Response to the Comments Made to My Letter to the Editor

I am choosing not to defend my letter on the Sauk Valley site, because I get tired of getting into a ideological battle with kool aid drinkers. However, because of the pseudo intellectual disinformation, I felt compelled to retort here for those with an open mind and ability to think for themselves.

Socialists attempt to redefine their own views as not being socialist, because they know that term connected to their ideology will be their defeat by the individualism of America. Mussolini did the same thing by calling his brand of socialism, fascism. It is dishonesty or ignorance to define "means of production" as being only goods and not services. Economics 101 here. Means of Production is the means that are used to produce goods and services, including the social relations between workers, technology, and other resources. Miss guided definitions come from two possible reasons. 1) Ignorance or 2) Fraud. My guess it is fraud to justify socialism for only social service. Their attempt at fraud however, does not hold up to logic. If the Federal Government should be in charge of insurance and health care because they are services, then they have every right to control the airlines, investment banking, travel agencies, window washers, marriage councilors, UNIONS and little league baseball.

The federal government was given the power by the people to help organize the infrastructure of the country to insure the free trade of goods between the states and to protect our borders from foreign powers. So even a child would understand the need for a post office and military in colonial America. How that extends to social services is absolutely mind numbing.

Wikipedia pseudo intellectuals are dangerous with their erratic dot connecting. Article 1 section 8, clause 18 is quoted as support for greater government powers along with references to Madison and Hamilton. Key line in Article 1 section 8, clause 18, "vested by this constitution". The race baiters always leave that line out. The Federalists, believed that the government would not grow out of control with this article, because it was limited by the constitution. Alexander Hamilton did argue for more flexibility in federal powers. But he was alone and by historical accounts a fervent nationalist. Unlike what was stated in the response to my letter, his fellow federalist James Madison, the guy who authored the line in the Constitution, disagreed with Hamilton and believed those powers were regulated to those only enumerated in the constitution. Madison was fanatical about checks and balances on the federal government and protection of individual rights from the tyranny of the majority.

The anti-federalists realized the General Welfare clause left enough vagueness and wiggle room to have the potential for corrupt men to create a powerful central government. The comment that the anti-federalists lost the debate again shows the ignorance of history. If it was not for the anti-federalists, we would not have had a Bill of Rights in our Constitution. Despite this victory, the anti-federalists nightmare and what was beyond the imagination of federalists like Jame Madison has happened. The progressives made the leaps from Post Office and Armed Forces, to social security, to the great society, and now socialized medicine. Thomas Jefferson warned against this when he said, "Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny."

It was silly to loosely connect today's tea partiers with the Anti-Federalists of Colonial America. As much respect and admiration I have for the Anti-Federalists, I nor anyone I know wants to reduce the Federal Government to equal or less power than the States as with the Confederation of States. We simply want the federal government to return to the power and size enumerated by the Constitution.

It is also laughable to think socialists try to equate themselves with the Federalists. Madison, if here today, would be viewed as a libertarian. As far as Hamilton, he did not believe in Democracy, yet these Democracy lovers seem to quote him every chance they get.

The fundamental flaw with the Wackos are their lack of understanding of the natural laws and the respect for individual life, liberty and property. To state the government has the right to pass universal health care or any program for that matter that imposes on the natural laws and rights of ANY of its Citizens is not only wrong, its unconstitutional and immoral.

The ultimate form of bigotry is to be prejudice against the individual. Since these progressives appear to not have any value for individual liberty, they are worst form of bigot.

God forgive the ignorant and bless those that fight for their Liberty.