Last week, our Fundamental Transformer in Chief said America’s economy is still struggling because Washington hasn’t been cuddling it enough. It seems Washington has been distracted by a string of “phony scandals.”

“Phony scandals”?! At long last, has this con artist no shame? Have the professional watchdogs of the press no pride? How does he pull this nonsense unchallenged? 

Even Nixon's pathetic "I am not a crook!" was more honorable. Nixon sought only to exonerate himself; not to insult America for the obvious questions people were asking.

Hey, all you well-paid hacks at ABC-NBC-CBS-PBS-CNN-NPR-AP-NYT-LAT, may I suggest a few questions real reporters would ask, if they actually had their big boy and girl underpants on?

“Mr. President: You said you’ve been distracted from the economy by phony scandals. But didn’t you have a majority in both chambers for the first two years of your term? What did you do for our economy then, sir?”

“Mr. President: The recent buzz about scandals came up mostly in the first weeks of your second term...your fifth year in office. What was your economic plan before then and why couldn’t you implement, or at least introduce and promote it before now?”

“Mr. President: When news broke the IRS was targeting conservative groups, you said that was unacceptable. You forced the acting IRS Chief and the Chief of Tax Exempt Divisions out of their jobs. Was your concern real or phony, sir? Did you sacrifice the careers of innocent civil servants to shield yourself from criticism for a “phony scandal?”

“Mr. President: The early damage control about the IRS situation said that rogue agents in the Cincinnati office were responsible. That story quickly proved false and fell apart. We learned the policy direction came from Washington and, actually from the office of your appointee, the Chief Counsel of the IRS. What can you say about that? Did you know about the targeting, sir? Did you order it?”

“Mr. President, if there’s no smoke or fire there, then why did Lois Lerner plead the Fifth Amendment against incriminating herself? Why don’t you order her to cooperate with Congress and answer straight questions?”

“Mr. President: When word broke the Justice Department was spying on the AP and tracking its reporters’ calls, you took the curious step of directing AG Eric Holder, the head of the Justice Department, to look into it and get back to you with a report. Sir, can you tell us if Eric Holder has learned why Eric Holder directed Eric Holder’s Justice Department to spy on the news media? And what are you and Eric Holder going to do about it?”

“Mr. President: About Benghazi, sir, you’ve said that you ordered our forces to do what was necessary to make our people safe. But our fighting men say on the night of that awful slaughter, the only order they got was ‘Stand Down.’ Sir, who gave the order to stand down? Aren’t you the only one with that authority? Why did you order the stand down? Why did you then lie to the American people about it and claim you ordered the opposite?”

“Mr. President: After the attack and slaughter in Libya, your administration came out immediately with a false story about the causes. Without any support, and contrary to the conclusions of the CIA, you blamed it on a spontaneous protest against an amateurish video that criticized Islam and Mohammed. You clung to that story and repeated it until the facts made known to the public made your position unsustainable. Why did you, your Secretary of State, your UN Ambassador, and your Press Secretary insist for weeks that the attack was a protest of a crude video? You knew that story was false. What was your reason for misleading the American people?”

“Mr. President, moving beyond the controversy over scandals, I’d like to ask you about your philosophy of government. In your speech on the economy, and especially in your second inaugural address, you argued you’re fulfilling America’s constitutional vision by working to improve people’s lives. But there’s a different view of America’s meaning sir. Your critics argue the Founders proposed to expand liberty and opportunity by creating a limited, divided government. They say you propose, instead, to protect security and equality by expansive, controlling, redistributing government. Isn’t that a different philosophy, Mr. President? Isn’t it actually the ultimate overthrow of the Founders' vision?”

Can any of you microphone jockeys ask hard question?

Don’t you overpaid, effete talkers get it? Real reporters confront ambitious. They call bigwigs out for inconsistencies and contradictions. They might even venture to ask a question or two based on premises different from the assumptions of The Man they are questioning. 

Where did you all go to journalism school? Why did you go to journalism school? To be lapdogs for the state? To be watchdogs for government, that bark and growl and savage citizens who oppose government’s actions?

What good are you?

Recently, Americans learned their government is spying on them.  

Massive amounts of data about every aspect of your life are being collected and stored.

Almost nothing is private anymore.  All data about you from phone calls, emails, internet browsing, social media posts and comments, online photos, utilities, financial transactions, TV viewing, guns purchased, medical records, drug prescriptions, travel records, traffic cameras, satellite images, and more will be stored.

