Wars and rumours of wars. Part 1

This series of posts revolves around the liberal leftist socialist progressives and the wars they wage in and against this Republic.

First up is the war on religion, the more correct term would be the war on(against)Christianity. This war has been going on for quite some time and continues today.

They use the same old tired argument, separation of Church and State. They do love to bring up the Constitution when it fits in with their agenda. They are either totally ignorant or they count on the citizens to be totally ignorant, I suspect the latter. The only separation between Church and State is laid out in the first Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

Kicking God out of the Schools. 1962, it was the opinion of the court that prayer in school violated the establishment clause of the Constitution.

It continued and continues with kicking God out of public places, removing religious symbols. The latest is the demand the removal of the Peace Cross, a World War 1 memorial. It is the opinion of the court that the Cross is unconstitutional because it excessively entangles the government in religion because the Cross is the core symbol of Christianity.

So was this Republic founded on secularism or religion? Well lets take a look at some of the founding documents. You will find these words, terms and phrases. Found at greatamericandocuments.com, there are other sources as well.

The Declaration of Arms July 6, 1775. Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking up Arms.
…that the divine Author of our existence…
…But a reverence for our Creator…
…Divine favor towards us…that his Providence would not…
…before God and the world…
…which our beneficent Creator hath graciously…
The Declaration of Independence July 4, 1776
…Laws of Nature and Nature’s God…
…their Creator with…
…the Supreme Judge of the World…
…protection of Divine Providence…
Articles of Confederation November 15, 1777; ratified and in force March 1, 1781
…the Great Governor of the World…
Treaty of Paris signed in Paris September 3, 1783; ratified by Congress January 14, 1784; ratified by Great Britain April 9, 1784
In the name of the most holy and undivided Trinity
… the Divine Providence…
…by the grace of God…

Obviously this Republic had its founding on Religion and not secularism. God is mentioned in the above founding Documents. You will notice that the Constitution is not on the list. Intentional, I assure you.

Is this Republic founded on Christianity or secularism? Again we turn to the founding documents.

The Articles of Confederation
This is found in the Preamble.
…the fifteenth day of November in the Year of our Lord One Thousand Seven Hundred and Seventy seven…
This is found in the Signatories
… the ninth day of July in the year of our Lord one Thousand seven Hundred and Seventy-eight…
The Treaty of Paris
This is found in the signatories
…this third day of September in the year of our Lord, one thousand seven hundred and eighty-three.
The Constitution.
This is found in the signatories
Done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and eighty-seven.

Obviously this Republic was founded on Christianity and therefore is a Christian nation, or at least it is supposed to be. The date of the historical documents reflect the date A.D. The year of our Lord. With that being said this is a Christian nation not a nation of Christians, there is no national religion and congress has made no law creating one. The citizens of the several States that comprise this Republic are free to worship as they please. Now we wait to see if the Courts have a differing opinion.

Church and State are separate, or are they? Government(state)has gotten itself unnecessarily and exceedingly entangled in religion. How you ask? IRS tax codes. Why? I believe for the simple reason of getting politics out and away from the Church. When was the last time you heard a sermon on politics, not necessarily supporting or opposing a particular candidate, but what effects politics and therefore government has had on the Church and Christianity? If a Church were to have sermons based on politics would they lose their favor with the IRS(government)?

Government has in itself become a religion, of sorts. Government has replaced God in people’s lives, government has become god. There was a time when people Prayed to God in times of difficulty. Now people pray that government(god)will come to their aid in times of difficulty.

If this was still a Christian Republic, based on Christian principles I doubt very seriously that we would have abortion on demand? But then again you have to ask yourself, why is there such a demand for abortion? Is it because we have devolved into a secular nation?

