One point that Mang makes early on in his book – in the Introduction no less – is something that should resonate with any conservative that has been faced with dealing with the questionable logic of liberals when it comes to government in general:

It is more important to be earnest, to care, to “do something.” A typical liberal solution goes something like this:

a. A perceived problem is identified;

b. Pass legislation addressing the perceived problem;

c. New legislation either does not solve perceived problem or creates new, unintended problem(s);

d. Repeat b and c.

The book, of course is titled after Nancy Pelosi’s historic nonsensical speech about having to pass Obamacare to know what’s in it, and that is the topic of the first chapter. Of course, that details the ridiculous stupidity of progressives today, describing how they either believe that healthcare must be more complex than creating a whole new form of government. Or you can take the colossally stupid explanation for why the Affordable Care Act is so long in comparison with the Constitution and the Federalist Papers combined – the legislation was double-spaced.

But Mang does not restrict himself to the stupidity of liberals when it comes to the Constitution, of course. He covers several other topics, including the ones already listed, plus a few others including Gitmo and Joe Biden. Throughout, there are footnotes of a sort, but most of them are personal asides, or sports trivia. While it is not a compilation of “zingers”, it definitely can be the inspiration for many, given the right circumstances. It is an enjoyable read, and definitely is more amusing than watching Piers Morgan try to match wits with… well… anyone.

A native of Chicago, Mark McNeilly is a former US Army infantry captain, a graduate of the 101st Division’s Airborne Assault School, a former strategist for a major global corporation, and now an adjunct professor at the University of Northern Carolina (UNC). As such, he has had ample time to study The Art of War and think about it, and through that process he has found what he believes are the six most important principles taught by Sun Tzu in his ancient masterpiece. The purpose of McNeilly’s book is to demonstrate these principles (as well as others laid out in The Art of War), how they fit together, how they apply to warfare (past, present, and future), and to illustrate these principles with historical examples. This is because every theory is worthless if real world practice proves it to be wrong. Sun Tzu’s principles have been put to a test numerous times, and usually (though not always) were proven right.

The book is organized into seven chapters. The first six deal with each of Sun Tzu’s six key principles:

1) Win All Without Fighting: Achieving the objective without destroying it;

2) Avoid Strength, Attack Weakness: Striking where the enemy is must vulnerable

3) Deception and Foreknowledge: Winning the information war

4) Speed and Preparation: Moving swiftly to overcome resistance

5) Shaping the Enemy: Preparing the battlefield

6) Character-Based Leadership: Leading by example

The seventh chapter explains how to apply these principles in the future and thus how to prepare the US military for the wars of the future.

The first chaper, Win All Without Fighting, teaches the important principle of “achieving the objective without destroying it”, that is, winning without firing a shot if possible, and if not possible, winning with the least possible destruction to one’s own military, the country being attacked, and its civilian population, and at the least possible fiscal, material, and human cost. Here, McNeilly, like Sun Tzu, challenges the conventional wisdom that one should do as much damage to a hostile country and its civilian population as possible. McNeilly shows that such policy, regardless of whether it’s moral, is counterproductive: it dramatically reduces the value of what you’re invading while engendering the hostility of the targeted country’s population (to say nothing of its political class) and sets the stage for more conflict down the road. And it does nothing to achieve victory, for, in war, killing enemies or destroying their country is not the goal; indeed, killing enemies is only the means, and not necessarily the best means.

The second chapter counsels military leaders to attack the enemy where he’s weakest: the weakest sections of a front, the least-defended site, city or province, the weakest wing/flank of an army, etc. Naval commanders, instead of trying to wage a headfirst battle with an enemy navy, should attempt to wage unconventional warfare by e.g. cutting the hostile country off its sources of supplies by controlling the sealanes on which it depends, as the US did against Japan during WW2. Again, McNeilly, like Sun Tzu, challenges conventional wisdom here, including Clausewitz’s theory that one should try to engineer a decisive battle (Hauptschlacht) with the enemy.

The third chapter deals with the all-important issues of deception and foreknowledge; and as spies are needed for both, McNeilly cites Sun Tzu’s advice on these and explains how to apply it. He also gives historical examples of victors fooling their enemies of their intentions while gaining great insight into their enemies’ minds.

Chapter four deals with the necessity to attack, fight, and win quickly, not slowly, to overcome resistance as well as gain and maintain momentum (like water). The classic example McNeilly uses to illustrate this is Germany’s successful invasion of France. He’s right; Heinz Guderian, the inventor of Blitzkrieg, said that a tank’s engine is worth as much as its gun.

