Sameness and Equality

**Editor's Note: I left marks "opinion disclaimer" in because I thought he would appreciate it, but I have to say that he makes some very good points in what he's written here. If you are reading this you probably know me and share many of my views. Even so, I think this article was meant for those that have bought into the notion that morality is relative. If you're one of those people, read at your own "risk." Also, before you make any judgement calls regarding the thesis of Mark's comments, make sure that you understand what it means to be "transgender."

--Enjoy!

My opinions are my own and in no way represent those of this blog’s creator.

I agree with the feminists’ movement of the 60’s in so much as it promoted equality of the sexes. However, I think its main focus did more damage than good. Namely, it promoted the sameness of men and women. Equality and sameness of the sexes are not the same. The feminist movement did more to make women like men than to celebrate womanhood. The differences of men and women are important and should be celebrated, not disregarded.

Two recent events in Maine illustrate how far feminists (which includes men and women) will go to promote sameness. Early this year the Maine Human Rights Commission moved to ban sex-specific bathrooms and lockers in schools based on the notion that prohibiting transgender (notice “gender”) boys and girls from a certain bathroom amounts to discrimination. So if a biological male feels he is a girl, he should be allowed to use the girls’ bathroom and showers. Biology, in effect, is secondary to how a person feels. After all, if men and women are the same, biology makes no difference. Also, earlier this year about two-dozen women marched topless in Portland, Maine “in an effort to erase what they see as a double standard on male and female nudity.” This truly is scary. What scares me is not their march per se, but the amount of nonsense that would have to be fed to these women to override basic instincts and common sense. The fact is men and women react very differently to bare skin. It was all too laughable when the women became enraged at all the men who showed up with their cameras.

We are now seeing the culmination of the belief that there are no differences between men and women. Same-sex marriage implies that men and women, as such, are not important. The only thing that matters is love, for there are no differences between men and women. I should say that my heart does ache for gays and lesbians. To not be able to marry the person you love would be painful. I acknowledge that bans on same-sex marriage are unfair to homosexuals. We have in place many laws and regulations that could be deemed unfair. The question is, what is better for society? A society can only be as functional as its separate parts. The more functional families are, the better a society will be. I also acknowledge that a functional gay couple is capable of raising a healthy child. And a dysfunctional heterosexual couple is capable of raising an unhealthy child. However, I think few would argue that, if all else being equal, a man and a woman can offer so much more to a child than two men or two women.

Our current-day culture blurs the differences between men and women. I think it is a double-standard to say that society artificially creates differences between the sexes but homosexuality is predetermined.

Marriage between a man and a woman beautifully celebrates their unique qualities. We are equal but we are different—and that’s important.

Inequality vs. Violence

This is an exciting day for Turn the Tides. A friend of mine and resident of Southern Arizona has agreed to guest-write. I want you all to know that I encourage and welcome the opportunity to post quality content from other sources. The readership of this blog isn't thing to shout about, so I wonder if it would even be worth the effort to you all. None-the-less, you're welcome to send me something.

Ironically, Mark mentions the concept of "haves" and "have-nots." My most recent post was awarded two comments that forced me to dig even deeper into the concept of political factions. In the next post I'll discuss my thoughts on the concept of those who have and those who don't. Though it is short, Mark brings up a very interesting point about the difference in perspective between the Left and the Right.

Larry McMurtry from the New York Review of Books blog plainly explains what is the greatest injustice of US border security:

The border at Nogales, Sonora, is fifty-five miles from where I write. I rarely go there, not because it’s dangerous—though it is dangerous—but because the deep sadness of the troubles there overwhelms me. And those troubles are much the same, all along the border from Matamoros, across from Texas, to Tijuana, across from California. Lately the drug cartels have upped the ante by pushing north: home invasions, smuggling humans, kidnapping, drugs and more drugs, violence and more violence.

But the sadness I feel at the border is not because of the violence: it’s the eternal struggle of poverty with plenty, a struggle that humiliates and degrades both parties.

What is amazing to me is that he lists all the problems that are associated with the US-Mexico border at yet he still believes that the greatest injustice is the inequality between the poor and the rich. What does this even have to do with border security? It just goes to show that the greatest evil facing the left today is inequality—not murderous drug cartels—but inequality. The left judges the world through the lens of race, gender, class. Trying to stem the inflow illegal immigrants is inherently wrong because the perception is that the haves are keeping out the have-nots. The home invasions, human smugglings, kidnappings, drugs, and violence that define the border at Nogales, Sonora are secondary.

