If I were a newly elected “Conservative” Republican my agenda would be….

*First and Foremost concentrate on National Security and anti-terrorism / Border Security and illegal immigration. (largest real physical threat to American Citizens).

*Second, economy and entitlements. Start by making the Bush tax cuts permanent, then introduce additional tax cuts for small business. (boost both job creation and consumer confidence).

*Next, roll up the sleeves and start repealing unconstitutional entitlements starting with Obama Care working back in time.

*Follow with Education reform. (Take on the union monopoly on our tax money under the guise of helping the children).

And last but not least…

*Tax Reform (Start by limiting the IRS’s authority while moving away from the confiscatory income taxes and more toward a flat tax or national sales tax.)

 Thanks for your Vote. 

Antonio A. Clemente For Congress in 2014

The video obtained and released by Breitbart is a brief clip of a forty-five minute speech where Mrs. Sherrod stated that she had used race in the past as an unofficial qualification to receive a fair amount of government aid and used the example of a white farmer she purposefully did not help to the best of her ability.

The blogo-sphere and many media outlets immediately excoriated Mrs. Sherrod and commentators such as Bill O’Reilly also called for her dismissal or resignation. The White House responded in kind and immediately pressured the agriculture department head to release Mrs. Sherrod.

The immediate response by the left wing media and Mrs. Sherrod was to point out that the full video was not released and excoriated Breitbart for not releasing the whole video and accused him of providing misinformation, then commenced to accuse the whole of conservative media for jumping to conclusions and blamed Fox News for reporting on the story; absolutely no criticism of the White House, for not investigating the allegations itself and for its knee jerk reactions to media outlets.

The rest of the video, which according to the left and even many confused fools on the right, is supposed to exonerate Mrs. Sherrod as simply just explaining her past prejudices and how she has grown to overcome them.

Okay, so lets examine the rest of the video.

She does go on to explain that she no longer practices this sort of racism in her position, however, she later goes on to comment on the health care debate and those who oppose health care reform. She makes it clear that she feels those who oppose health care legislation are racists.

Note that at the time she made these statements the main opponents to health care legislation were the Tea Party protesters, conservative radio and media, and the Republican minorities in both Houses. Now, that opposition has grown to an overwhelming majority of Americans as a whole. Guess we are all just racists.

The rest of this speech does nothing of the sort to exonerate Mrs. Sherrod but rather, is more damning than the original clip released by Breitbart.

What’s astounding is the willingness of those on the left and a few apologists on the right to paint the conservative media as unfair and jumping to conclusions by not being all-inclusive when reporting. Demanding the whole video be released to provide better context but at the same time ignoring the portions of the video when Mrs. Sherrod indirectly calls Republicans, Bush, and Tea Parties racist.

The whole video exemplifies the Obama Administration’s dream: have teams of bureaucrats who agree with wealth redistribution policies as well as redistribution based on race. This would explain the seemingly knee jerk reaction to pressure Mrs. Sherrod’s firing. The White House has to distance itself from real world examples of these army of bureaucrats, whose goals do not reflect the sentiments of freedom loving Americans, but rather to pursue more and more control while implementing redistribution based on race as well as implementing and complicating race politics.

In short the entirety of the Shirley Sherrod video not only exemplifies Mrs. Sherrod as a racist in the past but also, she exemplifies her continued racism and her willingness to be a race baiter. Moreover, all of this is directly reflective of liberal fringe behavior as well as many policies supported by the Obama White House.

Race politics has reared its ugly head once again in America and is now in forefront confronting Americans more and more on a daily bases, thanks to our ‘post-racial’ president who has failed miserably to mend the racial divide amongst citizens of this country but, rather is driving a wedge in it by painting illegal immigration as a ‘civil rights’ issue.  All the while, not standing up for the civil rights of the people who were shouted at and called racial slurs in Philadelphia during the November 08’ elections nor repudiating the actions taken that day by those individuals, what-so-ever.  The DOJ not filing suit against the new black panther King Shabazz for voter intimidation all the while simultaneously filing suit against the state of Arizona for its attempt to control illegal immigration, as well as the anti-tea party rhetoric that is consistently being insinuated by both the white house and the liberal media seems to be too methodically convergent to ignore the inherent political parallels. 