Chapter five reminds military leaders not to allow their enemies to shape them, and to shape the enemy instead: hold out baits, fool them, lead them into fields unfavorable to them, annoy their leaders if they are of choleric temper, etc. This also involves building, maintaining, and when the right time comes, dissolving alliances, as well as choosing the right allies and avoiding entanglements with the wrong ones. It also involves offering the enemy a face-saving way out of a war to avoid further conflict. Here, McNeilly makes a credible claim that the Allies should’ve offered Germany a face-saving peace if the Wehrmacht would topple Hitler and the Nazis and give up Western Europe. That would’ve allowed a lot of bloodshed and destruction while resulting in Hitler’s toppling (which German officers tried to do anyway) and Germany turning against the Soviet Union.

Chapter six shows how military leaders should lead by example. As McNeilly rightly says, “Leadership starts at the top and both good and poor examples of leadership trickle all the way down the chain of command.” McNeilly also deals with caring for, disciplining, rewarding, and punishing the troops, among other issues.

The book is, overall, a great work. It makes a strong, convincing case and backs it up well. McNeilly has, in my opinion, succeeded in making Sun Tzu’s work more readable and accessible to 21st century readers by explaining how Sun Tzu’s principles should be applied, especially WRT the six most important ones, which he explains in great detail and illustrates with germane, interesting historical examples from many different eras.

However, the book is not without flaws. And by that, I don’t even mean the few spelling mistakes that are here and there (e.g. “Clauswitz” instead of “Clausewitz”), but far more important issues.

Firstly, while the author underlines how pointless wars of attrition and headfirst attacks on the enemy are, he nonetheless fails to acknowledge that the Allies’ campaign against Nazi Germany was such a campaign throughout WW2. The Allies did implement some of Sun Tzu’s advice – as McNeilly documents – but despite the deception, the foreknowledge, and knowledge of daily weather patterns, the invasion of Normandy was nonetheless a headfirst attack and a huge blunder. Although the Allies were eventually victorious, they met fierce German resistance and suffered serious losses (about 30,000 men KIA, over 200,000 troops wounded, thousands of others missing). The Allies eventually liberated France and won WW2, of course – but only through their sheer advantage in numbers, not due to any strategic genius or implementation of Sun Tzu’s advice.

In fact, had the Allies TRULY listened to Sun Tzu’s advice, they would not have invaded northern France directly – that is exactly the kind of a head-on assault that Master Sun always counseled against. They would’ve instead invaded Italy and then the Balkans, advancing to Germany through Austria and liberating Central Europe as well. Thus, they would’ve won with far fewer casualties, far fewer destruction, faster, and without suffering a suprise German counterattack such as the Ardennes Offensive. Moreover, they would’ve significantly limited the Soviets’ conquests. France would be liberated afterwards, eastwards from an occupied Germany.

Churchill advocated such an invasion, as he wanted to win the war as easily as possible and to limit Soviet conquests. However, President Roosevelt was utterly naive about the USSR and Joseph Stalin, and refused to do anything that might upset the Soviets, and thus, he and Stalin insisted on a landing in France. Normandy was thus chosen as the landing site for purely political reasons.

McNeilly also wrongly claims that Germany made a mistake by invading Poland. However, it wasn’t a mistake. Although France and Britain did declare war on Germany over Poland, they did nothing effective to help Warsaw, or the Lower Countries and Denmark, when invaded by Germany. Furthermore, the Germans, as McNeilly documents, won overwhelmingly in France, while the British and General de Gaulle’s men were forced to withdraw to Britain. Soon after, the UK itself came under German bombardment. London then made the mistake of rejecting repeated German peace overtures.

Last but not least, there are a few things which I believe McNeilly should’ve said but didn’t. Firstly, he doesn’t provide much advice on how to use Sun Tzu’s advice to counter the growing Chinese military threat. Secondly, he does not acknowledge (nor deny) that WW2 and the Civil War were also wars of attrition in which even the winners, including the US and the USSR in WW2, paid a heavy price for victory.