The right to an abortion is based on a court opinion. The right of same-sex marriage is based on a court opinion. Much of what we are forced to contend with are based on court opinions.(More on opinion becoming law in a later post)

We in this Republic can stop thinking that politicians and jurists can save this Republic. They are the reasons this Republic is in such a mess. The only thing that can save this Republic is by returning to the religious foundations this Republic was founded under. The first thing to do is to remember that our rights come from God and are not bestowed on and to us by government(politicians and jurists).

Now my brothers and sisters in Christ let me say this I do not care the color of your skin, we as Christians must stop dividing ourselves and me must stop letting others divide us. We are easily conquered when we are divided.

Ephesians tells us what we must do. I prefer the King James Version, it is what I am most familiar with. I am not a Biblical Scholar, Theologian or any thing of the sort. Some call me a back-sliding Christian. I call my self a work in progress. To reinforce this I use a King James Study Bible, and seek help from my Personal Savior, Jesus Christ.

Ephesians Chapter 6
6:10 Finally, my brethren, be strong in the Lord, and in the power of his might.
6:11 Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil
6:12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.
6:13 Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand.
6:14 Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breastplate of righteousness.
6:15 And your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace;
6:16 Above all, taking the shield of faith, wherewith ye shall be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked.
6:17 And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God:
6:18 Praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit, and watching thereunto with all perseverance and supplication for all saints;
6:19 And for me, that utterance may be given unto me, that I may open my mouth boldly, to make known the mystery of the gospel,
6:20 For which I am an ambassador in bonds: that therein I may speak boldly, as I ought to speak.

That is it my friends we must regain our Republic. To do this we must wake up and follow the Scriptures. If we do as instructed we win the war on(against)Christianity. If we remain asleep and continue to ignore the Scriptures we will lose this war to the powers of darkness. The task ahead of us is not as great as the power behind us.

The time has come for another Crusade, a Great Crusade to restore this Republic. A spiritual awakening, revival and redemption.

DEO VINDICE

Advertisements

Oh, my word

Now we have “toxic masculinity”, good grief really. The Florida Democratic Party chairman has resigned(no date as of yet)because he “feels” like he is “creepy”, making women nervous in his presence. Creating a hostile and creepy work environment. So another male has jumped onto the “sword”, a self-sacrifice. Perhaps a better term would be self-castration. One female had said that he has a lot of “boob stuff” in his office, including “breast shaped” stress balls on his desk.

Given the fact that he is, soon to be was, a party official and many people, both men and women, may visit his office he should have exercised more or at least some discretion. Tacky to say the least. An office with public access should reflect a great amount of professionalism, the same amount of professionalism that one should display and act on in their public life. It would appear that many in politics fail to understand they have no private life, so they must be on their best behavior at all times. Sadly many in politics, both male and female think the rules, ethics and morality, do not apply to them. They are above all of that.

How one decorates his or her own personal office is their own business. If one chooses to decorate his or her own personal office in a bawdy manner do remember where you are when you get the urge to take a selfie. Under no circumstances should one ever take a selfie in their drawers, or in a negligee.

The rest of this post deals with the absurdity of this so-called “toxic masculinity”.

First off masculinity is not toxic to men or society as a whole. This world would be in a terrible state if it were not for masculinity.
Masculinity is defined as; 1a Male 1b having qualities appropriate to or usually associated with a man.
Toxic is defined as; 1 containing or being poisonous material especially when capable of causing death or serious debilitation.
Therefore if masculinity was toxic there would be no males.

If the following offends you, you need to get a grip and grow up.

I very seriously doubt that any female has ever screamed “toxic masculinity” when a Man(capital M)stepped to her aid to defend her or her honor. I used a capital M because sadly there are some males in our society that are men(little m). But then I am Southern bred and Southern raised. Masculine but not toxic Good manners and all.

A male looking at a female is not visual rape. Women, most but not all, go to great lengths to look their best. The ones that do they wear clothes that compliment their figure. Us men call the clothes they wear, “Look at me clothes”. Do I look? Hell yea. Will I apologize for looking? Hell naw. Will I gouge my eyes out for looking to prevent me from doing it again or taking a second look? Again, Hell naw.