The new black panthers are now provided a forum by media outlets simply because they demand time on television in order to spew their hateful racist ideology for the American masses to view.  All in defense of a reprehensible despicable man who stood outside of a polling station, holding a baton and shouting racially charged sentiments at potential voters on Election Day.  There is no rational defense for these actions and the reluctance of many on the left to immediately reject this behavior displays fully their own hypocritical racist notions.  Although the idea of these demonic people actually reaching a wider audience then they otherwise normally would is utterly repugnant, it is impossible to address their hateful rhetoric without allowing audiences to view it first for themselves.

Americans as a whole reject these fringe dwellers whose only reason for being is to deflect individual responsibilities and shortcomings onto the whole of society and to play on past events that were deplorable and utterly reprehensible yet an undeniable part of human and world history. 

Thanks to Americas founding however, and through a document like the Declaration of Independence, which established that the individual is free and bound only by natural law; not to mention a costly civil war, which almost tore the nation apart years later, has slavery been vanquished as a historical main stay in nation state economies. Too often is it forgotten that if not for America’s founding and the principals instilled by Americans since slavery would have had no real philosophical or moral opponent in world history.

Spitefully calling whites “crackers” and conservative blacks “uncle tom’s” is not a viable political stance nor does it belong in the same arena with a rational and responsible discussion of race and politics.  What is even more inappropriate is doing it at a polling place where there is supposed to be no intimidation of any kind especially in an attempt to skew results toward one candidate or another; let alone based solely on skin color.

To add insult to injury the DOJ has decided to ignore this radical action in favor of concentrating on the State of Arizona, not to help alleviate their illegal immigration problem but to oppose Arizona, who is only attempting to enforce federal law as well as protect themselves; calling Arizona’s law ‘racist’ to boot.  More over, if not for conservative news sources and Fox News this story would be allowed to fade into the analogs of the rampant reverse racism that has become today’s mandate on American culture. 

To be male, white, and maintain a reasonable income has become increasingly unfashionable and white males are the most demonized group of individuals on the planet today.  To this point I’m sure the new black panthers would be quick to say;

“Rightly so! That’s because crackers have all the power and force their whiteness on all people of color.” 

If by forcing whiteness on people you mean ‘world history’ or ‘western civilization’ then you are not actually interested in history, but rather are interested in blaming others for your own personal insecurities.  This psychological behavior is interesting when examined briefly. 

One notices that these insecurities run deep and are wide spread and are likely a direct result of the liberal nanny-state redistribution that has enslaved generations of these individuals to crime and poverty by creating and nurturing an utter dependence on the state for their sustenance.  The anger of the new black panthers if painted in this light would be understandable however, their anger is obviously misplaced and they do more harm than good and contribute greatly to race tensions in our society rather than helping to alleviate it especially when they blindly blame ‘whitey.’ 

Their anger should be with the progressive policies adopted by both parties in Washington over the past 80-60 years and the rapid advancement of the welfare state.  The welfare state mentality is one that expects one group to be taken care of at the expense of all. 

Also political correctness, an oxymoron in this context, mandates that any one who is of European or Anglo decent automatically has too much power simply by virtue of being white; as evidenced by the implementing of legalities like quota systems and affirmative action, making lawful the favoring one over another simply based on color of skin.  This is institutional racism and we are witnessing the consequences of sixty years of attempted liberal social engineering.  Liberal polices from abortion to redistribution have done more to hurt black individuals, communities and families than your average American tax paying citizen has.   

The left is always quick to use race for their political ends and by doing so, so transparently doing time and time again they show their true nature of racism which runs deep through the veins of the Democratic party from its days of the confederate old south days to its present day tactics of demanding tolerance for all and under only extreme conditions are you to reject any one, except white males of course. This is all supposed to create a warm fuzzy feeling of utopia were we are all equal in everything all the time.  Equality sounds so good but its context here means everything.  Equality of ‘everything’… is that even possible? 

Who other than the All Mighty has the power to equivocate justly and impartially?  More importantly, who other than the All Mighty do you trust to perform this daunting task of manufacturing utopia?  No one individual of group of individuals are capable of doing that which God has already taken into account. 

