Federal Government Control

When the framers of the Constitution created this special document it was meant as a road map for the Federal Republic they imagined. This Republic was intended to work for the betterment of the member states to represent their common ideals, to stand for them in the international arena, and to coordinate their common defense.

The states would in turn control the happenings inside their own borders based on their individual cultures, ideals, and desires.

Over the course of the last 233 years, that framework the Constitutional Congress devised has been nit-picked and slowly eroded to the point where the elected officials in Washington feel it their job to control every aspect of our lives. Gone is the belief that the states know best how to handle their own affairs as originally set out in the Tenth Amendment.

Instead of the framers original meaning, we now have an oligarchy in Washington that believes that the common good of all Americans is what they were elected to rule over. The framers would surely disagree and point out to our modern representatives that their job is to represent the states in common issues and prepare for a national defense, not to solve all the ills of the various states, cities, and citizenry.

Our Federal Republic is set up not to be the problem solver for the failings of every facet of our society. At some point the individual states have to stand up and fix their own problems – or fail and start over. But regardless of whether a state fails or thrives, it should not be the Federal Republic who steps in to save them.

The Eyes of Texas Are Upon You,
Bill

No Check Till I’m Dead – Maybe?

I told my wife the other night that I would have to be dead before I accepted a stimulus check from the Government. We lived through 14 years in the Navy and we could have received food stamps for 9 of those years but we refused. We were determined to make it on our own.

Today, we have a comfortable life and I would be one who would more likely have to pay for someone else’s stimulus check rather than get one myself. It irritates me that others will accept this money, some never having paid taxes in their lives, and not think twice about it. But look out, like anything else the federal government gets their hands in, the system is screwed up.

Recently, a New York woman, expecting a stimulus check of her own, opened the envelope only to find a stimulus check for her father, Romolo Romonini. Now I know, sometimes things get delivered to the wrong person, but this ladies father was dead. Yes, apparently he had made the same pledge I made to my wife – well, not really. It seems Mr. Romonini died some 34 years ago…in Italy.

The Social Security Administration is sending out the checks and I will give them this, at least this gentleman was a U. S. citizen. The problem is, he left for Italy in 1933 as a U. S. Citizen and only came back once afterwards for a seven month visit in 1969. He was a citizen, but never registered for social security and was never on their rolls.

So how did he get a check, well brace yourself. According to the Social Security Administration he is not alone. Of the 52 million checks sent out, between 8,000 to 10,000 will go to dead people because there is no record of their death. That is rather humorous since not only did they not have a record of Mr. Romonini’s death, but they had no record of him ever registering for social security in the first place.

I guess, looking back at that promise to my wife, I better be careful. If a check shows up in my mailbox I will be looking over my shoulder because the grim reaper can’t be too far behind.

The checks in the mail,
Bill

Margaret Sanger

Late this April, while speaking before the U. S. House Committee on Foreign Affairs on taxpayer funded abortion, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton made reference to how she saw her admiration of Thomas Jefferson in the same light as her admiration of Margaret Sanger. Now I know most people thought nothing of this, just as they probably no very little of Margaret Sanger, but I think it important to look at Sanger and to know who she was and what she stood for.

Secretary Clinton maintains that her admiration for Sanger comes from Mrs. Sanger’s efforts in the field of expanding the rights of women. To a degree, she has a point. Mrs. Sanger was an ardent supporter of the women’s suffrage movement and an advocate of legalized abortion; however, if you look at the whole of her beliefs, I think most of us would be hard-pressed to look at Mrs. Sanger with anything more than distaste.

Ms. Sanger was an ardent pro-abortion supporter (although she believed in privately funded apportion), socialist, racist, and a staunch believer in the “science” of Eugenics. I am sure most folks know what socialism and racism is, but what about Eugenics. According to Webster’s Dictionary, Eugenics is the science that deals with the improvement (as a means of human mating) of hereditary qualities of a race or breed. Sound familiar – yes, that is the same “science” the Third Reich used in establishing their “Final Solution.”

In her book “Pivot of Civilization,” Sanger argued the three points of her Eugenic beliefs.
First, she called for the elimination of “human weeds,” examples of those being immigrants of Slavic, Italian, Jewish, black and catholic heritages.
Second, she called for the segregation of “morons, misfits, and maladjusted.”
Third, she called for the sterilization of “genetically inferior races.”

In the same book she further made her point by saying that many of the people in these three groups were “an increasingly spawning class of human beings who never should have been born at all.” These were the same sort of claims and arguments she made in front of many organizations including the KKK.

In part due to Mrs. Sanger’s influence, several of the leading families during the early 1900’s used their own influence, and money, to help establish clinics that studied Eugenics. These studies and resulting “programs” attempted to show how the use of this “science” could help make the human race more genetically superior. These influential individuals also used their influence to help build programs outside the U.S. including the Kaiser Wilhelm Institutes for Psychology and Eugenics that were later used for research and development by the Third Reich.

I am not sure why Secretary Clinton chose Margaret Sanger as a person worth her admiration. Maybe she didn’t know the entire history of Margaret Sanger. Maybe she was just going by the publicity used by Planned Parenthood in their awarding of the Margaret Sanger Award (of which Hillary Clinton was the 2009 recipient). Incidentally, I looked at the list of awardees from the past and it is the oddest assortment of bedfellows I have seen in a while.

Mrs. Clinton said she admired Sanger for her work to help women to gain the freedom to make choices of their own. Mrs. Clinton also elaborated that, like Thomas Jefferson, it is hard to judge historical figures because they are all flawed. I get it, Jefferson owned slaves, but how can you compare that flaw with Sanger’s who advocated the EXTERMINATION of the minority races here in America. Is that the judgment we want in our Secretary of State?

Gute Nacht,
Bill