Our Shining City On The Hill Is In Plain Site, Can We Push Her Across The Finish Line?

We are nearing the finish line. Our quest to regain our Republic is in plain site. We still have a long road to hoe but the vision of our Shining City on the Hill is a glorious vision that is within our grasp. America is a great nation and most of the people who live here understand what it means to be free, to have liberties and to know why and how we have them today.

“Peace Through Strength” we are a nation that has stood by this adage since it’s conception many, many years ago. We have fought great battles, we have made many mistakes but America still stands. As an example to the rest of the world, we are a beacon of Freedom. To those people who understand the concept of a free country, it is imperative to remain loyal to the ideals and the foundations constructed by our Founding Fathers. The blood that has been shed over centuries and the many lives lost are a constant reminder that freedom is more than just a word, it comes with a heavy price.

There are those that believe that we can remain all of these things without exhibiting and showing the rest of the world that we are a strong and mighty force to be reckoned with and they believe that compromise and tolerance is the answer. They are wrong.

Sadly, the entitlement society of today raises their children to believe that they are owed something for nothing.  This constant misinterpretation of the facts and the progressive ideology has been fed to them most of their lives. In a lot of cases, they are raised in environments that are conducive to that way of thinking and therefore have no other knowledge. Americans have become conditioned to look to the government, to be the answer to all of their problems.

How do we as a society reverse the damage?

After the four years we have endured under the current administration we have a window of opportunity on November 6, 2012. When we as a nation come together and vote for Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan.  The change from a community organizer to a strong  principled leader. A leader with the courage, the competence, the commitment, the conviction and the character to step up and do the things that are right, to accept the future and the legacy for this great republic that’s threatened right now.

Mitt Romney will help redirect this nation back to a limited government with fiscal responsibility and free market solutions. But more importantly, get us away from leadership by entitlement.  He will offer solutions to assist our small businesses, infuse our economy, lower our unemployment numbers, give our Military much deserved and well needed encouragement with a Commander In Chief who will not stand down or leave anyone behind. A Romney administration will reorganize our safety nets so they will be there for our children and most importantly give strength to our National Security.

“We know that peace is the condition under which mankind was meant to flourish. Yet peace does not exist of its own will. It depends on us, on our courage to build it and guard it and pass it on to future generations. George Washington’s words may seem hard and cold today, but history has proven him right again and again. “To be prepared for war,” he said, “is one of the most effective means of preserving peace.” Well, to those who think strength provokes conflict, Will Rogers had his own answer. He said of the world heavyweight champion of his day: “I’ve never seen anyone insult Jack Dempsey.” – President Ronald Reagan

Click Here to Watch Congressman Allen West – First Principles of National Security Video

This country is at a crossroads. We can either continue the path we are going down now and end up a third world country with unimaginable levels of poverty and debt leaving nothing to our children by re-electing Obama. Or, we can elect two men with a real plan for this country that can change that downward spiral and that is Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan.

by T.Grimsley for Allen West Republic

I will not go quietly, I am a patriot.

Definition of patriot: A person who vigorously supports their country and is prepared to defend it against enemies or detractors.

We are not defined by race, creed, ethnicity, religion, wealth, education or political affiliation, but by our devotion to our Creator, and the Liberty He entrusted to us, one and all.

As patriots of the United States of America, we will rise up and be heard. A patriot will not surrender freedom and liberties which are being whittled away by the liberals and fence straddlers who wish to dictate and enslave those rights this nation fought hard to obtain.

As a patriot of this country I will not be swindled by the smears and attacks on my fellow patriot friends and countrymen. I will stand up for the loyal and good left in this nation. I urge you to do the same.

I stand with Congressman Allen West and all patriots united in the cause to ensure we are always that shining city on the hill. Support Strong and sound patriots in the upcoming elections. We made our voices heard in 2010, let us continue in 2012 and beyond. I will not go quietly, will you?

by Tanya Grimsley

 

Rep Allen West – Op-Ed “The Balkanized States of America” Washington Times

Op-Ed by Rep. Allen West

The 56 rebels knew they very well might be hanged for what they were about to do. As lawyers, merchants, farmers and landowners, they had plenty to lose. Fighting against an imperial ruler, they had everything to gain.

They were embarking on an adventure – not only because they were revolting against their own government and fighting outmanned and outgunned against a superior military – but because they were creating a radical approach to self-governance.

The 56 men who signed our Declaration of Independence on July 4, 1776, knew the only way they ever would be successful in their audacious plan was if they stood together. As Benjamin Franklin said at the signing, “if we do not hang together, we shall surely hang separately.”

Our founders shared a unified vision for our nation. They understood that unity of the many was necessary to uphold the sovereignty of the individual and the fundamental, unalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

To ensure the sovereignty of each individual American, our Founding Fathers knew the country would have to be unified on certain principles and values: a limited constitutional government, a free market, a respect for “the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God” and a strong national defense.