Thirdly, McNeilly does not account for the few cases where a leader went against Sun Tzu’s advice and won anyway. For example, during the Battle of Austerlitz, when Coalition troops went down from the Pratzen Heights to attack French Marshal Davout’s divisions, Marshal Davout decided to oppose and stop them – and won despite his troops being outnumbered 4:1. Sun Tzu wrote that if your enemy is charging downhill, you should never oppose him – but Davout did oppose the enemy and won anyway. How does McNeilly explain that?

Nonetheless, McNeilly’s book was a quick, enjoyable, and fascinating read from which I have learned much. Having already read Sun Tzu’s Art of War several months prior, I now have read a book which nicely explains his work and applies it to past and future wars alike. It’s well-researched, well-written, interesting, and instructive about the past and potentially the future alike. I would give it a 9/10 rating.

How many times have you, as a conservative/Republican asked yourself, “What’s wrong with these people? How can they think like this? Are they evil or just stupid?” It seems mind-boggling that the same people who claim to stand for the poorest among us support energy policy that makes it nearly impossible for the poor to afford energy in their homes. It’s confusing that a liberal would be so passionate about defending the “environment” that they would sacrifice hundreds of thousands of African lives just to ban DDT- the “miracle” chemical that nearly eradicated malaria, the number one killer in some African nations. A chemical that has to this date not been proven to be environmentally hazardous. It’s certainly no more hazardous than, say….malaria! Sayet lays out a brilliant answer to these questions and others, step by step.

To help you understand the basics of modern liberal thought, Sayet begins the book with a breakdown of “Laws of Modern Liberalism” and a “Corollary of Modern Liberalism”. According to him, there are 4 laws of modern liberalism:

1)Indiscriminateness – the total rejection of the intellectual process

2)Indiscriminateness of thought does not lead to indiscriminateness of policies. It leads to siding only and always with the lesser over the better, the wrong over the right, and the evil over the good.

3)Modern Liberal policies occur in tandem. Each effort on behalf of the lesser is met with an equal and opposite campaign against the better. My footnote – there is no better or more recent example of this immutable “law” than the recent rukkus over frakking. Liberals continue to advocate for the least effective forms of energy (wind, solar, etc.) while actively working to crush one of the most hopeful (and cleanest) forms of energy mining to come along in a long time – frakking.

4)The modern liberal will ascribe to the better the negative qualities associated with the lesser while concurrently ascribing to the lesser the positive qualities found in the better. My footnote – think Islam as “the religion of peace” versus Christianity as the aggressive and oppressive religion.

Applauding yet? That’s only the first page!

The real brilliance in Sayet’s argument comes from the title itself: Kindergarden of Eden. I originally had the author on my radio show to talk about his upcoming book last fall just before the elections. It was then that he explained to me the childlike outlook of liberals and how they not only laud childishness, they advocate for this childish Utopia as a superior form of relating to the world around them:

“In this Utopia that the True Believer envisions, everyone would be like Adam and Eve in the Garden of                        Eden, or, more precisely the secular version – the five-year-old child in another sort of garden paradise: the kindergarten. according to the True Believer’s Blueprint for Utopia, everyone was to live in total ignorance and therefore (or so the promise went) in total bliss.” 

And to prove this theory, we are directed towards one of the most influential books in modern liberal thought, “All I Really Need to Know  I Learned in Kindergarten”.  Just days after Sayet shared this theory, the liberal media exploded in panic, ridicule and anger when Mitt Romney (in the first debate with Obama) suggested he would cut funding to PBS. Were liberals angry about the debt, the deficit, rising taxes or how these relate to unnecessary public outlets like PBS? No, their panic and dread was directed toward one subject…Sesame Street. Headlines erupted over Romney’s Big Bird hatred and liberals everywhere were outraged that anyone would consider defunding a children’s show that earns over $200 million/year in sales and copyright revenue. Think about it – most of us grew up with Sesame Street; approximately how old were you when you started moving on from Sesame Street to other interests? I’m guessing it was right around the age of … 5. Exactly the age at which Sayet claims liberals are happy to stop progressing. He nailed it.

Sayet claims this is only the first written version of his theory. He plans to flesh out more and expand his argument in the future. As thorough and eye-opening as this short but entertaining offering was, there is certainly a lot left to be explored on the topic, and Sayet seems to have proven himself just the man to do it.