Before I forget, we have something in the South called GRITS. No not grits, but GRITS, an acronym for Girls Raised In The South. Some drive trucks, some drive what some of us call; Look at me trucks”. They have look at me clothes and look at me trucks, you should see them. Do we look? Hell yea. Will we apologize for looking? Hell naw. Will we gouge our eyes out for looking to prevent us from doing it again or taking a second look? Again, Hell naw.

Now I ask you girls this. If you get all gussied up and no man(big M or little m)looks would you be offended. Keep this up and soon no one will look, no matter how loud you or your attire screams “Look At Me”.

Masculinity is not toxic. Wussification is toxic. The wussification of males will cause the death of manhood, it is a debilitating condition is left untreated.

No Damsel in distress was ever, nor will she ever be, rescued by a wuss.

DEO VINDICE
God Bless Florida

Is this where all of this leads?

Could it be this freaking simple? I am referring to the recent outing of males as sexual deviants.

The political landscape has long been dominated by males, as has the business and banking world. They still have a hard time coming to grips with the fact that their candidate for president lost. They most likely and probably never will come to grips with that fact. They have blamed everything under the sun for her loss but her. They have even claimed that she lost because males were not willing or ready to vote for a woman for president.

The allegations made against males and their sexual misconduct towards women is coming at a dizzying pace, seems like it will never stop. And it wont until all males are portrayed as sexual deviants. Sexual deviants who cant be trusted in the company of a woman. A sexual deviant who caint(can not and aint gonna)control himself. There have even been allegations leveled a males for attempting or attempting to have their way with underage(minor)boys and/or girls.

Are they trying to remake the political landscape of this Republic? Absolutely. But more than that they intend to remake the entire landscape of this Republic. The goal, perhaps is to remove all males from positions of power or authority based on the actions of a few.

Thus far the only allegations of inappropriate sexual behavior that has been exposed has been against males. To date and to the best of my recollection no females have been accused of such “indiscretions”. This is most likely due to the double standards when it comes to males and females.

Allow me to explain. When a male teacher is accused of having inappropriate relations with a student, whether the student female or male, there is outcry to lock him up and throw away the key. But if a female teacher is accused of having inappropriate relations with a student, especially if the student is a male, some say “where was she when I was in school”. So therefore I don’t expect any males will come out under the hashtag me too. Males exploits are put out for the world to see, while the females exploits remain virtually invisible.

There are some in both sexes, male and female, that will take advantage of their position or power for their own gains, whether it be for sexual(gratification)or financial(personal profit)reasons.

Now let me say this, there are males and females in society that are more than willing to be used, if their being used will get them to where they want to be. Those willing to be used are not victims.

By all means those that are victims should expose those that use others, whether male or female. Having power and/or authority don’t give anyone, male or female, the right to whatever or whoever they see or can get their hands on. Keep your hands to yourself and keep a civil tongue in your head.

In this post I have used the word “they” a lot. Now let me say who “they” are. They are the Social Justice Warriors from the Department of Fairness and Equality.

I have also used the words male and female. That is because that was the way we as mankind were created by God, man and woman.

This is what all of this boils down to, the Social Justice Warriors want a woman to be president. No matter the cost. No matter if she is qualified. No matter her morals or the apparent lack of her morals. I mean after all, women can be trusted, right? The only qualification she must possess is to not be a man and social justice would have prevailed, in their view.

I cant help but wonder if that woman were elected president would all of these allegations come about? Are the allegations a result of her loss? We will never know, because thankfully she was not elected. I suspect though that silence would have prevailed, if she had won the election.

DEO VINDICE
God Bless Florida

I wonder if….