Sadly, we are in danger of squandering the precious gift those 56 rebels gave us 236 years ago.

We have become a nation of “special interests” – but what interest can be more special than preserving the greatness of the United States of America and the freedoms of all its citizens?

We have politicians who would rather divide us based on income, gender or race than unite us as Americans. They want citizens to believe that “all men were created equal” really means “all men are entitled to an equal share.” They want their fellow Americans to believe anyone else’s economic success always comes at their own expense.

CONTINUE THIS ARTICLE BY CLICKING HERE: WASHINGTON TIMES

Rep Allen West: Reconciliation is Essential to Protecting American Security

(WASHINGTON)— Congressman Allen West (R-FL) released this statment today:

“Today, my Republican colleagues and I in the United States House of Representatives have voted on and approved a clear and conscise plan that will carry the American economy into the next decade, by trimming $180 billion dollars off of the United States deficit.  These savings are imperative in creating jobs for the American people, by eliminating the massive burden our country’s debt and deficit have placed on American families.

This Reconciliation plan is essential to offset the automatic cuts to our nation’s military set to go into effect in January 2013.  If today’s House approved Reconciliation plan is not passed and put into law, the Department of Defense will see severe 10 percent cuts and shrink to its smallest size since before the Second World War. Under the current sequestration law, the cuts to the nation’s defense capabilities would result in:

  • The smallest ground force since 1940
  • The smallest fleet of ships since 1915
  • The smallest tactical fighter force in the history of the Air Force

At a time when our country is still at war with Afghanistan and facing increased threats from Iran, North Korea, unrest in the Middle East, and a rising China, reducing our military is dangerous, irresponsible and puts the national security of America at risk. With reports even this week of a thrwarted terrorist plan against America, it is absurd to think that reducing our Defense is safe for American families.

In contrast, Democrats have failed to offer any credible solutions to put our country back on track.  Instead, the President insists on taking more money from hardworking families and small businesses while building up the class of economically dependent Americans.  Senate Democrats have failed to pass a budget in more than 1,000 days, a crucial blueprint for going forward, which proves they do not have a plan, or are simply not interested in the future of the American economy.

As one of the only Members of Congress who has actually served on a battlefield, I am increasingly disheartened by the lack of understanding from leaders as to how the United States military functions and or what is needed for its continued success.  The American military cannot continue to be the billpayer for America’s economic hardships and failed policies.  When examining the exorbitant growth of federal government programs in the past ten years, one can see the claims of my Democrat colleagues are wrong, and at times deceptive. As a 22-year Army Veteran, I can attest that if the sequestration cuts are allowed to go through, the effect on the Department of Defense will be a catastrophe. With looming threats from all ends of the globe, now is not the time to politicize our men and women in uniform and put our national security at risk.

House Republicans have created a solution with common sense reforms in today’s Reconciliation package.  I strongly urge my colleagues in the Senate to pass this immediately.  Anyone voting against Reconciliation is saying to our men and women in uniform and their families, that their service, sacrifice, and commitment on the battlefield means nothing.”

For an easy to read slide summing up the deficit reduction totals, click here.

SUPPORT THE ELECTION OF CONGRESSMAN ALLEN WEST TO FLORIDA’S DISTRICT 18

DONATE/VOLUNTEER at AllenWestForCongress.Com

Obama’s Defense Drawdown – Op-Ed by Congressman Allen West

by Congressman Allen West – via Facebook

Mr. President, when will you learn? The military cannot continue to be the billpayer for fiscal irresponsibility. what’s driving 62 % of America’s debt is mandatory spending programs. We don’t need a repeat of task force smith! Read this op-ed for more info:

Wall Street Journal Editorial

Obama’s Defense Drawdown

President Obama yesterday put in a rare appearance at the Pentagon, flanked by the four service chiefs and his Secretary of Defense. Saying that now is the time to cash in a peace dividend, he unveiled plans for a significantly slimmed-down military. This dance was choreographed to convey strength. Everything else about it showed how domestic entitlements are beginning to squeeze the U.S. military.

This self-inflicted attack on defense comes at a strange time. True, the U.S. cut deeply after World War II, Korea, Vietnam and the Cold War—and in each case came to regret it soon enough when new threats emerged. But peace doesn’t characterize our time. Mr. Obama yesterday wielded his familiar line that “the tide of war is receding,” which will please his antiwar base but will come as news to the Marines in Afghanistan or the Navy ships patrolling the tense Strait of Hormuz.

The Pentagon shouldn’t be immune to fiscal scrutiny, yet this Administration has targeted defense from its earliest days and has kept on squeezing. The White House last year settled with Congress on $450 billion in military budget cuts through 2021, on top of the $350 billion in weapons programs killed earlier. Defense spending next year will fall 1% in nominal terms. The Pentagon also faces another $500 billion in possible cuts starting next January under “sequestration,” unless Congress steps in first.