If you’re looking for some new, informational books to put on your must-read list for 2013 I highly recommend you add Mr.Sayet’s book to your collection. It’s a quick read, but entertaining and filled with the “Ahhhhhhh!!!” moments that I search for in my “informational” reading. After reading this book you will come away with a better understanding of liberal thought and activism; ultimately you will be better armed to face the challenges ahead as we try to navigate the next four years under Obama and try to win the country back in some form. We are being overwhelmed, that is for sure. It is disheartening, that is for sure as well. The children are running the daycare center and it’s up to us adults to wrestle back control. To quote Sayet one last time:

“Today we are at a tipping point where the people of God and science will soon be overwhelmed by the demands of taking care of the permanently infantilized. It is unsustainable. If the system collapses under the weight, the future is not merely a slightly less wonderful existence, it is a return to what life had been like for the overwhelmingly majority of people in all other times and all other places…That life was described by Thomas Hobbes as ‘nasty, brutish, and short. We’re not there yet, but we’re close”.

*Keep your eyes peeled for my next Book of the Month coming in February.

In Crescent Moon Rising (Prometheus Books), journalist Paul L. Williams examines the phenomenal rise of Islam in the United States and discusses its implications.

In the first half of the book, the author traces the beginnings of Islam in this country, in particular the rise and influence of the Nation of Islam among African Americans. He emphasizes the impact of the 1965 Hart-Cellar Act, which abolished national-origin quotas and led to successive waves of Muslim immigrants, who entered this country from Palestine, Kuwait, Iraq, Southeast Asia, Africa, Turkey, and other parts of the world.

In the second half, Williams considers statistical studies of American Muslims regarding age groups, family size, professional affiliations, annual income, and religious and political commitments. He also addresses a number of disturbing concerns about some aspects of the Muslim presence in America. These include: the connections between many American mosques with Saudi benefactors who promote an ultra-orthodox, anti-Western agenda; the existence of Muslim paramilitary training grounds recruiting ex-convicts; and the ties of even self-described moderate Muslim spokespersons with more politically radical elements.

Informative and at times controversial, Crescent Moon Rising clearly shows that Islam will be a force to reckon with for some time in America.

To condense into a short essay the reason I’m a conservative is no mean feat. From my perspective In order to represent my reasoning I need to address not only what it is about conservatism that first captured my attention, but also how I believe that the principles of conservatism best suit humankind’s natural inclinations and that of society as a whole.

However in keeping with the conservative’s propensity for prudence I’ll do my best to refrain from pontificating too much on conservatism’s rich historical heritage or hazard excluding essential elements. I’ll defer to the more capable writings of doyens such as Kirk or George Nash to impart conservatism’s legacy, or recommend the musings of Hawthorne, Chesterton, Tolkien, Orwell or O’Conner or any of the other many brilliant writers with conservative leanings to express the merits of a conservative mindset through life’s lessons.

Founding Fathers Know Best, by Ross Edward Puskar. Hugo House Publishers, 2012 vii + 283 pp., Amazon price $17.95 paperback; $9.95 Kindle.

Follow Kurt Schlichter on Twitter? Or hang by his every word on Breitbart.com? Kurt talks about his new book “I Am a Liberal:A Conservative’s Guide to Dealing With Nature’s Most Irritating Mistake” Both Kurt’s books have made it to #1 in Political Humor on Amazon, so if you’re not reading them, you must be a liberal!

Listen in as John Grant from The 405 Radio, interviews Kurt. Of course, there’s also a little tag-team action, as Liz Harrison joins in for a few of the questions. If you missed it live, listen here now! #Caring

In Free Market Revolution, Yaron Brook and Don Watkins break down the often repeated talking points that our current financial crises was caused by greed and deregulation. They speak factually and bluntly about the actual numbers of regulations that were added during the last and current Administration, and their roles in creating a recipe for guaranteed disaster in the housing market, the resulting credit and lending crises that has been fueling the greatest recession since the 1930s, as well the slowest recovery in modern history. The undeniable blame for the current business-killing climate is laid at the feet of big government and collective calls for more regulation, where it belongs.

Dispelled, is the myth that America operates under a capitalist, free market system and explained are the reasons why proponents of a purely free market have been incapable of offering a defense of capitalism that appeals to America as a whole: A moral case for capitalism as an economic system that creates opportunity, wealth, and security for all, without ignoring what the left has so effectively defined as “basic need” and “rights”. Critics of Ayn Rand, without fail, point to her lack of empathy for the poor as a means of demonizing a free market system. Capitalists have been unable to argue the emotional talking points and the morality argument presented by the left, giving way to even more cries for social safety nets and spending by the government to pay for those “basic needs”. Until now.