See full article from the exerpt above: "The Trouble With Arizona"

Its Called the Executive Branch, Not the Executive Man

A recent article written by Mitt Romney, and published by USATODAY.com, brought back regretful memories of the day that Mr. Romney resigned the Republican Nomination to John McCain. It was truly a mistake to believe that such a volatile person could beat the emotionally charged Democratic Party.

I wrote a hopeful article right after Barack Obama was elected into office—hopeful that all was well and that the pressures of the Presidential Office would push him Obama into rationality. I am now beginning to realize how wrong I was in my optimism. It is as if conservatives in America shot a metaphorical “3-pointer.” The shot missed, was rebounded by liberals who sent the ball down to the other side of the court and swished their own debilitating “3-pointer.” Not only did we lose the opportunity to progress, but we’ve digressed just as much as we could have progressed.

There is much to be done in the country. Ben Bernake recently was cited in the Washington Post as saying that the current Federal budget is “unsustainable.” The process of rooting out all of the programs that simply are not the Federal Government’s responsibility; the process of handing those responsibilities over to the state and local governments; the process of challenging the American People to take care of their own; these will all take decades to realize. And the problems don’t just stop with the budget. There are several philosophical misconceptions that need to have some light shed upon as well. I believe in America and know that a higher power inspired the formation of this nation. I believe a solution is at hand, but let me warn that our current political system is responsible for most of the problems we face.

Democrats and Republicans rule America right now. I have a hard time understanding why nobody notices that George Washington, the greatest president this country has ever seen, had no party affiliations. Shouldn’t that be an indicator? With the exception of a few, most of our presidents end up gravitating towards the middle of the road. Has anybody thought about why? Has anybody thought that maybe a two party system IS NOT WORKING? Did anybody pay attention to George Washington’s warning against the formation of political parties? Are we really so easily provoked to the mob mentality that we must choose a side?

These are questions that have plagued my mind for several years now. I was at one point in doubt that my questions were valid after my brother scolded my questions with a reference to the Federalist Papers. Having never read any of the Federalist Papers, I had to withdraw my argument until I gained some insight into the argument. But finally, after several years of biting my tongue, my questions receive an indirect vindication from Mitt Romney.

A local University recently held their student body elections for the up-coming year. I have observed the political system at work at this school for several years now and am impressed by the intuitive election process that takes place there every year. When walking down the halls of a university campus two days before an election, most people would expect to see hundreds of signs, posters and flyers that had the typical “Vote For Me” (or something similar) campaign slogan on display. This university, however, has realized that problems are best solved in teams, and that no one person could possibly possess all the skills and know-how needed to govern a large body of people.

The winner of the election at this university was not one person, but rather a team called “Team Elevate.” Team Elevate consists of a candidate for each of the following offices: student body president, executive vice president, vice president of academics and vice president of student life. Team Elevate campaigned against other teams that were formed and the student body ultimately made its choice. Can you see why this impressed me so much, yet? No? Well, my last article on leadership focused more on what the people can do to help a leader. This time, I’ll explain how a leader can be most effective.

The first step in becoming an effective leader is to realize that your function is NOT—I repeat—NOT to have all the answers. The days of believing that a governmental leader is an all-knowing god are long-passed (hopefully). We, as well-informed citizens of the United States, CANNOT make the mistake of believing that the President has enough life experience to solve any problem. Our society is one that emphasized specialization. Our citizens are expected to learn a trade and master it. Our colleges practically force us to pick a field of study (i.e. major) and become an expert in that field. So, how can we expect our college educated presidents to be experts in any field other than the one they professed in college? The simple answer is that we can’t. Our society isn’t built that way.

The second step in becoming an effective leader is build leadership qualities. These qualities include all the clichés that we’ve seen on political advertisements for years. Jim Collins give the best description of good leaders that I’ve ever seen in his book Good to Great, so I’ll refer you to that book for the qualities a leader needs.

