House Republicans: U.S. Representative Paul Ryan- 'Who Should Control Medicare?'

Source:House Republicans- U.S. Representative Paul Ryan (Republican, Wisconsin) speaking to Georgetown University in Washington, about Medicare.

"House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan speaks at Georgetown University." 

From the House Republicans

Just on a personal note first: Representative Paul Ryan who is Chairman of the House Budget Committee, has this tendency to say when he's giving a speech either outside of the U.S. House or on the House floor, or in committee when talking about a particular: "Democrats like to talk about (fill in the blank) we welcome this debate, we need this debate." 

What Representative Ryan is essentially advocating for is a competition or free market of ideas about which side (meaning Republicans or Democrats) have the best ideas and who ultimately should be in charge of government in Washington: Republicans or Democrats. 

Representative Ryan is not talking about even though the Republican Party currently only controls the lower chamber of Congress and has a Democratic Senate and White House to confront, how best can Republicans and Democrats work with each other (and this sounds corny) for the good of the country. But instead wants to go back to the good ole days of the 2000s (as Republicans see it) when the Republican Party was in charge of everything in Washington.

As far as Medicare, Chairman Ryan leaves out a very important point about his own Medicare plan and that might be because this provision is very unpopular and is something that both House and Senate Democrats, as well as President Barack Obama will use and are already using against House and Senate Republicans, as well as Mitt Romney. Current seniors would be able to keep their traditional Medicare, as well as Baby Boomers who are close to retirement. But his Generation X, which is also my generation, would be forced into a voucher system once we're eligible to retire and lose real choice in how we pay for our health care in our senior years.

Hoover Institution: Uncommon Knowledge With Peter Robinson- Christopher Hitchens & William F. Buckley: The Sixties

Source:Hoover Institution- Conservative writer William F. Buckley, on Uncommon Knowledge with Peter Robinson, in 1998.

"In this rereleased interview from 1998, Christopher Hitchens, a contributing editor of Vanity Fair magazine, is a self-proclaimed radical.  William F. Buckley, Jr., editor-at-large of National Review magazine, is one of the most noted conservatives in the country.  During the 1960’s, Hitchens enjoyed the counter-culture, whereas Buckley was one of the founders of the politically conservative counter counter-culture.  Thirty years later (1998), and Hitchens and Buckley are still wrangling over the Revolution."

From the Hoover Institution

This might sound warped or insane or something but I'm going to argue that two of the most divisive decades America has ever had are the 1960s and 1980s had more in common, then they were different.

The 1960s a decade that Liberals generally speak in positive terms. (and I'm one of them) And the 1980s a decade that Conservatives tend to speak in positive terms. I'm a Liberal but I generally look at the 1980s in positive terms, except for the music. I say this because both decades were about freedom but to a certain extent in different forms.

The 1960s was about freedom, thats what Hippies and the civil rights movement we're fighting for. And this was also one of the reasons why so many Americans were killed as a result in a big way because of what they were fighting for. Jack Kennedy, Malcolm X, Martin King, Bobby Kennedy and others, were killed because of they stood for, which was freedom.

The 1980s was also a decade about freedom, economic freedom but also social freedom, with the Reagan Revolution as well as the ending of the Cold War with Russia.

The Hippie Generation was an anti-establishment generation: people who were bored by the 1950s. And how culturally conservative the country was and didn't want to live that type of life themselves. And wanted to be themselves, not be part of the establishment. Even if the Establishment saw them as weird, freakish or even Un-American, all charges that were thrown at them.

In the mid and late 1970s, we had a tax revolt in America, especially in California. People who were tired of big government and high taxes, people who believed that for what they were being taxed. They weren't getting much in return. The strange thing is that even though there was this movement going on against big government, there was another movement going on that started about the same time that pushed for another form of big government, which is where Religious-Right came to prominence and power in America.

Democrats tend to love the 1960s and dislike the 1980s just as much politically. Whereas Republicans tend to hate the 1960s and love the 1980s. But what both sides tend not to be aware of, is that both decades both had one big thing in common, they were both about freedom, not just for some people but the entire country. They just went about trying to accomplish these things in different ways.

Reagan Foundation: 'A Reagan Forum With Dennis Prager'

Source:Reagan Foundation- Right-wing radio talk show host Dennis Prager, at the Reagan Foundation.