Free Market Revolution makes clear what capitalists, successful businessmen, and proponents of Ayn Rand’s free market ideas have always known: That the only moral economic system is one that allows for success or failure based on individual effort and self-interest. Yaron Brook and Don Watkins put forth the simple idea that an economy unfettered by overbearing regulation will stimulate innovation and regulate itself via competition and common sense. They handily dismiss the idea that all entrepreneurs and successful business owners are out to gain by nefarious means, and grant the reader the idea that working for your own prosperity is not only fundamentally human, but also fundamentally moral. It is time for supporters of a free market economy to point out that the free market has not existed in America and could not have caused our current fiscal crises. It is time to stop allowing people like Madoff to be the public image of corporate success, and time to stop granting merit to the idea that selfishness automatically means benefiting at the cost of another.

Free Market Revolution is a tool for free market capitalists. One that offers a logical argument to the more and more public and political shouts against free markets and cheers the morality of an economic system that should not need defending, but extolling. You can order your copy here!

Yaron Brook (@YaronBrook) is Executive Director of the Ayn Rand Institute. He has written for the Wall Street Journal, USA Today, Investor’s Business Daily, and CNN.com, and appeared on The O’Reilly Factor, The Glenn Beck Show, On the Money, and Closing Bell, among others. A former finance professor at Santa Clara University, he is the co-writer with Don Watkins of a column on business and capitalism at Forbes.com

Don Watkins (@dwatkins3) is a fellow at the Ayn Rand Institute and the co-writer with Yaron Brook of a column on business and capitalism at Forbes.com. He appears regularly on radio and TV, and his op-eds have appeared in such venues as Investor’s Business Daily, The Christian Science Monitor, FoxNews.com, and Forbes.

Influenced by tails of a father he met only once, and a step father who saw Indonesia finally free itself from Dutch colonial rule in 1949, D’Souza shows his audience the anti-colonial influence that so impressed Barack Obama in his early years. This influence continued when back in Hawaii, he was mentored by the notorious communist Frank Marshall Davis.

When juxtaposed with a traditional American upbringing, the film makes clear the differences in world view between Barack Obama and the historical American perspective. It explains his animosity toward long time American allies, Great Britain and Israel, and asserts a possible motive for downsizing not only the country’s strategic defenses, but the economy as well.

In the end, D’Souza asks each viewer to look within themselves and ask the question which world view would they choose for the future of America.

The film, released in only a few markets last month and expanded nationwide over the weekend, has grossed $9.2 million, and become the top earning documentary of the year (excluding nature films).

Radical as his theories may be, Goodman has managed to get the endorsements of a couple former CBO Directors, and a former Administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, based on posted reviews. Well, it would be a better sign if those officials were still working in their respective agencies, and stated publicly that they agreed with his ideas. Of course there are some GOP politicians that have come out saying that they are impressed with Goodman’s book and theories. But there is nothing from Mitt Romney. That’s not surprising, since Goodman has used Romney’s healthcare reform in Massachusetts as a policy poster child of what not to do – or an example of coming attractions nationwide under Obamacare. Either way, it is anything but praise, like the following:

In fact, there is nothing in the legislation [the Affordable Care Act] that makes “healthcare a right.” Nor is there anything in the new law that makes the role of government more just or fair. To the contrary, a lot of knowledgeable people (not just conservative critics) predict that access to care is going to be more difficult for our most vulnerable populations. That appears to have been the experience in Massachusetts, which President Obama cites as the model for the new federal reforms. True enough, Massachusetts cut the number of uninsured in that state in half through then-Governor Mitt Romney’s health reform. But while expanding the demand for care, the state did nothing to increase supply. More people than ever are trying to get care, but because there has been no increase in medical services, it is more difficult than ever to actually see a doctor.

Far from being fair, the new federal health law will give some people health insurance subsidies that are as much as $20,000 more than the subsidies available to other people at the same level of income.

Right after the passage of the Affordable Care Act, Obama administration health advisers Robert Kocher, Ezekiel Emanuel, and Nancy-Ann DeParle announced that the new health reform law “guarantees access to healthcare for all Americans.”

In fact, nothing in the act guarantees access to care for any American, let alone all Americans. Far from it. Again, take Massachusetts as the precedent. The waiting time to see a new family practice doctor in Boston is longer than in any other major US city. In a sense, a new patient seeking care in Boston has less acess to care than new patients everywhere else.

