many of the members of congress who seem to have forgotten that they were elected to serve the people and, instead, have blatantly profited from their time in office.

Nor are Pelosi and Bachus alone.Sadly, many elected members of Congress come to Washington as modest men and women.Yet, while serving on a limited salary, they are, nevertheless, able to become multi-millionaires with stock holdings that routinely outdistance even the best-run portfolios in the nation.

Put bluntly, our elected officials and senior Administration officials are getting rich at the public expense.

What Americans are beginning to see is that these "gimme something"; public servants have no notion of public service. Public service is just a business for them, and they are just trying to make a buck. Nor does it end with their tenure in elected or appointed office.Once these folks come to Washington, they rarely leave; and make no mistake, whether operating openly or operating behind the scenes, they are always in power.

Why?

With over $3 trillion annually in federal spending alone, big government is big business.And, like barnacles on our great ship of state, they move along, feed off and erode the entity they are supposed to protect.

Some members of congress are exceptions, such as Congressman Darrell Issa, who created his wealth with his brain and his business savvy, or Senator Jay Rockefeller, who inherited his wealth.And, there are many others who married their wealth.But, these members are few in comparison to the many--too many--others who enrich themselves at the public's expense. These folks never truly leave D.C. because they aren't interested in solving our nation's problems.The business of politics is what they are all about.

In fact, many of these have created new, completely artificial industries that exist only through subsidies from the federal government. Whether elected, appointed or crowned Czars, they come in and they revolve back out to do the same thing--advance their own interests at the expense of the public. ;(Think ethanol and Gen. Wesley Clark? Peter Orszag and TARP- recipient Citigroup? Carol Browner and the Albright Stonebridge environmental advocacy group?)

Oh, how Americans long for a new group of more honest public servants and elected officials that will put the public interests above their own shameful grub for personal profits! Wouldn't Americans love to see just one former Congressman, Senator, or Cabinet Secretary actually return home to their state when he/she no longer serves, open a hardware store, work at a Pancake shop or do anything not connected to seeking political favors for some industry?

These are the public servants we need to find and to elect. And we need to do it quickly.

Lurita Doan

---

Lurita Alexis Doan is an African American conservative commentator who writes about issues affecting the federal government.

Lurita has been involved in the business community through participation in many trade associations, membership in business organizations including the Young Entrepreneurs' Organization (now Entrepreneurs' Organization) and Young Presidents' Organization, and involvement on charitable community activities.

---

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

---

Michelle Malkin - White House Bullying Business?

"Spin, baby, spin. Throughout his frenetic jobs tour across the West this week, President Obama tried to seize the narrative. Republicans, he told champagne-sipping, tea party-trashing Hollywood moguls and tech titans, are intolerant bigots, know-nothings and thugs. They've made his hair "grayer" and left him "all dinged up."
But who's battering whom? Since Day One, Obama has been the Chicago bully in victim's clothing. The mask is wearing thin."
Michelle Malkin

September 28, 2011

---

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

---