We currently reside in Gods utopia and we should be content to do so rather than incessantly lamenting circumstances and ignoring the wisdom of Gods self-evident truths.  This is why we have a Declaration of Independence that establishes that only God can confer rights, and is a stark recognition that man is only a part of nature and subject to the laws of nature before that of any government.  It declares that natural rights are “self-evident” and that God and only God can create and enforce the laws of nature that govern human behavior.

Now we have the NAACP condemning the tea party protesters as racist and demanding that tea party ‘officials’ (of which there are none) denounce the ‘racist’ element in its ranks.  I have attended several tea parties and I have yet to hear or witness any racially charged criticisms of Obama or toward any one for that matter.  Most if not all are there to protest the tax and spend politicians as well as redistributive entitlement policies. 

This attempt to paint tea parties as if there are racist amongst them is flat out false and despicable for the NAACP to be making these accusations with out any evidence; hearsay is not evidence by the way. 

Notice how the NAACP comes out now, prior to the midterm elections. This is a coordinated attack on average everyday Americans such as the tea party protesters and attempts to paint them as equivalent to fringe dwellers like the new black panthers are.  These two factions could not be farther from on another in tactics, organization, and message. 

The tea party is not a conglomeration of any particular group of individuals.  The attempt to paint the tea party protests, as a ‘white’ thing is laughable and as a ‘racist white’ thing is utterly absurd.  The demographics of the tea party reflect the demographics of America as a whole.  The idea behind the new black panthers is nothing other than the advancement of one color over another, certainly not the advancement of America.

However, to talk about ‘demographics’ and race is counterintuitive when one is talking about the Tea parties.  The whole idea behind the Tea parties is to protest against frivolous federal spending and the burdensome taxation that follows and calling for the reform thereof for all tax paying Americans.  We all pay taxes no matter the color of your skin.  So when government spends like drunken Marxists taxpayers are going to ask questions because they know that the money has to come from them first before the government can spend it or doll it out to their favorite, concocted constituent group(s). 

The tea party has no organization, no one individual leader or group of leaders nor dose it have any militants, with batons, standing in front of polling places staring people down on election day.  If, in some bizarre-o-world that happens, I guarantee the Obama justice department will not drop the case and sweep it under the rug as they have done with King Shabazz but rather pursue swift and harsh judgment on them racist ‘crackers’.

So in reality for the past ten years our representatives have been “growing our community” at an unprecedented pace all the while being totally dependent on the Nanny State to supplement our “growth”.   To be clear, when I say “growth” I am not only referring to the size of our community but more importantly, the spending that coincides with that rapid expansion of the municipality.  It is implied in the newsletter that state funds are not somehow tax payer monies by stating that “state aid and other sources account for most of the revenue in our budget, whereas the taxes you pay account for only a fraction of that total”.  So, we are to believe that because it’s called “state aid” that it somehow magically appears with out coming from tax payers first? 

The graphs that accompany the letter nicely prove my point.  The letter admittedly states that “costs increase but state aid shrinks”.  This begs the question why have costs increased?  I know that “cost” as they put it, I like to call it “spending”, has nothing to do with the fact that state monies have been decreased.  The decrease in “state aid”, however, empirically highlights the spending spree that has taken place over the past decade and the woes that are to come as a result, including a $610 tax increase on every $169,460 of property value to cover the loss of revenue from delinquent taxes, $47,504 increase in pension payments, and a 20% increase in health insurance.

Don’t buy the line that our current economic situation is simply due to state aid cuts and that it has nothing to do with the ten years of spending that put us where we are. 

That said, the layoffs of a few municipality employees is regrettable and we wish them the best of luck in the private sector.  Getting the current municipal employees to pay 1.5% of their health benefits is a great start and actually one of newly elected Governor Chris Christie’s main initiatives proposed in his Cap 2.5 budget control legislation which would cap any property tax increases to no more than a 2.5% increase over the pervious year as well as asking public employees to pitch in a meager 1.5% of their health coverage, up from zero percent for state employees. 

The taxes that are coming are going to hurt and make worse our current situation.  Apparently we suffer from rampant tax delinquency because people just cannot afford the current level of taxation and the spending.  Their solution, add more taxes to that burden to cover their increased cost/spending. 