"A Reagan Forum with Dennis Prager on Friday, May 1, 2012. Opening remarks made by John Heubusch, Executive Director of the Ronald Reagan Foundation & Institute.

For more information on the ongoing works of President Reagan's Foundation, please visit:Reagan Foundation." 

From the Reagan Foundation

Dennis Prager, a right-wing radio talk show host, is right about one thing. The right-wing and the Republican Party has forgotten about Ronald Reagan and what Reagan conservatism actually is and what it means. President Reagan left the White House in January, 1989 just twenty-two years ago. And today probably wouldn't recognize the Republican Party today. I'm not a mind-reader, but I'm just basing that on where he was politically when he left the White House. And where the GOP is today, remember what Ron Reagan said.

"Government isn't the solution, but the problem." But yet you had two Republican presidential candidates in 2011 come out in favor of constitutional amendments to ban pornography and same-sex marriage. Actually looking to expand Federal Governmental power in Michelle Bachmann and Rick Santorum. Rick Santorum, saying "why do we need fifty marriage laws? We should just have one standard." Which is the argument that today's Progressives make when they are talking about more Federal power in education. "Education is a national Issue, we don't need fifty different standards when it comes to education."

I'm a Liberal Democrat, so obviously I don't agree with President Reagan on everything. And I'm not an expert on President Reagan either. But his message was pretty clear and simple. "Big government is the problem and we don't have enough individual liberty." His message wasn't just about economic freedom or religious freedom or political freedom. But his message was about individual freedom. That people should be free to live their own lives. Religious and Neoconservatives today, who call President Reagan a Liberal, except on economic and foreign policy, take a different approach to politics.

"That individual freedom is a threat to national security." Or as Michelle Bachmann said, "same-sex marriage is the number one threat to our national security". If people have a lot of individual freedom, they may do things that people don't like and wouldn't do. And would become threats to our national security, according to today's Neoconservatives. Or as Rick Santorum put it, "our national morality." The Reagan Foundation and the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library, is what Republicans and people who claim be Conservatives today should be looking at and studying. Ron Reagan considered himself a Libertarian as late of 1975. He was elected President in 1980. Libertarians people that Religious and Neoconservatives consider to be immoral or Un-American. Because they believe in freedom and are individualist, not collectivist.

CSPAN: U.S. Representative Paul Ryan- 'America's Enduring Promise'

Source:House Republicans- U.S. Representative Paul Ryan (Republican, Wisconsin) speaking at Georgetown University, in Washington.

"Paul Ryan: America's Enduring Promise" 

From the House Republicans

I agree with Representative Ryan (Chairman of the House Budget Committee) that the national debt and deficit are serious issues that have to be addressed. I just don't know how you erase a trillion-dollar deficit by gutting Food Assistance and Public Housing, which are only about 50 billion-dollars a year annually in total, while not investing in infrastructure, and keeping corporate welfare, borrowing more money, for more tax cuts for wealthy investors, and adding to the defense budget, without paying for any of those investments, gets us to a balanced budget. 

And I don't Chairman Ryan knows how you get America back to place where our economy is growing faster than our national debt and we are able to get our Federal budget back to balance, either. Otherwise he would've explained that by now. Which are issues he's been working on in the House last 5 years as Ranking Member and now Chairman of the Budget Committee.

Live Green Tennessee: 'Prison Farming'

Source:Live Green TN- Sergeant Doug Griffith: Tennessee Department of Corrections.

"We think its great news that several Tennessee Prisons are choosing to Go Green, and Live Green Tennessee recently visited Sergeant Doug Griffith of the Tennessee Department of Corrections. 

Griffith explained a recycling program that turns leftover food from five prisons into rich, fertile mulch thats then used on a 100-acre kitchen garden. The inmates working the farm save the prison system—and you, the taxpayer—money...

But more important is the responsibility, the fresh air, and the opportunity to learn practical, employable and life-long skills to help trustees adjust to life upon release." 

From Live Green Tennessee

Prisons are obviously designed to punish people who commit felons in America and who hurt innocent people either intentionally or by being very irresponsible, like drunk driving. But that punishment should be about taking the inmates freedom away and getting them out of society as long as they represent a threat to society. 