Sound impossible?  Until recently, it was.  But a massive one-million square foot NSA spy facility will be ready to go in Fall 2013.  Located in Utah, it will be the home of the "Titan," a super computer that can store more data than all of the other computers in the world, COMBINED.  It is capable of storing yottabytes (a million billion gigabytes) of data.

Here's more...

Learn More:  NSA Spying Allegations

Education changes lives.  It has always been the key to unlocking potential and achieving dreams.

Education has transformational power and can help us become someone we haven't even imagined yet. 

It can change generations to come.

In this inspiring commencement address, Condoleezza Rice talks about the responsibilities of an educated person: find your passion and act on it, use your reason, cultivate humility, and remain optimistic as you serve others.

This year marks the 10th anniversary of the creation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

DHS was established to help prevent terrorist attacks within the U.S., reduce our overall vulnerability to terrorism, and help us rapidly respond to any attacks that may occur. 

DHS was also tasked with the massive challenge of integrating 22 separate agencies into a single unified department. 

Ten years later, not only has DHS grown larger than many had ever anticipated, but the effectiveness of the department has been called into question.

I am alarmed and disappointed at the failure of DHS, the FBI, and other agencies within the intelligence community to prioritize and share critical information on the Tsarnaev brothers with state and local law enforcement prior to the Boston attacks. Our government has known about these information-sharing challenges for years but has been unable—and, at times, unwilling—to solve them.

At an April hearing before the House Oversight Subcommittee, Cathy Berrick from the Government Accountability Office testified that the coordination and sharing of best practices is critical, but as of March 2013, the federal government had made no substantial progress in developing an overarching system to strengthen the sharing of intelligence, terrorism, and law enforcement information among federal, state, local, tribal, international, and private-sector partners.

I’m also concerned with DHS’s failure to properly recognize the threat posed by radical Islamist terrorism. If our government is unwilling to even discuss the threats facing our country, how do we ever hope to combat them? From the classification of the Fort Hood shootings as workplace violence to missed signals in the Boston bombings, I’m worried that political correctness has taken the place of common sense within the department.

With DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano set to resign in September, I hope this transition will be a turning point for DHS and for our counterterrorism strategy here at home. I strongly encourage President Obama to nominate a Secretary who will have better discernment in identifying the threats from Iran and Islamist terrorism and in prioritizing communication among DHS and state and local law enforcement partners.

Representative Jeff Duncan (R) represents South Carolina’s third congressional district.

Are the feds spying on American citizens?  

When reports of government spying hit the news, officials were quick to claim that data was being stored, but it was only accessed when there was evidence of a security threat.

Now it looks like Americans have much more cause for concern.  

Wake up!  Once the massive government spy system is fully in place, there will be no turning back.

President Obama can’t stop comparing himself, or the son he never had, to Trayvon Martin. And he can’t stop talking about race. Everything in Obama’s world is black and white. This is not America’s first “post race President.” This is America’s first “all race, all the time President.”

I see the Zimmerman/Trayvon Martin case very differently. For me it was never about black or white. It was always about life or death- for George Zimmerman. 

You see, thirty-six years ago I was George Zimmerman. Thirty-six years ago I almost died in a life or death struggle eerily similar to George Zimmerman’s confrontation. Let me tell you the story.

In 1977, at the age of 15, I attended Mt Vernon High School in Mt. Vernon, New York, one of the most dangerous and violent urban schools in America. Guns and knives were rampant. Assaults were a daily occurrence. Every walk through the hallway was an opportunity to be beaten or robbed. Lunchtime was an opportunity to have your lunch extorted by someone threatening your life. And worst of all were the bathrooms. Every decent kid at Mt. Vernon High School knew we were taking our lives in our hands if we went to the bathroom- so we didn’t. We learned to hold it in all day until we got home- for fear of being robbed or beaten in the filthy, dangerous bathrooms where hoods, gang members, and drug dealers hung out.

The school was about 85% black. I was white. But being white wasn’t the problem. Being a good kid was the problem.  It’s wasn’t black vs. white. It was good vs. bad. The good black kids were as readily beaten up and intimidated as the good white kids.

Like George Zimmerman I decided I wanted to make a difference- for white and black kids. I was sick of the crime and violence. I spent the summer lifting weights and taking boxing lessons, bulked up, and upon my return to school, volunteered to become a Marshal. That meant I was part of our volunteer school police force. We were unarmed, but carried badges and walkie talkies. Our job was to police the halls and prevent crime, drug dealing, and cutting classes.

