|Posted by Michael Judson on March 17, 2013 at 10:30 PM||comments (0)|
While at CPAC, I attended a forum by K. Carl Smith about negating the race issue. This class did not go as expected. K. Carl Smith advocates that conservatives do not call themselves conservatives, instead label themselves a Frederick Douglas Republican. The theory is that African Americans can not call you racist if you do. The class took a turn for the worse when an openly liberal Kim Brown began questioning K. Carl about his motives. Then K. Carl stated that some slaves forgave their slave masters, at which time an openly racist Scott Terry of North Carolina, said “forgave for what, providing food and shelter?”
Well, guess what, I am a conservative. I will continue to call myself a conservative. I hold conservative values and principals and I will not sacrifice them to appease anyone. The debate we should have had that day with Kim Brown was why. Why do we still use race as an issue? Why do we not judge people by character instead of color? Why do we use programs like affirmative action to segregate people? We are all Americans. There should be no difference between an African American and an Irish American. We will continue to have division in this country if we can not look past race and ethnicity. I understand that people want to be proud of their heritage but they should be just as proud to be an American.
Scott Terry was wrong. Slavery is a horrible part of our past. We can not condone what happened, but we can, and should, move on. Mr. Terry does not represent The Tea Party. K. Carl was wrong. We should not call ourselves something to appease anyone. I wish the crowd could have settled down so that Kim Brown, from Voices of Russia, and I could have had this debate like adults.
|Posted by Michael Judson on March 12, 2013 at 3:25 AM||comments (3)|
This is a 16 year old American Citizen named Abdulrahman al-Awlaki. He is only different than your children or my children because of the family he was born into. This child did not have any ties to terrorism yet our government used a calculated drone strike to kill him citing "He should of had a more responsible father". This is a case of one man playing judge, jury and executioner.
I commend Rand Paul for defending the constitution and making a point of having the Justice Department condemn drone strikes on Americans on American soil, but what about Americans overseas. Are you not entitled to due process of the law if you travel overseas? Rand Paul made Eric Holder answer the easy questions and now I would like the hard questions answered. Can our government kill an American overseas with out due process? Regardless of what the government thinks it knows about you and your actions are you entitled to a trial by jury? I know many people think that if someone has ties to a terror organization they should give up their constitutional rights, but the government can call anything they want a terrorist organization. They can come out tomorrow and say that The Tea Party is a terrorist organization. Should I forfeit my constitutional rights? Should I have to live in fear because a governmental organization does not agree with my core beliefs? Some people think I am crazy for asking the question but where do we say enough is enough? I think when an innocent 16 year old is killed we need to draw the line. Could Abdulrahman al-Awlaki have turned out like his father? Maybe but we should have let him decide what kind of person he wanted to be.
|Posted by Michael Judson on March 9, 2013 at 7:20 PM||comments (0)|
As the snow flurries fell outside of the capital, Rand Paul reenergized the Tea Party movement with his stark defense of the Constitution. Senator Paul began speaking, and he continued throughout the night. What we witnessed was one man upsetting Washington. Mr. Paul, single handedly, upset both democrats and republicans, all while gaining support from the libertarian conservatives. The libertarian conservatives make up a majority of Americans, both left and right. A majority of us just want to be left alone and that’s what Rand Paul was standing up to, an overbearing federal government.
The Tea Party is painted as wackos by the main stream media and politicians. Senator McCain called Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz and Rand Paul such. It is a consensus that these three Senators are the future of the Republican Party. Is it a coincidence that all three of the shining stars of the party where elected in large part by the Tea Party? The Tea Party is not dead and thanks to Rand Paul, our message is now back on track. We don’t care about gay marriage or many other social issues. We do not think the federal government should be involved in any marriage. We have a message and must not get side tracked. Our message is for a fiscal responsible, constitutionally limited government. That’s what the filibuster was really about.
Stand With Rand
|Posted by Michael Judson on February 11, 2013 at 2:55 AM||comments (0)|
Last week Karl Rove and his cronies started a new organization, The Conservative Victory Fund. After loosing the presidential election with his super PAC, American Crossroads, making generous donations, Rove is trying to remain relevant. Karl Rove brought us eight years of George Bush. Karl Rove backed Charlie Christ (who is now a Democrat) over Marco Rubio. Can Karl Rove even call himself a conservative?
The thought process behind the Conservative Victory Group is to support the most conservative, electable candidate. This is where the Conservative Victory Group differs from The Tea Party Patriots. The Tea Party has core values that we stick to. Candidates we support must be fiscally conservative, for constitutionally limited government, and for free markets. We will support candidates based on out principles, not who we think can get elected. Mr. Rove, you are making a big mistake challenging the Tea Party. We may not have all the money you have but we have something that cannot be bought, integrity! Any candidate you support will be labeled as part of the establishment that has done nothing to save this country from the fiscal mess we are in. You will put a bull’s eye on their back. I do not think many candidates will want your support.