Punishment can't be the only thing that prisons should be about, otherwise they and the inmates simply become too expensive for taxpayers. The time that inmates do in prison should also be productive for taxpayers, the prisons and staff itself, but the inmates themselves, because most of them eventually leave prison and return to society. Educating our inmates and putting them to work doing real jobs and like producing food for the prisons, is a great way to rehabilitate the inmates in prison.

Washington Times: Dr. Milton R. Wolf- 'Kathleen, I’ve Got a Feeling You’re Still in Kansas'

Source:Ballotpedia- Dr. Milton R. Wolf.

Source:The Daily Post

"Liberals are a curious breed. They actually believe the government can mandate you into prosperity. They wave a magic wand, and the universe bends to their whim. At the end of each day, they rest their weary heads blissfully - willfully - unaware of the damage they cause.

Witness Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Kathleen Sebelius. Before she was wielding the iron fist of power granted to her by Obamacare, she was the Kansas’ governor and, before that, the Kansas insurance commissioner. Health insurance mandates were her stock in trade, and with each new government dictate, Kansans saw their premiums increase. No matter how well-intentioned, the very nature of a mandate is that it forces consumers to buy something they don’t want, or why the need for a mandate? It’s unavoidable, then, that Kansas families’ costs increased and many simply could no longer afford insurance.

The net result? Mrs. Sebelius chased nearly a dozen health insurance companies out of the state, leaving behind 40,000 Kansans who no longer had health insurance. That President Obama would choose her to head HHS and implement Obamacare is telling and terrifying." 

From The Washington Times 

Replace Liberals with Leftists, especially Socialists and I probably agree with everything that Dr. Wolf said in his column. But he's wrong about Liberals and the Affordable Care Act. And I understand a doctor being wrong about liberal since he's not a political scientist or philosopher. But it's the Affordable Care Act which was designed by Center-Right Republicans in the early 1990s and signed into law in Massachusetts by Governor Mitt Romney in 2006, that I'm having a hard time figuring out how the good doctor could be so wrong about Romney/ObamaCare.

“Constitutional Accountability Center interviewed several tea partiers in front of the Supreme Court during oral arguments in the Obamacare cases in March 2012. Many of them feel strongly that the law is unconstitutional, and many of them proved that they have absolutely no idea about what the Constitution actually says.” 

Source:CO-Progressives- covering Tea Party opposition to ObamaCare in 2012.

From CO Progressives 

This video could be very slanted and that CO Progressives went to the American Dumbass Convention (also known as Dumbasses of America) that was gathering in Washington and found the Dumbasses that know the very least about the U.S. Constitution and just decided to interview those people. Instead of interviewing people who’ve at least heard of Article 1 of the U.S. Constitution and can actually explain it. COP talked to people talked who apparently aren’t even aware of why they oppose ObamaCare (also known as the Affordable Care Act) let alone can articulate why they think it’s unconstitutional.

Hoover Institution: Uncommon Knowledge With Peter Robinson- ‘Pat Buchanan on Suicide of a Superpower’

Source:Hoover Institution- right-wing columnist and author Patrick J. Buchanan, talking to Peter Robinson.

Source:The FreeState 

“This week on Uncommon Knowledge, author and commentator Pat Buchanan discusses the disintegration of the United States as a superpower and a united nation.”

From Uncommon Knowledge 

What Pat Buchanan is essentially doing here and doing in his book is making the same argument that his fellow right-wing columnist and author Ann Coulter makes, which is immigration, especially from Latin America and Asia , and the third world, is ruining America. That non-European immigration and even non-Northern European immigration is changing the culture and complexion of America.

Not calling Pat Buchanan a racist (necessarily) but he is a Nationalist and even a European-American-Nationalist (if you want to put it in ethnic and racial terms) who represents a faction of the country that believes that the Anglo-Saxons (English Americans) and other Northern European-Americans are the real Americans. Arguing that they built America and made it great and these outsiders (meaning Latin-Americans and Asians) are coming to America to escape from the third-world and living off and even stealing what the Anglo-Saxons and other Northern-Europeans created in America.

What the Pat Buchanan’s and Ann Coulter’s of the world want to do is take America back to pre-1965 when most of the immigrants in America were Northern-Europeans of British, Nordic, and Germanic ancestry and where even Jews, Slavs, Italians, and Spanish-Europeans, had a hard time emigrating to America. If you want to know why Pat Buchanan is known as a cultural warrior, its because he makes these arguments and pits cultural’s versus other cultural’s.