Like Zimmerman, we weren’t supposed to engage, only observe and call for help. But, as you might surmise, it doesn’t always work out that way.

In the late Spring of 1977 I faced a “George Zimmerman moment.” As I patrolled an empty hallway in my high school, I spotted a gang-banger smoking and listening to loud music when he was supposed to be in class. I confronted and told him, “You’re coming with me.” The kid wheeled around and pulled a gigantic knife. In court it was classified as a machete (with a blade longer than 8 ½ inches). He lunged at me and I grabbed his wrist. We wrestled to the ground with him on top. A much bigger kid than me, he was soon winning the struggle and about to stick the machete into my head.

If I had had a gun, I certainly would have used it to save my life. That was the choice George Zimmerman faced. What Obama and the race-baiters call murder is self-defense. Those who make the race baiters happy by not fighting back are…dead. After the fact, they’re called “victims.”

I got lucky. As my life was about to be extinguished a principal emerged from his office to check on the commotion.  Like Zimmerman, I’m sure no one knew which of us was screaming in my life or death struggle, but my screams saved my life. The principal shouted, “Hey you, drop that knife.” The kid ran. The principal raced to my side…I told him what happened…together we chased down my assailant in the school courtyard. I lived to tell this story.

Zimmerman’s critics call him “a police wanna-be.” I guess you could say I was a “police wanna-be” too. How rude. You know what that means? Zimmerman and I cared about our community. I cared about my fellow classmates. He cared about his fellow homeowners. We both cared about right and wrong. We wanted to protect and serve. We wanted to make a difference. And we volunteered to put our lives on the line- for no pay.

Should someone like that be punished, vilified, and put in prison, or respected, celebrated, and recognized by society? I believe at the least, that person deserves the benefit of the doubt. I cheer a person who volunteers to protect his school or neighborhood. If only more Americans were willing to police our streets and schools, we’d all be safer. We should be thanking the George Zimmermans of this world.

You know the biggest irony? Obama is the ultimate “community organizer” and fan of volunteerism. Obama thinks if you volunteer to protest in front of banks to force minority loans, or fight for welfare and food stamps, you’re a community hero. But if you lay your life on the line to protect your community from criminals, you deserve prison for defending your life. Interesting interpretation.

God forbid you ever find yourself in a life or death situation, and survive by hurting or killing the bad guy. If the Al Sharpton’s and Jesse Jackson’s have their way, you’ll end up in jail. Unfortunately our President can now be added to the list of people out to vilify you for trying to clean up your community and help your fellow man, white or black. Always remember that George Zimmerman was protecting a large number of black homeowners in that community.

Obama fantasizes that he could have been Trayvon Martin. But thirty-six years ago, I really was George Zimmerman.

Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (“PTSD”) is an immobilizing illness characterized by flashbacks, nightmares, depression and extreme anxiety.

It can lead to angry and violent outbursts. 

It is brought on by exposure to a terrifying or traumatic event.

500,000 of the 2.5 million soldiers who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan suffer from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder or Traumatic Brain Injury.

Those who have given their all for us are not getting all the help they need.

22 soldiers a day - 8000 a year - are killing themselves. 

Another 45 per day - over 16,000 per year - make a failed attempt at suicide.

These men and women deserve better.

Please help get the word out.  Pass this on to your family and friends.

For information on how to help, please go to Wound that Don't Bleed.com.

...Government exists to protect people's life, liberty and property. 

It receives its legitimate powers from individuals who possess, and then delegate, certain authorities to it. 

Just as I cannot force my neighbor to fund my medical care, I cannot justifiably do so through my representatives in government.

Today's government bears little resemblance with its core purpose. This circumstance has resulted from a steady abandonment of personal responsibility, as individuals make poor choices and want bailouts, subsidies and support to avoid the consequences of their own actions. Eager to assume more power, the state has willingly stepped in to help.

At the outset of determining how best to help those in need, we must consider our objective. Should we seek to support, or supplant, personal responsibility? Are we working towards a vibrant, strong community, or are we relying on the state to take care of those around us?

In a true community, individuals fulfill their personal responsibility by voluntarily helping those in need rather than shirking this mandate and allowing the state to forcibly tax everybody in order to do it. By deferring to the government, we lose out on important experiences, relationships, and opportunities that exist in interactions of mutual support and service.

Providing these services through a bureaucratic middleman divorces the giver and recipient, uses force to achieve this goal and destroys any sense of community. On these grounds, many individuals rightly object to the government's intervention in what should be an individual responsibility.

