If You Want the Money, You’ll Have to Work for It

Our government places conditions on all the money and aid they dole out – education, healthcare, State aid, everything. Why not this?

from IBD:

Why Does The Left Oppose Work Requirements For Welfare?

Attacks on President Trump’s push for work requirements to get welfare benefits fall into two categories: Either the work rules are pointless, or they are inhumane. Neither is correct.

For some on the left, the only measure of whether a poverty program is working is the number of people enrolled. They considered ObamaCare a great success, for example, precisely because it added millions of able-bodied adults onto this welfare program. They cheered the sharp rise in food stamp enrollment under President Obama as an economic stimulus. read more

Say Goodbye to the Obama Era

from IBD:

Trump Dismantles Another Obama ‘Achievement’ — Just One More To Go

This week, the Trump administration announced that it would revise President Obama’s draconian auto fuel economy mandates. That alone is big news. But it marks the near total reversal of Obama’s anti-growth domestic policies. That’s bigger news.

EPA head Scott Pruitt said Tuesday that the administration would rewrite Obama’s fuel economy standards starting with model year 2022. Obama’s plan was to mandate that all cars sold average 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025, up from 38.3 mpg this year.

As we have repeatedly explained in this space, Obama’s fuel economy mandate was little more than a thinly disguised electric car mandate, since hitting that level would have required a substantial increase in plug-in sales. As it stands, there are only a handful of powered cars that can go more than 54 miles on a gallon of gas.

Pruitt said that, instead of trying to force consumers into more expensive cars that environmentalists like, the focus at the EPA will be “on making cars that people actually buy and that are efficient.” read more

The Border Wall Works – Let’s Build It

from Constitution.com:

Trump Gets Amazing Proof of Just How Effective Border Walls Can Be

There is an old saying that good fences make for good neighbors and during his recent trip to California, President Donald trump learned how effective even a makeshift border wall can be.

Trump got some shocking news when he visited the southern border near San Diego, California, on Tuesday, March 13. Not only did he learn that a border wall can be highly effective, but he found out that there doesn’t even have to be some elaborate, high-dollar system to make it effective for stopping illegal border crossings.

Trump headed to the People’s Republic of California this week in part to view some border wall prototypes. read more

Innovation Born of Necessity

by: Brent Smith at the Common Constitutionalist

Scroll Down for Audio Version

I am firmly against excessive tariffs. I’ve made that crystal clear on a number of occasions. Reasonable tariffs on imported goods are well… perfectly reasonable. At our founding, it was the source of federal government funding. Reasonable import tariffs (imposts) and duties covered the cost of operating the small federal government budget. It paid for the labor and clerical work of the importation and inspection process. As the feds were responsible for little else constitutionally, tariffs were an adequate funding system.

But these days, tariffs could not hope to cover the cost of operating the federal leviathan. They are now more a measure of protectionism worldwide. And I agree that on the world stage, America has allowed itself to be taken advantage of. Other nations expect America to charge minimal import tariffs and duties for the goods they export to us, but few reciprocate.

Nations like China do in fact take advantage of us. They expect us to treat them fairly, but often charge exorbitant tariffs on products we ship to them. And that’s assuming they accept our exports at all. In many cases, they simply do not. They don’t wish to compete with American imports on their own soil. For a long time, it has been rather one-sided.

And for just as long, the American government has put up with inequity, afraid to make waves. Enter President Trump. read more

Donald J “Smoot-Hawley” Trump – It’s Déjà Vu All Over Again

by: Brent Smith at the Common Constitutionalist

Scroll Down for Audio Version

Here we are again – our government doing what they do best – picking winners and losers. President Trump has done a lot of good things for this nation thus far, but protectionist tariffs aren’t one of them.

The first protectionist tariff, the “Dallas” tariff, was enacted in 1816. It happened again in 1824, in 1828, the infamous “Tariff of Abominations,” in 1832 to fix the problem in 1828 (which it didn’t), and in 1842, the “Black” tariff.

All these were passed to benefit the Northern States at the expense of the South, and all were major contributing factors in the run-up to the Civil War. No, the Civil War was not just about slavery.

And then there was the infamous “Smoot-Hawley” tariff of 1930. It was named after its authors, Utah Senator Reed Smoot and Oregon Congressman Willis Hawley. The purpose was to support U.S. farmers who had been ravaged by the Dust Bowl.