It would seem that nearly all of the congress critters and almost all of the talking-heads have already convicted Judge Roy Moore from the Great State of Alabama of sexual improprieties. Not only have they already convicted him they demand that he step aside in the Senate race. One of the enlightened clowns presently holding a seat in the senate has already said that “He has no place in the Senate”. At least one has said that Judge Moore must prove his innocence. Judge Moore has already been convicted in the court of opinion. Judge Moore has not, I repeat has not, been convicted in a court of law. They have even began a campaign to find a write-in candidate in the senate race. One would expect this from the other party. Judge Moore won the republican primary in Alabama and the afore-mentioned statements are coming from republicans. It seems to me that the republicans will torpedo their own, wanting and willing to lose the election and the seat. Or is it just they did not get the candidate they wanted? Seems to me the republicans are trying to put a monkey wrench into the works.

It has even been said by some Judge Moore should step aside and let the party select a nominee. They actually think the party machine is smarter than the voters who supported Judge Moore. Seems to me not all that long ago they wanted then candidate Trump, then nominee and now President Trump to step aside because of allegations of improprieties that were later proven false. Then as now they did not get the candidate they wanted.

Judge Moore as well as any other person accused of a crime should be and is presumed innocent until proven guilty in a Court of Law. A matter of Fact not a matter of Opinion. This still is America is it not? Since when is it the defendants responsibility to prove his innocence?

So I wonder if allegations of improprieties(taking liberties)were leveled at a sitting member of Congress, would they step aside? Would they succumb to opinion? I doubt they would. But the republicans in Congress are guilty of taking liberties, they have abused the voters that supported them. Constituent abuse. They have lied to the voters. Come on, confess your improprieties and step aside.

I question the timing of these allegations. They did not surface during the primaries. Why now?

You were willing to have a democrat president just not to have a President Trump. Anybody but Trump you said. You are willing to have a democrat senator just not to have a Senator Moore. Anybody but Moore you are saying.

Choose wisely Alabama.

You the republicans are the Jacobins of today. The ends justify the means.

DEO VINDICE
God Bless Florida
God Bless Alabama

Some do, some dont

Some get it, some dont and probably never will.

The latest mass killing(murdering)occurred in a Baptist Church in Sutherland Springs, Texas. This was not the only shooting(murdering)that has occurred in a Christian House of Worship. Before the one in Texas there was one in Tennessee. Before the one in Tennessee there was one in South Carolina.

The one in Tennessee and the one in Texas have one thing in common. A concerned citizen brought the carnage to a halt. If I recall correctly the murdering at the Antioch Baptist Church was stopped by an Usher who wrestled the attacker to the ground. Again if I recall correctly the attacker(murderous savage)was shot in the leg. The murdering at the First Baptist Church was also brought to a halt by a concerned citizen. In this attack the concerned citizen exchanged fire with the attacker, as reported the attacker(again a murderous savage)was shot during the exchange. In the one in South Carolina the attacker(and again a murderous savage)was able to flee the scene, only to be captured a short time later. The murderous savage in Texas was not only shot, but when he attempted to flee was subsequently chased down by two townsfolk, including the one who had exchanged fire with and wounded the murderous savage.

This needs to be said and understood by all. In each of these instances the murderous savage knew he would face little if any resistance. They basically had the upper hand, the advantage if you will. They are brave when they have the advantage, not so much when they encounter resistance. None of the three murderous savages had planned on any meeting any real resistance.

I would like to point this out about society in this Republic today. The concerned citizen in Texas who grabbed his rifle and brought the savagery to an end is more the exception than the rule. Most in our society would have chosen not to get involved, if they did get involved it would have only been to the extent of grabbing their cellphone and making a video. This man chose to get involved, he grabbed his rifle(not a cellphone)and placing himself in great danger engaged the threat. He placed himself in great peril to defend the defenseless. To me that is the definition of a true Hero. This man exemplifies the meaning of the American Spirit, heroic and decisive action in the face of great peril. The other man, the driver of the truck also chose to get involved. This man also demonstrated great courage during the chase, determined to not let the murderous savage escape. Both of these men are exemplary and courageous in deed and character.