The final step in becoming an effective leader is prioritizing; deciding which problems need to be solved now, and which can wait. For the problems that need to be solved now, a good leader selects individuals who specialize in solving the respective problems. Starting to come together? In the article by Mitt Romney that I mentioned above, he stated the following:

In a crisis, the leader must gather the experts — federal, state, local, public and private — not to discover who is to blame but to secure their active and continuous involvement until the crisis is resolved. There is extraordinary power inherent in an assembly of brilliant people guided by an able leader. In virtually every historic national crisis, our most effective leaders gathered the best minds they could find — consider the Founders in Philadelphia, Lincoln with his "Team of Rivals," Roosevelt with scientists and generals seeking to end World War II, Kennedy with the "Best and Brightest" confronting the Cuban missile crisis. What happens when men and women of various backgrounds, fields of expertise, and unfettered intellectual freedom come together to tackle a problem often exceeds any reasonable expectation. Ideas from one may cross-fertilize the thinking of another, yielding breakthroughs. The president of MIT told me that the university spent millions of dollars to build a bridge connecting two engineering departments that had been separated by a road — the potential for shared thinking made it more than worth the cost. But even a gathering of experts won't accomplish much unless a skilled leader uses their perspective to guide the recovery.

We have something similar to this third recommendation right now, but our focus is all wrong. Whenever a president is elected he chooses a cabinet. These cabinet members are supposedly experts in the field for which they were appointed, and usually are the ones that advise the president toward a specific solution. The great thing about the university mentioned above is that the candidate for student body president advertises his specialists just as much as he advertises himself. Humility is an ESSENTIAL quality of effective leaders. The ability to say, “I don’t know everything, but my team and I can solve everything that we promised to solve” is lacking in this country. During the campaign, the students at this university can interview each member of the team and decide if they are truly qualified for the position.

I wish I would have known that Janet Napolitano and Hillary Clinton were going to be in the President’s cabinet while he was campaigning. Had I known this, I would have been much more adamant in my Obama opposition. Instead, we elect leaders on the basis of party affiliation and basically say, “Here’s hoping!”

Hopefully, by now you’ve realized by now that this sort of system cannot exist with our current one. If we tried, experts would be selected on the basis of party instead of expertise. Republican candidates would only select Republican cronies, and Democrats would do the same. George Washington was the best President we’ve had; not because he knew everything, but because he knew how to inspire people to do what was right.

We have to face the truth that both parties are too interested in furthering their own interests to be trusted with improving our country. The part that gives me hope is that it wouldn’t take much to change our political system. It just takes one privately funded visionary that has the good sense to realize that his or her intellect is of better use when it is combined with other, specialized intellects.

Photo Evidence of the Need for Strict Immigration Laws

To all people with eyes to see:

Since most of the residents of this nation can't go to to the Arizona border to see what its like, a Tucson resident did us all a big favor. They pulled out a camera. I really don't think I need to say much more than the person who wrote the email below has said.

Imagine what kind of numbers of people are required to create such a mess! Imagine if you owned the land shown below! Imagine if that land grew the cotton that you supported yourself with! All the while, Obama continues to put immigration reform off and then humors the Mexican President while he bashes one of our nation's states in our nation's capital.

Its just ridiculous. If America only knew how poorly and cruelly the Guatemalans are treated in Mexico if they migrate illegally. Southern US Border states installed water pumps so that immigrants wouldn't die in their journey! Guatemalans who cross the border get beat, raped and imprisoned.


Sonoran Desert, Outside Tucson, AZ

Hey everyone out there! We, in Arizona, know you're boycotting us -- but you really should come out here and see our Beautiful Sonoran Desert. It's just gorgeous right now! We know you'd love it and maybe you can share what you saw with the rest of the country so they can love it too!

This is on an 'illegal super - highway' from Mexico to the USA (Tucson) used by human smugglers. This area is located in a wash, approximately 1.5 miles long, just south of Tucson, Arizona. If a flood came,all this would be washed to the river and then onto the sea!

It is estimated over 5,000 discarded backpacks are in this wash. Countless water containers, food wrappers, clothing, feces, including thousands of soiled baby diapers. And as you can see in this picture, fresh footprints leading right into it.

As we kept walking down the wash, we thought for sure it was going to end, but around every corner was more and more trash!

And of course the trail leading out of the wash in our city, heads directly NORTH to Tucson, then leads to your town tomorrow.

They've already come through here. Isn't Arizona just beautiful, America?Why would you boycott us??? Our desert has basically been turned into a landfill.

The trash left behind by people illegally crossing our border is another Environmental Disaster to hit the USA. If these actions had been done in one of our Northwest Forests or Seashore National Parks areas, there would be an uprising of the American people.....but this is the Arizona-Mexican border. You won't see these pictures on CNN, ABC, NBC or the Arizona Republic Repugnant newspaper. Nor will they mention the disease that comes from the uncovered human waste left in our desert. However, with respect to CNN, ABC & NBC, they do offer us "Special Reports" on cheating celebrity spouses....