By the time 1930 rolled around, practically every legislator had added protections to Smoot-Hawley for their states’ industries. The bill ended up with proposed tariffs on 20,000 individual imported goods. Does this sound eerily familiar to anyone? It’s why bills are thousands of pages long – to attempt to hide such things.

This time, instead of agriculture, our government has chosen the American Aluminum and Steel industries to be the temporary winners. Yay! read more

Limbaugh’s Thoughts on the latest Budget Agreement

by: Brent Smith at the Common Constitutionalist

Listening to Rush Limbaugh on Friday had me confused. He’s always been the voice of the right, giving voice to our thoughts. But it appears since this past presidential election, at least to me, that he is putting the voice of Trump and his supporters ahead of what we knew he has always been – a no-nonsense, small government, frugal conservative.

He has always been the man we could count on to hold everyone accountable for their actions and votes, if they happened to veer away from espoused conservative principles.

Yet Rush doesn’t appear to me to ever be critical of the President, even as Trump signs onto a massive spending increase or offers up amnesty to millions.

I discuss all of this rather uncomfortable topic. And believe me – I hate doing it. read more

We Know How Great our Military is – We Don’t Need a Parade to Prove it

by: Brent Smith at the Common Constitutionalist

Scroll Down for Audio Version

President Trump says he has an interest in a military parade in Washington D.C. sometime in the future.Image result for military parade

Fox Business reported on it.

“President Trump is incredibly supportive of America’s great service members who risk their lives every day to keep our country safe. He has asked the Department of Defense to explore a celebration at which all Americans can show their appreciation,” White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said in a statement.

First, I don’t think it really serves any purpose. Those who love and respect the military already do, and show it as often as we can – and you’re not going to change the minds of leftists. Also, in my humble opinion – those who can’t fight, parade, those who can, don’t need to parade.

Personally I hated wearing my dress uniforms. Heck, I don’t care for wearing a civilian suit. Most of our military are lunch-pail, fatigue wearing fighting men and women. They are not accustomed to goose-stepping down some city street like so many dancing monkeys, on display for their civilian overlords. read more

WND Exclusive – TRUMP’S TRANSFORMATION FROM CARICATURE TO STATESMAN

OK, everyone has said their peace regarding the State of the Union speech. I guess it’s my turn.

I must admit that I was dreading that night. I was so close to not even watching it. I never cared for Trump’s voice, his inflection, his mannerisms, his facial expressions. There was pretty much nothing I liked along those lines.

I had also prejudged the speech – figuring I knew what he was going to say and how he would act. So why even watch? But I decided to suck it up and watch it anyway. I’m glad I did. This was not campaign Trump or rookie Trump. This was our president and a statesman. read more

Yes, Democracies Die, but Republicanism Lives On

by: Brent Smith at the Common Constitutionalist

Scroll Down for Audio Version

The leftist website Vox.com posted an article yesterday entitled, “How democracies die, explained.” Of course it has to do with the president, but they add that, “The problems in American democracy run far deeper than Trump.” Well bully for them. Dilly Dilly!

Now right off the bat, we should notice a glaring error. It may stem from calculation or ignorance. In case you missed it, America is not a democracy. However those of leftist persuasion often refer to the United States as one. We are of course a representative republic.

To the ignorant, those who have not been taught the difference, this is understandable. Being ignorant is simply lacking knowledge. No matter how well educated one is, he or she will always be ignorant of something. There are no exceptions. Okay one. God knows everything.

However, knowing the difference and deliberately misleading the ignorant is a different story. This, for want of better term, is malicious. read more

Conservatives Must Separate Trump the President from Trump the Man

by: Brent Smith at the Common Constitutionalist

Scroll Down for Audio Version

I have a disagreement with some conservatives. However, I choose not to name names due to my respect for them on so many other issues.

My disagreement is regarding the Trump presidency vs. Trump the man.

There is a story out there. Most of us have heard at least some of it – that Trump had paid off an adult film star, possibly with campaign funds, for an alleged affair Trump had in 2006. The payoff was meant to make his involvement with her go away. In other words – hush money.

Trump is accused of breaking two campaign finance laws by not reporting $130,000 of hush money paid to Stephanie Clifford, aka, Stormy Daniels – the aforementioned adult film star. One complaint was filed with The Federal Election Commission (FEC) and the other with the Justice Department.

No doubt Jeff Sessions will feel the need to recuse himself again and the left will demand another independent council. I don’t know this, but I won’t be surprised if it happens. read more