Fairly harsh words for Romney’s healthcare reform that the campaign has undoubtedly been trying to figure out precisely how to deal with on the road. But, there’s one option, albeit unlikely. Why not admit that the Massachusetts health care reform law was a mistake? It’s not like there’s any shortage of factual proof to back that assertion, since Goodman has already taken the time to not only find it, but also expound on it. Sure, it’s off the reservation for a candidate to admit flaws unless there is absolutely no other option. The Romney camp isn’t there, but this isn’t a typical situation either.

While Obamacare has some popular features, in general it is disliked by a majority of Americans. Now that the actual costs for the program are becoming more clear, the need to come up with “something better” should be high on the list of things to do for the Romney folks. Saying that repealing Obamacare on day one isn’t enough – back to that whole GOP “repeal and replace” theme. Goodman’s plan is to move healthcare to a market-driven system, and this is something that a good businessman can manage much better than a typical politician. The left has been hammering on Romney’s background at Bain Capital in an attempt to portray him as an out-of-touch corporate man. But if the GOP “replace” plan was to slowly shift healthcare and health insurance to a true business model, even a past as the most ruthless of corporate marauders could be sold as an asset.

Goodman points out that the primary problem with healthcare is the fact that there is no real price for anything in the industry. Because of this, this complex system does not behave like any other economic system. Contrary to what policy makers would like to have people believe, the problem of increasing healthcare costs is not the amount of money being paid to providers. The problem lies in the fact that people are encouraged to over-consume healthcare services when they are healthy, and under-utilize services when they are ill. This is the direct result of insurance companies catering to the healthy, primarily because their care costs less. Because people are not directly paying for services rendered, and have no real control of healthcare dollars, there is no incentive for them to be frugal in their consumption of healthcare. Bureaucracy has created an environment of wasteful spending, and perverse incentives that keep those that need care the most from actually getting it at all, or at the very least, getting it in the most cost effective way possible. Priceless, while a repetitive text, should be considered required reading for anyone that honestly wants to learn about what ails our current healthcare system, and what problems Obamacare will undoubtedly exacerbate in the near future.

Obama claimed that he made history with his landmark healthcare legislation. If Romney could manage to be daring enough to publicly admit that his Massachusetts plan is fundamentally flawed, and offer a solution along the lines of those offered by Goodman, the upcoming election could end up re-writing that historical moment. The Supreme Court left this issue squarely on the shoulders of the politicians, and that should be interpreted as a call to the GOP to declare open season on failed Obama policies in healthcare, and everything else. The only wrong answers are already on the books thanks to Obama. It remains to be seen whether or not Romney will have the courage to stand up and offer something more than just a promise to undo Obamacare on day one. What about day two?

ENUMCLAW, Wash., May 18, 2012 /Christian Newswire/

Charles is bossy, rude, and very proud of his flawless appearance. All that changed when his beautiful golden rim is cracked, and the Others start calling him Chip. As a result, his luxuriant lifestyle drastically transforms, and he finds himself on a dusty shelf in the Mission Thrift Store between a superhero cup and some old plastic cereal bowls. When Friendly Person decides that Chip can help him serve homeless people a cool drink or a hot cup of coffee, Chip finds that no one cares about his damaged rim. He discovers that life is not about beauty or gold; “life is about serving other people — even if you have a nick.”

A poignant story for four- to eight-year-olds, “Charles T. Cup”examines the concept of self-worth, the deception of outward appearance, and the value of service to others that children will understand. Using the setting of the Sunday Breakfast Mission in Wilmington, Delaware, Dalen Keys melds a thoughtful fantasy with real-life situations that teaches a lesson while it entertains.

Watch the trailer:  Click Here

I had noticed it before, but didn’t realize how rampant it was until my book One Nation Under God: A Book for Little Patriots came out. Suddenly, I was being accused of trying to indoctrinate children in conservative values, or even to hate liberals. This is, of course, ridiculous. The book is unabashedly patriotic, but it is in no way partisan. In a counting book of one through ten, the only number that could be considered at all values-based is number one; One Nation Under God. That is not a partisan issue. So, what is bringing on this confusion between patriotism and partisanship?

Let’s take a look at the dictionary to see what it has to say on the issue. Miriam-Webster defines patriotism as “love or devotion to one’s country.” Although we disagree on the best way to run our country, I would hope that people of any political affiliation would love it. What are we to think of a group of people who, upon hearing the term “patriotism,” assume that people mean the other party? Shouldn’t everyone, if they think it’s a partisan issue, assume that their party is the one which is thought to love America best and more? Apparently not.