Taken altogether, the budget could shrink by over 30% in the next decade. The Administration projects outlays at 2.7% of GDP in 2021, down from 4.5% last year (which included the cost of Iraq and Afghanistan). That would put U.S. outlays at 1940 levels—a bad year. As recently as 1986, a better year, the U.S. spent 6.2% of GDP on defense with no detrimental economic impact.

What’s different now? The growing entitlement state. The Administration is making a political choice and sparing Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, which are set to hit nearly 11% of GDP by 2020. And that’s before $2.6 trillion for ObamaCare, which will surely cost more.

These entitlements are already crowding out spending on defense and thus reducing America’s global standing, following the tragic path that Europe has taken. The difference is that Europe had the U.S. military in reserve. Who will backstop America?

We’re told that Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, who came into office last summer, says he doesn’t want to go down in history as the man who “hollowed out” America’s military. But the security trade-offs foisted on him by the White House will leave the military a less formidable, ready and dominant force in a still very dangerous world.

Part of the problem is that military personnel costs are exploding on pace to exceed the entire defense budget by 2030, according to Andrew Krepinevich of the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. It’s hard to make the political and moral case to reduce benefits for veterans and soldiers, but here’s where Mr. Panetta could show mettle on Capitol Hill, especially by reforming military health care. The bulk of any defense budget is better spent on equipment, training and research.

Specific cuts will be spelled out in detail in the next Pentagon budget. The Navy, Air Force and Marines are flying old planes and waiting on the next generation F-35 Joint Strike Fighter jet, which comes with stealth technology. Previous Pentagon chief Bob Gates justified ending F-22 purchases by pointing to the F-35. But now the F-35 will likely be further trimmed and delayed.

After a decade of war, all the services need to replace worn-down equipment. U.S. nuclear submarines, missiles and bombers purchased during the Reagan buildup are reaching the end of their service lives. They need to be replaced, but they probably won’t be soon.

Mr. Panetta and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, General Martin Dempsey, tried gamely yesterday to dress up these cuts not as a drawdown but as a “strategic shift.” The Pentagon will spend less on the infantry to nation-build—now so unpopular—and will switch instead to defend the Pacific and new threats from cyberwarfare and in space.

But where are the resources to match the ambitions, such as new ships to patrol the Pacific? The planned reduction in troop strength is an “acceptable risk” (in General Dempsey’s words) since this Administration doesn’t plan to fight ground wars or pursue any Afghan-style “stabilization” missions. Too bad Commanders-in-Chief don’t get to choose history’s next surprise.

The real message to the world is that the Administration wants to scale back U.S. leadership. This was part of the rationale behind the White House’s reluctance to take the initiative in the Middle East last year, as well as the attempts to mollify Iran’s mullahs and Russia’s Vladimir Putin. Now the Administration plans to draw down troops and America’s profile in Africa, Latin America and Europe. The Navy can easily match Iran’s threats in the Persian Gulf now, but what about in 10 years?

President Obama ended his remarks yesterday by quoting Dwight Eisenhower on “the need to maintain balance in and among national programs.” The line comes from his 1961 Farewell Address, better known as the “military-industrial complex” speech. Mr. Obama’s new defense posture brings to mind another Eisenhower line, offered two years earlier: “Weakness in arms often invites aggression.”

 

Poverty and Welfare – The Creation of the Entitlement Class by Providence Crowder 1 of 4

by Providence Crowder : Contributor to Contagious Transformation

Understanding the Democrat and Republican Parties Through Their Own Words

 

Political parties are comprised of individuals.  Within a particular party, the individuals may vary to some degree on how they view particular issues.  Corporately, however, political parties set platforms that generally represent the ideologies of the people that make up that party.  In closely comparing the party platforms of the two major political parties in this nation, one can better determine which party best represents his or her moral, social, and economic convictions and make an informed choice based on that persuasion.

How the Democrat and Republican parties address the social ill of poverty is worth examining. Poverty is a reality in this nation and abroad, and neither political party diminishes that reality nor seeks to intentionally do injustice to the economically disadvantaged.  However, the parties have differing ways in which they approach the poverty issue.  I have compared two years from each party’s platform; years in which they specifically addressed Poverty, Welfare, and Welfare Reform.  There were other years in which these issues had been addressed, but for simplicity, I used just two; 1968 and 1980.   After each year’s bulleted platform summary, I recapped the conclusions of each party in my own words.

These are the parties, in their own words:

CONTINUE THIS ARTICLE BY CLICKING HERE: Contagious Transformation

Subscribe to Contagious Transformation with just your email address you won’t be disappointed!!

Follow Stacy Swimp on twitter: @stacyswimp

Friend Stacy Swimp on Facebook: Stacy M. Swimp

 

FOLLOW ME ON TWITTER TOO!!!! : @luvGodncountry