This information needs to be seen by the rest of the country.

SB 1070 Arizona Immigration

I served an LDS mission in Mexico and LOVE the Mexican people. I love the fact that they have brought their culture to the United States. I have come to also love the other latin cultures through several friendships. If they are willing to pledge allegiance to the Constitution of the United states and pay taxes, I'd rather have them as neighbors than some of the closed-door caucasians I know.

With that said, I think its important for people outside Arizona to know why this bill was passed. I grew up in Arizona until I was 19 and know what is going on there now. The drug cartel isn't just taking over Northern Mexico. Its taking over Southern Arizona as well. The media is attacking the new law because of the potential for racial profiling. Since when does being required to show proof of citizenship (drivers license) lead to racial profiling?

Despite what the ACLU, CNN, the New York Times, TNT and President Obama are saying, the majority of Arizonans are in favor of the law. Also of little note in the media is the fact that the majority of polled U.S. Citizens are in favor of the law. Many other states are now also considering enacting a similar law. WHY?!

Where were the Feds when Rancher Rob Krentz was murdered by the drug cartel on his ranch a month ago? The Federal government also failed to protect a young family in my inlaws' church group. They were boxed in by 3 cars and shot with their 1 year old sitting in the back seat. The man of the couple was a member of the U.S. Consolate in Mexico. The drug cartel is getting bolder and stronger. President Obama continues to push immigration to the back burner so Arizona took action. My grandpa (WHO ACTUALLY LIVES IN ARIZONA) sent me an email with this letter
from an Arizona Senator in it.



"I’m Arizona State Senator Sylvia Allen. I want to explain SB 1070 which I voted for and was just signed by Governor Jan Brewer. Rancher Rob Krentz was murdered by the drug cartel on his ranch a month ago. I participated in a senate hearing two weeks ago on the border violence, here is just some of the highlights from those who testified.

"The people who live within 60 to 80 miles of the Arizona/Mexico Border have for years been terrorized and have pleaded for help to stop the daily invasion of humans who cross their property. One Rancher testified that 300 to 1200 people a DAY come across his ranch vandalizing his property, stealing his vehicles and property, cutting down his fences, and leaving trash. In the last two years he has found 17 dead bodies and two Koran bibles.

"Another rancher testified that daily drugs are brought across his ranch in a military operation. A point man with a machine gun goes in front, 1/2 mile behind are the guards fully armed, 1/2 mile behind them are the drugs, behind the drugs 1/2 mile are more guards. These people are violent and they will kill anyone who gets in the way. This was not the only rancher we heard that day that talked about the drug trains.

"One man told of two illegal’s who came upon his property. One shot him in the back and the other shot him in the arm after forcing them to carry the drugs. Daily they listen to gun fire during the night. It is not safe to leave his family alone on the ranch and they can’t leave the ranch for fear of nothing being left when they come back.

"The border patrol is not on the border. They have set up 60 miles away with check points that do nothing to stop the invasion. They are not allowed to use force in stopping anyone who is entering. They run around chasing them and if they get their hands on them then they can take them back across the border.

"Federal prisons have over 35% illegal’s and 20% of Arizona prisons are filled with illegal’s. In the last few years 80% of our law enforcement that have been killed or wounded have been by an illegal.

"The majority of the people coming now are people we need to be worried about. The ranchers told us that they have seen a change in the people coming. They are not just those who are looking for work and a better life.

"The Federal Government has refused for years to do anything to help the border states. We have been over run and once they are here we have the burden of funding state services that they use. Education costs have been over a billion dollars. The healthcare costs billions of dollars. Our State is broke with a $3.5 billion deficit and we have many serious decisions to make. One is that we do not have the money to care for any who are not here legally. It has to stop. The border can be secured. We have the technology we have the ability to stop this invasion. We must know who is coming and they must come in an organized manner legally so that we can assimilate them into our population and protect the sovereignty of our country. We are a nation of laws. We have a responsibility to protect our citizens and to protect the integrity of our country and the government which we live under.

"I would give amnesty today to many, but here is the problem: we dare not do this until the Border is secure. It will do no good to forgive them because thousands will come behind them and we will be over run to the point that there will no longer be the United States of America but a North American Union of open borders. I ask you what form of government will we live under? How long will it be before we will be just like Mexico, Canada or any of the other Central American or South American countries? We have already lost our language. Everything must also be printed in Spanish. We have already lost our history. It is no longer taught in our schools. And we have lost our borders.