Perhaps patriotism is being equated with American Exceptionalism. Conservatives seem much more ready to holdAmerica in esteem above all other countries than liberals. Isn’t it patriotic, though, to think one’s country is the best country in the world? I think it’s a symptom of the chasm opening up between the mindset of conservatives and liberals. It would appear that conservatives are proud to display their loyalty to America, flaws and all, while liberals seem more wont to view patriotism as undeserved blind allegiance to a flawed land.

An author’s views don’t typically enter into his or her work, and One Nation Under God: A Book for Little Patriots is

no exception. There is nothing political about mine, unless one considers teaching children the basics of America to be a political matter. Seeing as these are things that are taught even in that bastion of liberalism, the public school system, this is pretty easy to refute.  Even they are allowed, for the time being, to say  ”under God.”

The interesting thing is, the vitriol comes almost exclusively from the hyper-political on the left. I know many democrats who do not live and breathe politics who are proud to love their country. I’ve gotten feedback from some solidly left-wing parents that they enjoyed reading it with their children and cannot imagine what the fuss is about. There is a small (and, ostensibly, growing) group, however, which is quick to label patriotism as partisan. These people assume the worst and are quick to pull the fire alarm of right-wing indoctrination based on these unfounded assumptions.

This seems to go deeper than a difference that can easily be put aside. This isn’t a matter of Americans loving Americans but disagreeing how best to keep her great. This seems to be a matter of irreconcilable differences. If we aren’t all patriots, where do we go from here?

A couple of years ago I began hearing about a new concept in taxation. This new concept is called The FairTax. I didn’t pay much attention because I thought “how is any tax fair?”, when some pay and  some don’t. At first I dismissed it as another scam to throw me off the track of an out of control government looking for another way to hoodwink me into paying more of my hard earned money into their grand spending plans.

I have long since grown tired of paying so much of my money into ever growing but useless government programs that pay people to sit on their butts and spend my money. Welfare expenses keep going up as more and more people find ways to game the system by having babies, faking injuries, working for cash under the table, etc. The ultra-rich hide their money in “foundations” or overseas to avoid the taxes I have been paying for 45 years. All of them, rich and poor are getting over on the other working stiffs who are too stupid, too honest, or unwilling, to do these things. These money pits keep growing as the amount of available income to tax drops.

One of my pet peeves with income tax is those who don’t pay any. While I was paying 32% in my working years the local drug dealer was paying nothing. The local prostitutes who hang out on street corners in the bigger cities or work out of high priced hotels were paying nothing. The welfare cheats who sit around finding ways to game the system for their own benefit have no intention of doing anything to benefit society, or themselves for that matter. The illegal aliens who were working for cash were paying nothing. I had noticed the illegal aliens especially. They were everywhere and driving much nicer vehicles than I was, or am now driving (I don’t hang out where the hookers hang out). I was paying a 25% income tax, a 7.5% social security/Medicare tax, plus state taxes, and being told the government couldn’t afford for me to retire while those not paying taxes lived the good life. I struggled, they flourished. That is when The FairTax began to make sense to me.

I heard Neal Boortz one day talking about this new plan on his radio show. I listened with interest and thought it sounded good but never really did any more to learn about The FairTax. In the last election cycle, the 2010 mid-terms, I kept bumping into Carol Chouinard and she kept handing me literature about The Fair Tax. I took the information and looked it over without really spending a lot of time educating myself on this new concept. Interesting but, ehhhh!!!!

One day I was going through a stack of papers that had accumulated over a few months, actually several months, and found the literature Carol had given me. As I read through the brochures and leaflets I began to realize that this was not the run of the mill scam to get more of my money. This was an idea that made sense to me once I really looked at it.

Carol is the local guru on The FairTax. She lives in Rogers County, 2nd Congressional District, State of Oklahoma. She travels throughout Eastern Oklahoma, or anywhere else for that matter, presenting The FairTax to any group or person who will give her a chance to enlighten them. I ran into her again the other night and we got to talking about political issues and The FairTax came up. Well, I was complaining about the current debt ceiling debacle and how to deal with it. Carol began to explain some more about how The FairTax was the answer to much of the problem.