Now lets move on to those who dont get it and probably never will. This would be the gun control crowd, actually it should be called the “cult of gun control”. I call it a cult because to them it is a religion, but it is a cult. It is a false religion based on a false premise. It is based on the premise that what they call “gun crime” can be eliminated by placing further restrictions on law-abiding citizens. Passing laws and even more laws have no effect on those that choose to ignore or break the laws. If the rights of the citizens are infringed the only effect that would have would to be to provide even more victims of those who use a gun to commit a crime. I call the gun control a cult for another reason, they have Profits, false Profits. They follow a Profit who calls for more gun control while at the same time they are surrounded by armed security. They have guns to protect them while they seek to disarm others. The false “religion” of gun control headed by a false Profit, that makes it a cult.

Now we have a republican Senator from Texas siding with and reaching out to the democrats on gun control. This is a democrat windfall. It sounds as simple as writing legislation to enforce and strengthen laws on the books, but it is not that simple. It will not stop with legislation to fix existing legislation, it will lead to “comprehensive reform”. Currently the Air Force is being blamed for the failure on its part in reporting the conviction of the murderous savage in Texas. To me it is just another example of the government being above the law. When the government makes a mistake they just say “oops”. What happens to the rest of us if we make a similar mistake?

Now let’s go to those that get it. Once again a bad guy with a gun was stopped by a good guy with a gun. We have a sheriff here in Florida that has come out to say, “if you have a permit and a gun take your gun with you”. He gets it and so should you. I agree with what he has said.

You are your own “first line of defense”. Everyone who owns a gun should be proficient, range time and holster drills. I would like to say this, carrying a firearm comes with great responsibility. If you are not willing to accept that responsibility them for God’s sake do not carry. Let me point this out, the gun in your holster is not a “good luck charm”. Just because you have a concealed weapon and a permit is no guarantee that nothing bad will ever happen. Be proficient. If you want to carry a “good luck charm” get a rabbit’s foot, but then ask yourself what happen to the rest of the rabbit?

Now this is going to bring us to the subject of guns in Church. This is a subject that most congregations are unwilling to discuss. But it must be discussed. Before beginning with this I would like to point out this. We should be walking about this Republic everyday without a care in the world. We should be safe in our schools, offices, parks and everywhere we go, but things are different now.

There are many places that one would believe they were absolutely safe, but for today I will address only two. We should feel absolute safety in these two places, the sanctuary of the womb and the Sanctuary of the Church. Taking a little side road for just a minute. Let me go back to the “cult of gun control” for just a minute. The same people who favor gun control are the same people who favor abortion on demand. I find this to be more than ironic, they are perfectly willing to support abortion, which is not a Constitutional Right but oppose the private ownership of guns which is a Constitutional Right. Since 1973 it has been estimated that over 53 million babies have been murdered in the mother’s womb. The pro-choice “abortion cult” has their false Profits, the same as the “gun control cult”. The ones who push abortion have children and grand children. Those that support abortion only do so because their mothers chose life.

Now let’s go back to guns in the Church. This is going to cause angst in some Churches. I am of the opinion that every Church in this Republic have some sort of Church Protection Plan. I am also of the opinion that every male in the congregation carry his own personal firearm, that is, if he is trained, proficient and holds a permit if required and most importantly will to take on that responsibility. Some Pastors are going to be against guns in the Church. Some of the Congregation like is going to be opposed to guns in the Church. But I remind you of this you are your own and best first line of defense. As I have said before when a wolf comes it is best to have some wolf repellant.

There are those who claim that a handgun is not match for a rifle. Well that is true, but something is better than nothing. For a handgun to be effective against a rifle, the distance must be closed, either by the defender or the murderous savage. I am not for turning every Church in this Republic into a bristling fortress, but Churches like all “soft” targets must be “hardened”. We want people to come to Church and come to Jesus. We could lock our doors, but locks only keep honest people honest.