"The leftist media has distorted what SB 1070 will do. It is not going to set up a Nazi Germany. Are you kidding? The ACLU and the leftist courts will do everything to protect those who are here illegally. SB 1070 was passed in an effort to try and stop illegal’s from setting up businesses, and employment, and receiving state services and give the ability to local law enforcement when there is probable cause (like a traffic stop) to determine if they are here legally. Federal law is very clear if you are here on a visa you must have your papers on you at all times. That is the law. In Arizona, all you need to show you are a legal citizen is a driver license, MVD identification card, Native American Card, or a Military ID. This is what you need to vote, get a hunting license, etc.. So nothing new has been added to this law. No one is going to be stopped walking down the street etc… The Socialist who are in power in DC are angry because we dare try and do something and that something the Socialist wants us to do is just let them come. They want the “Transformation” to continue.

"Maybe it is too late to save America. Maybe we are not worthy of freedom anymore. But as an elected official I must try to do what I can to protect our Constitutional Republic. Living in America is not a right just because you can walk across the border. Being an American is a responsibility and it comes by respecting and upholding the Constitution the law of our land which says what you must do to be a citizen of this country. Freedom is not free.

"Respectfully,

"Sylvia Allen
Arizona State Senator"

Declaration of Dependence

An ominous example of what happens when governments exceed their spending limits is being shown in Europe, and more particularly Greece, right now. For years, whenever the debate between socialist vs. capitalist arose, Europe seemed to always be brought up as a shining example of the success of socialist policies. Canada was another one, but they spend next to nothing on national security so their financials are labeled “N/A” in my book. Anyways, back to Europe.

If you haven’t heard yet, Greece is in a jam along with Spain, Portugal and Ireland. Euro is losing value and those that manage the Euro have had to make some tough decisions. “Do we drop Greece and fix the Euro by ourselves, or do we bail them out?” (Is anybody else getting tired of the word ‘bailout’?) To my dismay, Europe has elected to appease the irresponsibility of Greece. This help, however, came at a price. To the dismay of the people of Greece, the price of the bailout will be paid with pay-cuts and pension reductions. Riots and protests have taken place in Greece that resulted in a few deaths. The Greek people are, in a word, unhappy.

The really aggravating part about this whole scenario is that they were happy enough not so long ago. Their economy has experienced incredible growth throughout the last 50 years. The growth of the Greek economy was so stunning that the Greek government began to feel left out and made all sorts of plans for growth as well. To fund all the growth and government expansion, Greece began to borrow money. If used efficiently, and if the global economy remained unchanged, these funds would have been paid back easily.

So, what happened? First of all, Greece abandoned the principles of frugality and thrift that had caused such rapid economic expansion. Government officials became slightly corrupted by all the prosperity and began to line their own pockets. Also contributing to the issue was the housing crisis in the U.S. When Americans have less money to spend, we take go on less vacations to Greece. Given that tourism is such a large part of the Greek economy, this was a big hit.

The main problem, however, is a more internal, broad issue. The government was trying to do too much. They trained their citizens to depend on government to manage their economy. For a while they were fat and happy. But now that everything is crashing down, who is to blame? The citizens are responsible for believing that their government was doing a good job. The government is responsible for believing that their leverage ratio was okay.

The United States is headed in the same direction. Many financial analysts are very worried about the repercussions that the U.S. will feel as a result of the Greek meltdown and the devaluation of the Euro. Global trade will definitely be affected. But just as the core of Greece’s problems was not caused by foreign markets, the problems in the U.S. have been building for a while.

Believe it or not, the United States is still suffering from the Great Depression. The Feds had to step in and fix things; it was necessary. FDR did some valuable things and definitely helped us out of a jam. The problem with that scenario was that the government has been seen as the economic problem solver ever since. Since the depression, there have been numerous ups and downs in our economy. Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence. FDR wrothe the Declaration of Dependence. When times are good, politicians are given the credit (and are rewarded handsomely) for the prosperity. When times are bad, heads roll and politicians are fired.

My question is simple. “In what world can political science buffs and lawyers be expected to manage an economy effectively?!” These people did not study economics or business in college or high school. Why do we think they know anything about the matter? Washington is not going to solve America’s problems. Just as “we the people” formed and ratified the constitution, we need to stimulate our own economy. Sometimes the government reminds me of a mosquito bite. The more attention we give it, the worse it gets. Please do not think that I advocate political apathy. We need to be active participants in government, but we need to stop looking to the government to solve problems that are beyond their constitutional job description.

