As a nation, we stand today on the precipice of our political and
economic ideologies.  We have reached a fork in the road; to the right
we pursue traditional American values as drafted for us by our
founding fathers.  This path, as led by grassroots activism (mainly
through tea parties and town halls), is one that embraces the notion
of an Ameritocracy, freedom from the weight of an overbearing
government, and the need to be self sufficient.  The path to the left,
as led by liberal idealism, is one that preaches the notion of a
living breathing constitution that should be “interpreted” to fulfill
the needs of the political ideologies of the time.  It is a path which
requires the individual to depend on the government, and limits
individual freedoms through the relinquishing of ones income in the
form of taxes.  This path drastically limits the ability of the
individual to take ones life into his or her own hands, thusly
preventing one from living the life one creates.  Instead, the
individual becomes a cookie cutter piece of society in which one lacks
motivation for upward mobility as the Ameritocratic dream is
squandered.  But before we choose the path that will dictate our lives
and the lives of our children we must pause.  We must take a step
back.  This piece is not intended to preach which road is the right
road, fore that depends on the ideological perception of the reader,
instead this article is intended to draw on American history to make a
plea to our government to halt the hastened vote which will dictate
the road we choose and to allow clearer heads to debate this notion
when the American economy is not teetering on the brink of disaster.

At present we are faced with a national unemployment rate of 10.2%, a
rate that is expected to be drastically underestimated due to the
nature of the calculation.  At this moment the United States is in the
midst of what is being hailed as the worst economic disaster since the
Great Depression.  As such, it is only fitting to use the Depression
as the backbone for this argument.  The current administration has
sold a majority of the public on the need for economic stimulus, this
stimulus came in the form of new government spending – the intention
of which was to create jobs through the initiation of public works
projects.  From where does this economic ideology stem?  The principal
is Keynesian at heart, and was the primary factor driving FDR’s New
Deal.  Simply, the idea is to decrease unemployment by increasing
government spending to build roads, bridges, dams, etc.  Given the
confidence of continued employment, individuals then stimulate the
economy by spending.  The problem with Keynesian economics, however,
is that it is only good for temporary stimulus, and seems to work
primarily in a bubble.  History tells us we were not pulled out of the
hardships of the Great Depression by the New Deal, but instead by
Americas’ entry into World War II.  Thus, why are we employing the
same economic thought today?  If we take a closer look, as was done by
Harold L. Cole and Lee E. Ohanian two economists at UCLA, we see
clearly that the New Deal (concurrent with the policies of the time)
help to prolong the Depression not pull the United States out of it.
This happened because the New Deal was a mix of new government
spending for infrastructure combined with the largest new entitlement
programs in U.S. history.  In addition, the administration curbed
global trade by instigating the largest trade war to date by passing
the Smoot Hawley Tariff Act.  Long story short, the government was
forced to raise taxes due to initiation of large entitlement programs,
thus the money going out for infrastructure projects was never given
the opportunity to work effectively because it was collected by the
government in the form of taxes.

Today we find ourselves in a similar predicament.  Having just passed
the largest stimulus spending legislation in history, we are about to
follow the path of FDR’s failed policies and pass new Health Care
Reform legislation and Cap and Trade legislation.  This is too much
for this economy.  We must approach this nation’s problems in stride.
Priority number one must be economic recovery.  Trying to push
legislation through a supermajority in congress is not in the best
interest of the United States.  It will almost undoubtedly force this
economy into another downfall, increasing unemployment yet again and
prolonging any notion of recreating economic normalcy.  Legislators
please do not force the nation to succumb to a stint of Tyranny by the
Majority as Alexis de Tocqueville so eloquently phrased it.  Allow us
to recover, then, allow us to debate.

By Evan E. Adams

 

Later this month three United States Navy SEALs will be subject to military court marshal for the handling of captured terrorist Ahmed Hashim Abed, the monster responsible for the torture, mutilation, murder and hanging of four Blackwater security guards in Fallujah in 2004. The three SEALs were assigned the scrupulous task of capturing a priority terrorist in hostile Iraq. As proud military men do, these men served with honor, integrity, and discipline; as is stated in the Navy SEALs philosophy, they " train for war and fight to win… [t]he execution of [their] duties will be swift and violent when required, yet guided by the very principles [they] serve to defend." Sadly, the principals they serve to defend have been, in large, overlooked by the political correctness of modern America.

Matthew McCabe, a Special Operations Petty Officer Second Class, is facing charges of dereliction of performance of duty for willfully failing to safeguard a detainee, making a false official statement, and assault. Petty Officer Jonathan Keefe, is facing charges of dereliction of performance of duty and making a false official statement, and Petty Officer Julio Huertas was given the charge of impediment of an investigation in addition to the aforementioned charges (says Fox News). What actions could warrant such charges? As terrorists are now trained to do, Ahmed Hashim Abed complained of miss treatment and offered a bloody lip as proof. That is correct, three of America's best are being charged for blooding the lip of the man who maimed, murdered, and put on display four American security guards.

This absurdity seems to be to the new standard by which our government recognizes U.S. soldiers, and citizens for that matter. Couple this act with the trial of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed which will take place in New York, and we see war criminals (terrorist) given equal rights under the Obama Administration's interpretation of Constitutional Law. In an instant, this government has belittled the soldiers sworn to protect this great nation and elevated two of the worst terrorist (both top government priorities), providing them constitutional rights and a platform to spew propaganda and gain martyrdom status amongst their sympathizers. It would appear that the administration is over embracing their politically correct party mandate, offering war time detainees a criminal trial and placing the "rights" of terrorist ahead of the rights of U.S. constituents. This is a dangerous path to lead. 

The United States is rapidly approaching a point of no return in regard to the extent at which it allows political correctness to dictate lives.  Today, three American soldiers are awaiting trail for performing their duty in a manner the people of the United States should be proud of, and in large the nation is silent. This is due to a lack of reporting by large media outlets, but stems from an issue far greater. Political correctness is eroding the notion of good over evil. It blurs the lines of right and wrong in order to propel the notion of utopia. However, the utopia offered by political correctness is one of ignorance and dismissal. In the age of Islamic extremism and our war on terror, Americans must be steadfast in their position that America is on the side of good not evil and should succeed in its task by any means necessary. We should be mindful and grateful of the contributions our Islamic brothers have made to this country, but we mustn't allow political correctness to blur the lines of justice. The three American soldiers facing court marshal are on the side of good. Ahmed Hashim Abed and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed are evil men, not worthy of the rights endowed to American citizens by our constitution. In the words of the late Theodor Roosevelt, " If given the choice between righteousness and peace, I choose righteousness." As we must now do.

-Evan E. Adams