Furthermore, the pie chart included with the newsletter illustrates the amount of taxes allocated for specific purposes.  I would just like all to note the size of the portions we are currently spending on social education. The size of the education spending portion on this pie chart resembles something like Pac Man eating the pill.  Sixty-three percent of the coming tax increase, according to the pie chart, will be allocated for social education.  This means that although some sacrifices have already been made by a few individuals it shows that more cuts are needed in order to truly reign in spending and offset the decreases in state aid. 

Do not allow incumbents to simply act like they are new players in this.  Take notice that 63% of the proposed $610 tax increase to come is allocated for social education and compare that to the 65% growth of our community in the last 10 years and one can see clearly why costs are rising and rapidly.  Education cost in this instance appears to be directly correlated to the recent growth of our community.  Supplement that with a simultaneous increase in the cost of both health coverage and pensions and we have our current economic situation. 

We should be trying even harder to alleviate folks from burdensome taxation, not to add to it year in and year out and simply throw our hands in the air and chalk it up to serendipity.  To believe this is naiveté and elegantly demonstrates why new leadership is needed at all levels of our government as well as in planning boards and school boards.  Serious leaders are needed now more than ever, who are not afraid to make the tough choices in tough times. 

November cannot come soon enough!

Originally posted at: www.egtrc.com

This action does not and cannot as a measure of reason solve the problem of the current over taxation but rather attempts to shift the burden of government employee salaries from the state and county governments onto local governments.  One tax replacing another tax is not an effective fiscal policy.  It’s a shell game.

Despite the spin given in the Star Ledger, praising Louis Greenwald (D-Camden) for his “thinking outside the box…” and “his aim to contain property taxes, the real enemy…” Greenwald’s plan in actuality simply amounts to the rising of the already cumbersome tax burden on New Jersey’s residents.

How can supporting yet another tax to be issued onto the public be billed as a tax saving action?  The logic is unreasonable and ignores the fact that government must be cut, not expanded if we intend to preserve our wallets and our liberty.  It has shown that New Jersey Democrats and its media arms have not learned from the recent gubernatorial election, but rather their concern only lies with how government employees will get their next fix at taxpayer expense while billing it as some humanitarian action. 

When one attempts to control spending as governor Christie has shown the character enough to insist on, rather than playing the old word tricks of doublespeak, they are attacked on a number of false moral arguments.  Immediately one reads tearjerker stories about local patrolmen, educators, and firemen who’re afraid for their jobs.  Melodramatically, making sure to include that the individuals have children that are in some dire strait because mom or dad may be laid off. 

This is the typical ploy to paint budget cuts as mean spirited and incomprehensible.  Granted, this not an ideal situation no one likes to lay anyone off.  That said, when did having a government job mean having a permanent job regardless of the economic climate?  It is a reality that any man or woman in private sector has no lawful right to their job but rather the right to do it well or fail trying, with no guarantees of outcome.  One may even do their job well and still wind up losing it for any number of reasons.  The point is there are no guarantees.

The simple fact is New Jersey cannot fund itself without confiscating private wealth from its citizens to pay for the enormous amount of entitlements and education costs.  In the private sector it’s called layoffs.  Join the 21% of your American peers who are unemployed or underemployed as a result of the type of burdensome taxation the private sector must adhere to in order to remain lawful, no-thanks to the already bloated government.  Furthermore, when did having a government job mean that one is entitled to a raise, as many union bosses demand for their workers, not based on merit or productivity but rather on time-served, yet another entitlement perhaps?

Instead of searching out and proposing more taxes, regardless at which level of government, we should be proposing to allow citizens to keep their tax monies and scaling back our government which would save real money.  Greenwald is avoiding the “real enemy” which is the exorbitant cost of public education and the burden that already places on our communities.

Greenwald’s plan is to alleviate the coming rise in property taxes by issuing more taxes.  If you’re confused, you should be, because it defies logic.  It assumes that one tax will replace the other when in all reality we know that it will just be another tax to pay added on top of the current property taxes. “This is a shell game that we’ve played any number of times… that has papered over the problems and just continued to increase the amount of revenue, that’s not what were here to do,” Governor Christie said in response to the proposal.  “What were here to do is to make government smaller,” Christie said.  

 At least someone gets it!