Above when I said “This man exemplifies the meaning of the American Spirit heroic and decisive”, that was and is true but it exemplified more than just the American Spirit. He exemplified the Christian Spirit. Willing to lay down his life for a friend. The Christian American Spirit.

DEO VINDICE

It is high time ….

It is high time to put things in their proper context. Thing needs to be placed in proper context, and if there is blame to assign proper context will make it clear as to who or what is at fault. This is the second part of a series.

What I am referring to is the latest terrorist attack, the one in New York. Good grief, in news story after news story the headline was “Terrorist truck attack”, this crap makes it appear that the truck was the terrorist and committed this heinous act. The truck was not the terrorist, and a truck being an inanimate object is not capable of committing an act of terrorism.

It seems that the selection of words and their placement were/are an attempt at “blame-shifting”. The rented truck was merely the tool of choice, the weapon, in this terrorist attack. The man behind the wheel was the terrorist. The man behind the wheel was a Muslim, a follower of Islam. Those that were killed and those that were injured we his victims, his intended victims. The Islamic terrorist drove the rented truck onto a bicycle/pedestrian path, intentionally. The Islamic terrorist then proceeded to run down/over as many people as possible, again intentionally.

Had the Islamic terrorist used a knife in his dastardly act, the headlines would have been a “terrorist knife attack”. The knife would have played a key role in terrorism the same as the truck did this time, at least in the minds of the apologists. They seem to confuse the what for the who.

A more fitting headline would have been “Islamic terrorist kills 8 and injures many more in New York City”. Time to quit candy-coating, blame-shifting and most of all get off the wagon, the politically correct wagon. Call it for what/who it is.

Now the politicians will try to come up with ways to stop these kinds of attacks. They will suggest some type of barriers to prevent motor vehicles from entering pedestrian/bicycle areas. They will come up with plans that cost millions. Let’s say they erect barricades between the sidewalks/paths and the streets, but what happens when an Islamic terrorist enters the sidewalk/path on foot or bicycle with a knife or axe and does what Islamic terrorists do? Now what? The answer is much simpler that erecting barricades and is free. No terrorists no terrorism.

Unfortunately there are already many terrorists already in this republic, thanks to many previous administrations. The latest terrorist attack was carried out by an Islamic terrorist who has lived among us for years. It has been reported that he has been here since 2010, and just now decided to wage Jihad. How many more are there? Are they just waiting for the right time to strike?

What is the answer? I dont know, but somebody better come up with something fast, and I mean something better than barricades. If not this Republic will soon find itself in the same sorry state as Europe. If something dont change Americans can soon resign themselves to the fact that terrorism is just part and parcel to life in the big city. Are you ready for that? Just waiting for the next attack.

Law enforcement will spent many hours searching for a motive as to why this attack was carried out. Maybe we as citizens should be searching for the motive as to why our lawmakers democrat and republican, are so lax in their immigration laws and policies. Why are they so much into diversification and multi-culturalism.

DEO VINDICE

One down many more to go

It would appear that President Trump has ended one welfare program, actually it is two, two for the price of one. Ended is the cost sharing portion of Obamacare. That means that we hard-working citizens will no longer have to pay for others lifestyle. It also ends a corporate welfare scheme, the insurance companies will no longer be paid to overcharge for insurance products. Well done Mr. President.

Now here is the “fly in the ointment”. Congress can appropriate monies from the national treasury to fund these two welfare programs. My guess is that congress will appropriate monies from the national treasury. They will do this for two reasons. The first being is that they need campaign donations from the insurance industry. The second is that this welfare program is like all the rest a vote-buying scheme. The old back-scratching scheme, “You scratch my back and I will scratch yours”.

