Choosing Freedom

It may be said that the majority of Americans want, in a practical way, a greater quality of life. This is our basic categorical motivation. Whether financial, emotional, social, spiritual, etc., Americans endeavor toward this end. Therefore, we strive to reach certain goals at our vocations, employment, scholastic pursuits and other endeavors. We make sacrifices for our children, spouses and family along the way to reach these goals. We plan for, and make informed choices regarding the improvement of our lives and our loved one's lives. These are but a few behaviors that bear this out. However, when we analyze our life choices as pertaining to those we elect into political office we often choose office holders who's policies are at variance with our efforts to improve the quality of our lives. The thesis of this editorial will focus on this inconsistency and seek to bring about a reconciliation.

As we we are...
Americans of today have increasingly been lead to believe that our government serves as the source for the solutions for the problems and complexities of current society. The major television networks are instrumental in presenting and enforcing this idea. Other media with currency and influence such as radio, newspapers and magazines echo this thought. The government is being portrayed as an able and trustworthy problem solver ready to right the wrongs of every shape and size. This is what passes for a good candidate these days, a money pump. The reasons a candidate gives for why they should be elected is that they will fund this or provide money for that. Ask yourself, where does this money come from? The old adage of "robbing Peter to pay Paul is a great way to get Paul's vote", is where we are today whenever elections are held. This an erroneous assumption that arises from ignorance. When government becomes the avenger of economic disparity and seeks to "make things fair" by taxing the rich to give to the poor, that action will cause the rich to scale back their successful ways to avoid taxes and unmotivate the poor from working because they will loose their government handout.

Your tax dollars at work?
Additionally, government is in the business of corporate welfare. The quid pro quo of campaign dollars that these corporations give politicians is manifested in the following examples. McDonalds corporation really needs millions of our tax dollars to advertise overseas don't they? Disney is hurting for money too, the Interior department "helps" them with their fireworks displays for the amount of $300,000 a year. This is but a small sample of what is going on with our tax dollars. Some other items include $400 million per year going to Planned Parenthood, $175 million annually to the morally twisted National Endowment for the Arts and $327.2 million to PBS and NPR.
Where will it end?

Learning from our history...
The facts of history remind us that when early American's fought their way free of the British crown and King George III, they did so for the purpose of LIMITING government's role and place in their lives. They did not fight the war of DEPENDENCE they fought the war of INDEPENDENCE. The rejection of the stamp act and the Boston tea party were actions taken over small taxes when compared to the spider web of taxes contemporary Americans are forced to pay. The property taxes we pay today, for example, would NEVER be accepted by those that fought for freedom and started this country! It is a gross misrepresentation of history and human nature to suggest that government is a benign "problem solver".

In light of this, the U.S. Constitution originally contained strong protections against unlimited taxes. An income tax, as we have it today, was not permissible, and for many years scholars understood that Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution granted to Congress only 18 specific powers such as the ability "to raise and support Armies." With the addition of the 16th Amendment in 1913 the government (that trustworthy institution) authorized an income tax without limitations.

The Supreme Court in the 1930s enfeebled the doctrine of enumerated powers by ruling that the government's spending power was "not limited by the direct grants of legislative power found in the Constitution." With the Constitution's original tax limits traitorously removed, taxes were then made "legal" by our "representative" government's "authority". The National taxpayers union created, for purposes of illustration, Tax Freedom Day, to demonstrate the day of the year when an individual theoretically stops paying their taxes and starts working for themselves. This benchmark went from January 30 in 1913 to May 6 last year. With this, federal tax collections have climbed more than 175,000%.

Risky business
Yet, in FULL knowledge of this, we are told a tax cut would be "risky". Who would this be risky for? Would it be risky for our collectivist government (the rulers) in such a way that, as the taste of tax freedom is experienced by the people (the ruled) such would incrementally generate an even greater appetite for more tax freedom from the beleaguered producer class? This is the definition of "risky" from the elitist president who legally sought to define what the word "is" meant. This measure of deceit and trickery isn't limited to tryst worthy Bill, the other operatives of the ruling class, Daschle, Gephart, et al, speak the same language as they seek to deceive as many as they can. The poll fetish, incumbents of both parties also hold to the same.

Give yourself a raise
In summation, Thomas Jefferson said that the government that governs best also governs the least. Limited government means greater personal freedom for all of us. It also means that the government will not "rob Peter to pay Paul". It also means that you can give yourself a raise. Please keep this in mind when you wonder why the cost of living is so high and you have to decide between a new car or a used one. Consider it when you would like to send your children to private school but just can't afford it. Think about it when you would like to move to a better neighborhood for your family's sake but don't have that option because your money is going to an insatiable government's tax dollar appetite. This is real, this is what is going on and we need to vote it to an end. The question is will you choose to do so?