Originally posted at: www.egtrc.com

In my local township, major changes are ominous and can be witnessed by simply observing recent committee meetings in person or via a new web channel; compliments of our newly elected Republican committeeman. This change is observable in three main ways. One, prior to last November’s election, notice of resolutions to be voted on prior to their passing, was virtually non-existent despite an ethical responsibility to inform the people. Two, officials have slowed the pace in which they are voting on resolutions. Three, officials are now taking the time to or are at least attempting to verbalize, in a discernible manner, their positions on and rationale behind proposed projects and resolutions. With the new found audience online, as well as a refreshed electorate and the obvious ascendancy of conservatism as a political philosophy, we have created a situation where our local officials are now taking the time to explain ordinances and their positions on them. This would not be the case if voters did not have their voices heard last election. 

My incumbent committee deserves to be commended however, for reacting in a positive manner to what many might have expected would draw negatively and divisiveness by incumbent democrats. These new constructs, however, do not excuse nor should it diminish previous actions of our representatives. In other words, despite the alluring changes brought about by the electorate, at the dismay of incumbent representatives I might add, incumbent democrats still have a history of repressing information and for appropriating powers and presenting the municipality as the ultimate solution to all township ills. Let us hope that they truly have changed and are seeing the light, so to speak, as opposed to simply moving to center in an attempt to maintain elect-ability come November 2010. 

Despite the potential pitfalls of short-term memory loss and the false sense of comfort through the allure of fickle politicians changing their tune, it seems more changes are to come and we are the better for it. This is evident in the newly apparent transparency of our township committee. It is also evidenced in recent elections at all levels of government. The American people have spoken loudly and clearly. We, the American people do not support big government polices and we traditionally never have. Our nation was founded to gain independence from an over bearing and ever encompassing government. This notion has and will always flow through the veins of freedom loving Americans. So congratulations to you, the residents of East Greenwich Township and to the American people for creating a better and optimistic outlook for 2010 and for the future of America. 

Keep up the good work!

Originally posted at: www.egtrc.com

We have witnessed this sort of thinking over and over.  When a few individuals become a problem local officials feel the need to “act” and then the rest of the community has to adhere to erroneous regulations aimed at certain residents but affecting all residents; thereby asking the entire community to surrender part of their liberty to do what they want on their own property in order to address a few problem individuals.     

This notion must be rejected by freedom loving Americans if for no other reason then to draw the line in the sand and tell officials, as the proverbial old man would say to children in the neighborhood, “stay off my lawn.”  Furthermore, stay away from my private property and stop believing that it is appropriate to monitor and essentially harass citizens by mandating that certain citizens treat their private property a certain way. 

Rather it is the citizens who should be demanding more from our local officials, not them demanding more from us in the form of taxes and regulation.  This is the typical democratic machine that only knows how to tax and regulate.  This is a trend where every proposition that has come from New Jersey and National Democrats has this essential principal tied into their fiscal and governing policies. 

In a recent New Town Press article giving the typical liberal spin with the headline, “Lawn Parking Ordinance Tabled, Public Comments Taken into Consideration”; well how nice of them to take the residents opinions into consideration.  This is not to be applauded however, simply because those residents that were cited in the article have misplaced concerns.

 Their concern is misplaced because they are not asking the right question.  They are correctly worried that the ordinance will affect them and are chasing a red herring when they ask about property lot sizes, the amounts of fines due or the definition of terms such as “front lawn” or “vehicle”.  When the real question is: “Is it ever appropriate for local officials to pass ordinances that restrict our private property rights?” 

Here is my definition of “front lawn”: the foremost piece of a private property residence purchased via money acquired from ones own labor. Is it not enough to not only pay ones property taxes, now citizens are being threatened with fines of up to $500 simply for having a car parked on their own lawn? Last I checked we still have the right to own and maintain our own property, including front lawns guaranteed to all citizens by the United States Constitution.  Before you know it, local officials will be proposing that we can only own or park a certain number of cars in our driveways and on our own properties. 

The rationale for such legislation as stated by the current Mayor and reported in the New Town Press is that cars parked on lawns is somehow a “safety hazard” and “make it difficult for police patrols to ‘do what they need to do’.”  Patrolmen are now actively patrolling our front lawns?  This is news to this life-time East Greenwich Township resident. 