Start businesses, buy houses, create trade! Take control of your economy! If we stop asking Washington to solve our problems, they probably will stop trying. Right now, the only booming industry in the United States is government. Does anybody else see the irony here? If so, please leave me a comment.

Turn the Tides

Delegate

Has anybody reading this post ever felt too small to make a lasting change? If so, the topic for today may present you with a solution.

I'm learning that our world is becoming smaller and larger at the same time; smaller in the sense that I can talk to somebody on the other side of the world without any amount of difficulty and larger in the sense that because more individuals are able to be heard, each individuals' voice is harder to hear. With all the clutter on the internet and television, skepticism and passive attention is given to most ideas, even the good ones.

Take this blog for example. I am nobody of consequence and as a result this article will be viewed by very few relative to the number of internet users. In my opinion, if the suggestions contained in this article were followed they would bring about the empowerment of each individual. But first, it must be read. Then, the masses have to agree with it. Then programs and corruption have to be overthrown and bills have to be passed in order for any of these ideas to be actualized. Frankly, I feel slightly hopeless that anything I say will have any impact on American society.

This idea is still formulating in my brain, and I haven't ironed out all the details as of yet, but it started its formulation when I received my first paycheck from a data entry job I had a couple of years ago. I looked at the net pay and was suddenly overcome with the desire to storm the I.R.S. and demand the rest of my paycheck. Thankfully, I didn't. Instead, I began an internal debate to find the problem and subsequently, the solution.

The first thing I wanted to know was where all my monotonously earned money went. I examined the check stub and noticed that compared to the amount my state received, the Feds were cashing in, big time. "What in the world are they doing that costs so much?!" I asked myself. After all, I hadn't perceived any real benefit from the paycheck deduction.

Please understand, I realize that complaining about high taxes and government inefficiency is an extremely old cliché. What I don't understand is why nobody does anything to fix those problems. If we were more efficient with our revenue, deficits would not be such a prevalent paradox.

If the preamble to the Constitution of the United States in examined thoughtfully, it is clear that the Federal Government is trying to do more than it was designed to do. The exact text is as follows:

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

In other words, the Constitution was designed to form a union stronger than that of the Articles of Confederation, make sure "we the people" are dealt with justly, remain safe and that those blessings are perpetuated through the lives of our posterity. How many Federal Government programs fall outside the realm of that purpose? I say that the answer is, "too many!"

I want to also make a special note regarding the way the “general welfare” is addressed. The Federal Government is responsible for promoting the general welfare of its constituents. If the founding fathers believed that the government was supposed to supply for the general welfare of the United States, I believe that they would have used the word “provide” as they did when addressing the common defense. As we have seen, this is not the case.

Given that this interpretation is correct, the Founding Fathers showed a great deal of foresight in making sure that the Federal Government was not responsible in providing for the welfare of its people. There are 309,210,119 people living in the United States right now. The Federal Government estimates that 2 million people work for it. That means that there are roughly 150 citizens per U.S. government employee. Yes, you read that right. One government employee is responsible for you and at least 149 other people. Given that most of these employees live very far from where I live, I don’t believe they could ever adequately provide for me. If they tried, our country would be bankrupt by now. As of yet, we are merely headed for bankruptcy. It is time to turn the tides.

I offer my solution: delegation. The only way an organization as large as the United States of America has any chance of survival is effective delegation. As things are, we're being lead and governed by a body of individuals that know nothing about us. How is it that D.C. can know anything about a person living in Mesa, Arizona? Could they spot Mesa, Arizona on a map? When people feel like they are not being represented properly they become slightly apathetic and disloyal towards whatever organization is misrepresenting them. Apathy and disloyalty are not a welcome problem in the United States. (The lack of action towards illegal immigration from the Federal Government may suggest otherwise, but we'll give them the benefit of the doubt.)

In my introductory post on this blog, I stated that my tax dollar allocation worried me. The states need to be trusted. Nebraska’s congress needs to have more power to do its job for Nebraska’s citizens, and so-on throughout all fifty United States. If Nebraska fails, the citizens should be free to move else-where. This will bring competition amongst the states which will breed efficiency and improvement. Until recent years, the United States has had no real competitors. Thus, it has had no need to improve. Now we find ourselves in dire need of improvement with a governmental structure that is too large and robust to improve in time.

It is time to divest in centralization and invest in delegation.