I am also of the opinion that the republican controlled congress has made no serious attempt to end Obamacare for the same two reasons. Doing so would have cost them both campaign contributions and votes. The insurance industry could have done much better with the monies donated to political campaigns, but then they would have not put corrupt politicians in their pocket.

So, lets discuss the insurance industry and the lobbyists for the insurance industry for just a moment and the possible correlation of insurance premiums. Insurance companies charge for their premiums to cover overhead. The insurance company employees have to be paid, whether it comes from the company directly or is included in the premiums, the employees will be paid. How much do you do you think it costs the insurance industry as a whole to have lobbyists? Millions or tens of millions? Who pays for the lobbyists? Where does the money going into political campaigns come from? Would premiums be lower if not for the lobbyists and campaign contributions? The insurance industry looks out for the industry and not those who buy policies. There is a reason that former politicians become current lobbyists. There is also a reason the former lobbyists become current politicians.

The same goes for the banking industry. The people receive a mere pittance in the form of interest on their savings, while the industry pays millions for lobbying efforts. What is the rate you receive on your savings? What is the rate on your mortgage or other loan? What is the dollar amount from the industry in the form of campaign contributions? What would your rate be if not for paying lobbyists and campaign contributions. The banking industry looks out for the interest of the industry not those who use the banks.

Politicians look out for their political careers not those they are supposed to represent. Or do they? If this is a representative republic just who do the congress critters represent? It sure aint me and you. They represent their moneyed interests.

Now that President Trump has brought this non-sense to an end the congress critters are screaming in agony. He has out-smarted them. They now claim that millions will lose their health care insurance, the premiums will be to high for them to afford. They make it sound like they care about the common man. Nothing could be farther from the truth. It was the politicians, the democrat politicians, who wrote, passed and implemented the health care law known as Obamacare. They wrote it knowing full well it was unaffordable, that is exactly why they included a subsidy program. They did not give a hoot about your health care or your ability to afford insurance, they wanted to ensure a steady flow of revenue for the insurance industry, which in turn ensured a steady flow of campaign contributions. Please wise up.

If the politicians really cared about your ability to afford or have health insurance they would lighten up on the regulations that curtail job growth and opportunity. You do not need subsidies to afford any thing. What you need is job then maybe, just maybe you could get insurance through an employer sponsored health care plan, a group plan. Do you want a job or a subsidy?

While I am on the subject of ending subsidies, all of them should be ended. Welfare included. I am of the opinion that “If you don’t work you don’t eat. I said dont not cant. There was a time in which the community and the associated Churches helped those that had fallen on hard times. There were even private charities that were equipped to help those that could not work long-term. The problem now is that government has caused such a demand for assistance that the Churches, communities and private charities can no longer keep up.

The child credit on the tax forms should be eliminated. I am personally tired of seeing and hearing from people that they got their “tax refund” check and it was more than they paid in in taxes. A tax refund is when you get a little bit back when the government took a bit too much. A “refund” is not when you get back more than the government took from you. What you received was a welfare check and nothing more. It was money they never earned, nor were entitled too. I have even heard some say that they did not deserve the “refund”. They did not return the money, they spent the money and in some cases on the damnedest things imaginable. They could afford the things they bought not by their own efforts, but because of the efforts of others. Before the government could give them anything it first had to be taken from another.

One more thing. Maybe those enlightened individuals in congress should read a short story. “It is not yours to give”.

I might as well end with this. I would like to see the day come when those that received money from the government they had neither earned or were entitled to send the money back. What the government calls “entitlements” are just welfare payments. You are entitled to what you earn and nothing more. If you feel that you are entitled to more, go earn it. Be independent not dependent. Mark those welfare checks return to sender, if you have the courage.

I have a hunch that Dixie, The Confederate States of America would not have become a welfare state.

DEO VINDICE
God Bless Dixie.
God Bless the South.
God bless the State of Florida.

What was right in 1776 was right in 1861 and is right today.