East Greenwich Township has a meticulous and effective police force comparable to any in the state or nation even.  The quality of service these brave men and women in blue do our community is admirable.  They provide the atmosphere of safety that we all enjoy and deserve to be commended for their efforts.  To use these men and women as a reason to infringe on residents private property rights is despicable.  Our patrolmen and women have more effective, efficient and proactive activities to perform that actually contribute to the community and take precedence over policing front lawns.

Moreover as stated by my township Solicitor and quoted in the New Town Press, patrolmen would use “common sense” when enforcing the ordinance.  Is the phrase “common sense” a legal term?  Our patrolmen and women already use common sense when enforcing the law, as they should.  This is not new information but rather a deflection from the fact that our patrolmen and women ought to not be concerned with residents’ lawns.  However to even put them in this situation shows a lack in understanding the human condition and in the ideas of liberty and freedom it self. 

Originally posted at: www.egtrc.com

On what grounds dose any official or committee have the authority to mandate how often and what time of day one can, on their own property, hold a sale of their own private property or goods? Not only are we told how often and what time of day we can hold a yard sale but we must first obtain “permission” from the township via a yard sale permit.

Sorry, but many of us became adults years ago. Only one’s parents assume this sort of control over anothers life where “permission” is needed in order to sell one’s own goods. Our government officials have assumed the role of “parent” over the community as if we are their children. This has been true at all levels of government for quite some time. However even in this situation the parents (government officials) apparently despite being the “parents” constantly seek what equates to an allowance (taxes) from their “children” (you and me). If this sounds backwards to you, you would be absolutely right!

Stop assuming the role of our parents! Do not assume it is appropriate to tell private citizens what they can and cannot do on their own property. Please respect our right to own and sell our own private property. Just the fact that I have to ask for my rights shows how out of touch our officials are with the principals of personal responsibility and private property rights.

Our Constitutional rights to life, liberty, and property have been under assault for a century. This is just one tiny yet “in your face” example of how our personal liberties are slowly being digested by the statist mentality.

The motive behind this move seems to be that some residents are having multiple yard sales per year and are seemingly operating to generate revenue. In other words, some folks are making too much money and are operating a business, according to our township committee.

Government should be concentrated on Police, Fire, and Emergency Services, not on yard and garage sales.

What a gross waste of our monies when we are paying our patrolmen to ride around and seek out avenues to harass citizens of our township. Rather than policing our economic activities on our own personal property our patrolmen should be concentrating on keeping us safe from harm and delinquents.

Originally posted at: www.egtrc.com

I am an avid supporter of the Republican Party and a leading member of the local Republican Club in East Greenwich Township located in Gloucester County.  Our club
has made leaps and bounds this past year in creating a strong web site and in succeeding to get a Republican elected to our local township committee, where he will be
out numbered 4 to 1 until November 2010 where we hope to gain a few more seats back.

I am writing you this letter however, not to ask you for your support in local matters, although that would be greatly appreciated and much needed, but rather to implore
you and your attorney general to investigate the constitutionality of the current legislation that is being rammed through at the federal level as well as the ethics of certain
NJ senators being leading members of race related groups who attempt to segregate the population into groups based on their race and then attempt to lobby for that group
over another segment of the population.

This is a fascistic practice, favoring one race over another and attempting to fleece the American people of their wealth and resources in order to support a political
agenda, rather than treating all members of society as equals as a public official ought to treat their constituents and as the federal government ought to treat the
individual states.

Hypothetically if there were Senators that were members of the KKK, in this day and age, they would be out right ostracized and politically ruined if not jailed, however,
it is ok for a senate member to be a leader of “La Raza” which, as I am sure you know, stands for “The Race”; a group in which holds the western territories of the United States
as unofficial Mexican territory, and lobby endlessly for subverting the traditional aspects of American society by forcing the Spanish language on an English speaking country
and lobby for illegal immigrants to be treated the same if not better than the legal tax paying residents of this great country. La Raza holds Mexico as the mother country
and not the United States thereby subverting the interests of the American people for that of the Mexican people.  One can imagine the damage that can be done to our state
and nation not to mention our society if we allow our representatives to hold these views with out political and legal reprisal.  If that is not fascistic and treasonous then I must
have missed something in my education.

Both our N.J. Senators and our run away federal government’s arrogance have left we the people of New Jersey and the United States holding the bag for their recklessness
for years to come, but we can at least fight back.