Mr. Rove, if it’s a war you want, you have come to the right place. Do you know why the American defeated Britian during the American Revolution? Because they believed what they were fighting for! You are fighting to remain relevant; we are fighting because we believe in what we are doing. Good luck.
|Posted by Michael Judson on February 4, 2013 at 2:50 AM||comments (1)|
On February 3rd our great leader (insert sarcasm here) has called for closing tax loopholes. This is exactly what Speaker of the House Boehner called for during the fiscal negotiations. President O demanded that we raise tax rates instead. Now Obama wants to close loopholes on top of the tax rate increase. No matter how you look at it this amounts to a tax increase. Any tax increase will take monies out of the private sector and give them to the government. We have all seen the waste in government programs. The government mismanages everything they put their hand in. It is so easy to spend someone else’s money. We have heard it before, “This tax will not affect the middle class.” Do we still believe that?
Whether you want to call it supply side economics or Reaganomics, the process of letting people keep there own money has been shown to stimulate the economy. Thnk about it. If you work for a business owner that makes one million dollars after taxes and the government closes loopholes that in turn lower his income to eight hundred thousand a year his lifestyle will not change. He will still take vacations with his family; he will still drive a new car, and he will still contribute to his retirement accounts. So what will change? The people who work for him will have to make sacrifices, whether it comes in layoffs, additional contributions to medical insurance or elimination of 401k matches. The bottom line is when ever money comes out of the private sector and goes to the public sector it is the working class people who suffer.
By allowing corporations to keep more of their money essentially stops them from outsourcing a lot of their jobs. You read everyday about companies closing and moving overseas. You can not blame these companies or their stockholders. These companies are in the business in making money and if you punish their success they will find a new way to turn a profit.
This doesn’t seam to difficult but our elected officials can not get it right. I feel that a lot of the reason that politicians can not figure it out is because as soon as they get elected, their primary focus turns to getting re-elected. That brings me to my next issue… look for it later in the week… term limits
|Posted by Michael Judson on January 29, 2013 at 2:15 AM||comments (2)|
Congress seems to be tackling many issues as of late. We found out yesterday about bipartisan immigration reform. Nancy Pelosi is pushing an extensive gun control agenda. The House passed “No Work, No Pay” and an extension of the debt ceiling, essentially kicking the can down the road again.
What we don’t see is anyone taking on the fiscal mess. There are a couple important dates coming up soon. The self imposed sequestrations are set to kick in on February 28th. The continuing resolution that is funding the government expires on March 31st. Why is it, that none of this is being dealt with? I can guarantee you nothing will be dealt with until February 27th at 11:59 and March 30th at 11:59. Why can’t our Congress be proactive?
Here’s why, President Obama and his fellow democrats are winning again. By keeping the focus on Gun Control and immigration it keeps our focus off the fiscal issues and entitlement reform. I am not a social conservative, but a fiscal conservative. My priorities are not immigration reform or banning gay marriage. Those are small battles. We need to keep the pressure on our politicians to focus on the big battles, like a balanced budget and entitlement reform. Let the democrats push their social agenda; the republicans have enough members in the house that it will just be a waste of time. I wish I could explain why our elected officials do not stay on the offensive; I can not figure it out. Let the NRA fight gun control, in the mean time keep the pressure on our elected officials to fix the spending problems. In the end, if we do not fix the budget mess we will no longer have a country to fight for.
|Posted by Michael Judson on January 22, 2013 at 12:15 AM||comments (0)|
Today we witnessed the second inauguration of President Obama. For many people, this was unsettling. People fear the unknown and tend to think of the worse. I am here to tell you FEAR NOT! We can use this day to start anew. With new beginnings come new challenges and I challenge you all to get involved. Reach out to your representatives. This is still a country by the people, of the people, and for the people.
Mr. President, you may have been elected by 51 percent of the people but you work for 100 percent of the people. Today you said “Preserving individual liberties ultimately requires collective action”. Mr. President, your defense of big government, or collective action as you like to call it, is not needed when the individuals accept responsibility for their actions.
The President, Senators, and members of the House have all been sworn in. It is now time to get back to work. Just remember who they work for. 62 percent of Americans want spending cuts. Contact your representatives and tell them the time is now. Do not kick the can down the road, even for three months. Pressure your Senators to pass a budget; it has been 1360 days since the last one has been passed. We cannot pressure Senators to make cuts when they do not even know where the money is being spent.
This is not a Republican or Democrat issue. This is not right versus left. This is not Freidman versus Keynes. What this is is the desire of the American people to salvage a country with an insurmountable federal debt. The people of America are making more sacrifices every day. It is time to ask the same of our government.
|Posted by Michael Judson on January 3, 2013 at 10:30 AM||comments (0)|
|Posted by Michael Judson on January 2, 2013 at 12:55 AM||comments (0)|
On 1/1/13 the House of Representatives passed legislation raising taxes on anyone makeing more than $400,000 a year. The fiscal cliff would have raised taxes on everyone, but inturn would have included massive spending cuts that would have given us a smaller government. I feel as if the republicans in the House and Senate have let the people down. For the ethical sacrifice the Republicans gained no real spending cuts. Revenue is not a problem, the problem is spending. Politicians in Washington refuse to address the real problems. The deal passed by the House and Senate increase revenue by $620 billion but just kicks the can on spending cuts 2 months down the road. In 2 months we will bee dealing with the same issues.