It is easy to object when the government exceeds its proper boundaries. It's not nearly as easy to step in and take over, crowding out the government by taking care of our friends and neighbors ourselves. Apathy and laziness lead many to tolerate taxation as a viable alternative, allowing them to carry on with their lives without being bothered by the demands of others.

In the past few decades, government has grown to astronomical proportions, passing laws that affect every part of our lives. Unable or unwilling to take care of ourselves and voluntarily contribute to strengthen society, we have ended up with a nanny state aiming (and failing) to do it on our behalf. As columnist Walter Williams noted, "Our increased reliance on laws to regulate behavior is a measure of how uncivilized we've become."

To counteract this worrisome trend, lawmakers and citizens alike must restore personal responsibility as the foundational benchmark of each proposed policy. Churches, teachers, non-profit groups, and especially parents should coordinate efforts to promote and popularize this public virtue.

Those fighting for limited government have been largely working backwards, as the fight for liberty is best won not by tearing government down, but by building up institutions and individuals that help create a vibrant society and strong community.


Connor Boyack is president of Libertas Institute and author of "Latter-day Responsibility: Choosing Liberty Through Personal Accountability."

Bill Whittle does a great job of summing up the story of Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman.  Trayvon was not a sweet child, and George was not a racist vigilante.

In fact, George Zimmerman is one of the most caring people you could meet - no matter what race you happen to be.

It's incomprehensible and unconscionable that politicians and people with an agenda have twisted this story beyond recognition and have thus placed George in grave danger.

Please share.  The more people who know the truth, the more safe George will be.  

...Those who talk glibly about redistribution often act as if people are just inert objects that can be placed here and there, like pieces on a chess board, to carry out some grand design. 

But if human beings have their own responses to government policies, then we cannot blithely assume that government policies will have the effect intended.

The history of the 20th century is full of examples of countries that set out to redistribute wealth and ended up redistributing poverty. The communist nations were a classic example, but by no means the only example.

In theory, confiscating the wealth of the more successful people ought to make the rest of the society more prosperous. But when the Soviet Union confiscated the wealth of successful farmers, food became scarce. As many people died of starvation under Stalin in the 1930s as died in Hitler's Holocaust in the 1940s.

How can that be? It is not complicated. You can only confiscate the wealth that exists at a given moment. You cannot confiscate future wealth -- and that future wealth is less likely to be produced when people see that it is going to be confiscated. Farmers in the Soviet Union cut back on how much time and effort they invested in growing their crops, when they realized that the government was going to take a big part of the harvest. They slaughtered and ate young farm animals that they would normally keep tending and feeding while raising them to maturity.

People in industry are not inert objects either. Moreover, unlike farmers, industrialists are not tied to the land in a particular country.

Russian aviation pioneer Igor Sikorsky could take his expertise to America and produce his planes and helicopters thousands of miles away from his native land. Financiers are even less tied down, especially today, when vast sums of money can be dispatched electronically to any part of the world.

If confiscatory policies can produce counterproductive repercussions in a dictatorship, they are even harder to carry out in a democracy. A dictatorship can suddenly swoop down and grab whatever it wants. But a democracy must first have public discussions and debates. Those who are targeted for confiscation can see the handwriting on the wall, and act accordingly.

Among the most valuable assets in any nation are the knowledge, skills and productive experience that economists call "human capital." When successful people with much human capital leave the country, either voluntarily or because of hostile governments or hostile mobs whipped up by demagogues exploiting envy, lasting damage can be done to the economy they leave behind.

Fidel Castro's confiscatory policies drove successful Cubans to flee to Florida, often leaving much of their physical wealth behind. But poverty-stricken refugees rose to prosperity again in Florida, while the wealth they left behind in Cuba did not prevent the people there from being poverty stricken under Castro. The lasting wealth the refugees took with them was their human capital.

We have all heard the old saying that giving a man a fish feeds him only for a day, while teaching him to fish feeds him for a lifetime. Redistributionists give him a fish and leave him dependent on the government for more fish in the future.

If the redistributionists were serious, what they would want to distribute is the ability to fish, or to be productive in other ways. Knowledge is one of the few things that can be distributed to people without reducing the amount held by others.

That would better serve the interests of the poor, but it would not serve the interests of politicians who want to exercise power, and to get the votes of people who are dependent on them.

Barack Obama can endlessly proclaim his slogan of "Forward," but what he is proposing is going backwards to policies that have failed repeatedly in countries around the world.

Yet, to many people who cannot be bothered to stop and think, redistribution sounds good.