When elected representatives who hold radical far left stances are in charge of legislating in the senate what we get is a whole slue of unconstitutional resolutions.
Resolutions such as mandating all Americans buy a product against their will and to supplement those who have no claim on American society because they are not tax
paying citizens as well using public funds for politically controversial issues such as abortion.  Taxing certain states to supplement other states (see Ben Nelson and Nebraska)
and including resolutions that make the current legislation un-amendable and unchangeable by future congresses and future representatives thereby binding future
generations to this radical legislators’ political agenda.

The unconstitutionality of what is taking place at the federal level is tantamount to robbery of the American tax payer in order to line the pockets of the far left’s political supporters.

I am simply asking you as your constituent who has voted for you to make a political statement by joining with the other states that are investigating the constitutionality
of the current health care legislation in relation to the violation of the commerce clause which mandates that the federal government has dominion over economic activity
that takes place across state lines however treats all the states as equals regarding policy.  Simply ask yourself how much more will New Jerseyans have to pay for their Medicare
taxes in order to supplement Nebraska’s sweetheart Medicare deal?  Rob Peter to pay Paul is the popular ideology in the Democratic majorities in order to bribe representatives
to vote for bad legislation.  If the legislation is so good why must senators be coerced into voting for it?  Something stinks to high heaven here and it would be a major
statement if a traditionally politically left state of New Jersey were to turn the corner and join the ranks of the brave representatives speaking out against this health care debacle.

Please consider taking careful and diligent action to protect the rights of your constituents.

Sincerely,

NJ Tax Payers

Originally posted at: www.egtrc.com/Blog.html

I am a concerned New Jersey citizen. My entire life I have been inundated with notions of government as the solution to social, economic, and political problems. All of
my elementary, high school, and especially my college education have been heavily geared to shed a positive light on expansion of the state. In elementary school we
honored such figures as Teddy Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, and Franklin Delano Roosevelt. All of who come from an era in human history where what was billed to be a
brand new ideology of, what amounts to Statism, was actually a rebirth of an old world order that existed prior to Americas founding. Ideologies history has since proven
to be obsolete, with roots in European social and the collegiate elite of the era. Hitler’s “National Socialism”, “Mussolini’s “Fascism”, and Stalin’s “Communism” all come
from the same ideological well, in which the individual has no rights other than to do what the state dictates.

Woodrow Wilson, FDR, and Teddy Roosevelt are all progressives; progressives who believed that the state has a duty to control and dictate citizens’ individual liberties and
rights. Wilson’s “War on Poverty” a war that modern progressives decry, and will always decry, that we are loosing. A war that cannot be won! A seemingly humanitarian effort
as a “War on Poverty”, in all actuality requires that those who are productive citizens be held liable to those who are not. This amounts to a confiscation of the private property
of those who make a living for themselves and give it to those who do not make their own living; a “Rob Peter to pay Paul” scenario. I wonder how Peter feels about this
transaction? I bet he feels like a growing number of Americans who just want oppressive government out of their faces.

FDR had his ever expanding and haloed from progressives as well as the left “Social Security” which was sold to the public as an insurance policy for aged Americans who
can no longer be fully involved citizens by virtue of their physic and natural degeneration that takes place along with aging. Social Security was founded on the idea that
only those who need assistance would receive it. This is the moment in history where the Constitution was overridden with little to no fight from the American people to
allow the involuntary confiscation of private citizens income to provide income for other private citizens. An unconstitutional notion, by all means! Do you believe that it
was Thomas Jefferson’s intentions to have the state take care of its citizens from birth to death; or George Washington’s intentions; or any of our founders?

The left and many so-called “progressives”, complain that capitalism has failed and that we need the state to fix it all. A silver bullet if you will. This in complete and utter
nonsense! I propose that it is not capitalism that has failed but rather the strain that Wilson’s, and FDR’s progressive socialism has put on capitalism that has caused the U.S.
economy to collapse to its current condition. Just look at the numbers. All of our “social insurance” policies are bankrupt and will soon be indebted if not already in debt. Liberal
lending policies caused a housing and foreclosure crisis. Government never solved a social problem. It cannot with out at the same time being tyrannical in nature and violating
constitutional private property and personal liberty rights. Now we have Universal Health Care. It’s the same animal of “socialism” just in a different costume.

Originally posted at: www.egtrc.com/Blog.html