As I listened to her a light bulb came on in my head, and the squirrel began to spin the cylinder. The things I had read came back to me and began to make sense. I began to remember about the way our tax system keeps hard working honest people in bondage while those who don’t mind cheating skate by without paying anything, only taking from those of us who do things the right way. Carol gave me a book about The FairTax. It is the second book called FairTax: The Truth. The first book, The FairTax, came out in 2005. This book was published in 2008 so is 3 years old as I start this article. Much of the information I will include in future articles about The FairTax will come from updates from the FairTax web site as I want to give you the most up-to-date information and statistics available.

One solution I see to our fiscal problems in this plan is the title, The FairTax. From everything I have read and the research I am doing, this plan solves many of the financial problems we face as a nation, the issue of money paid in taxes. I find that this plan is aptly named. I often hear Democrat and sometimes Republican politicians, especially those in Washington, cry about how “the rich” get over by not paying enough taxes. Yeah, like the politicians pay “their fair share”. Remember the hullaballoo a few months ago about Senator John Kerry, the one who parked his multi-million dollar yacht, $7 million yacht to be exact, on the far side of the bay because the state taxes on that yacht were cheaper there than on his side of the inlet? $500,000 per year cheaper to be exact. So much for Washington’s multi-millionaire insiders being concerned about paying their fair share of taxes. Hmm, I wonder where I am going to park my $7 million yacht. Oh, never mind, I don’t have one.

I also hear many “poor” people make the same statements, “the rich need to pay more taxes”. The problem with the “poor” complainers is that most of the ones I know don’t pay any taxes at all either. Most of the “the rich need to pay more taxes” crowd, at least the ones I know personally, are on the dole. They are drawing welfare, food stamps, social security disability, state aid, etc. Many of them either don’t work at all or work part time. They pay nothing and spend much of their time complaining that they don’t “get enough help from the government”. They have cell phones for themselves and their children, several have big flat screen HD televisions, complete with the latest game consoles, cable TV service, cigarettes, and are usually well stocked with beer in the fridge. Actually, I need the “rich” people to continue to be “rich”. They are the ones who will hire me, hopefully, so I can make a little money. Poor people never seem to hire me for anything.

In the spirit of “transparency”, my wife and I both have cell phones, we have cable TV service, and one 37 inch flat screen HD television set. Before you say “AHAH!!!” let me offer a caveat to this. We don’t get any help from the government and are not exactly in the “rich folks” category. I am retired but not old enough to draw social security, my wife works a full time job, and we have a small Mom & Pop business that gives me a little work and usually provides us very little in the way of profit. As a matter of fact, if the business doesn’t make a profit in 2011 we are going to have to shut it down. I work part time for a friend when he needs help on a project but the rest of the time I spend working on and around the house. We have a 1976 Chevy pickup that my father-in-law gave to us when he became unable to drive. We have a 1995 Ford Escort that my mother-in-law gave to us when she became unable to drive. We also have a 2004 Dodge PT Cruiser with over 100,000 miles on it (it was a demonstrator model). We don’t owe any money on our cars, and live in a 101 year old house with a $60,000 mortgage. Not exactly Beverly Hills here, closer to Green Acres, but we don’t get any government assistance either.

To get back to the point of this article, our nation cannot keep going the way it is financially. We cannot continue to borrow and spend, drive businesses out of the country, and raise taxes on the “rich”, those making $250,000 per year or so, the small to medium businessman/family who provide the bulk of the jobs in this nation. We have to do something to bring the jobs back to the United States. We need to make it feasible for those who hide their money to use that money to provide jobs so those who desire to work but can’t find a decent job can get back to work. Giving people unlimited unemployment pay is not the answer to prosperity, it is a handout not a hand up. Many of those drawing that unemployment would work if they could find a job. Some of them are lazy bums that are looking for a handout but most, and I do mean MOST, are honest hard working people who just want to provide for their families.

The FairTax is a method to accomplish this task of financial recovery and prosperity. In the next installment of this series I intend to delve into how our current tax structure is designed to inhibit rather than enhance prosperity. I will cover the costs of enforcing and complying with the current tax code and how it affects every person in America, tax payer and non-taxpayer. The FairTax books are a treasure trove of information about how our financial system works, or doesn’t work, and what We the People can do if we will stand up and demand that the politicians change the way they do things. Other installments will cover more aspects of The FairTax plan and how we go about getting it implemented by politicians that are more concerned about themselves than We the People. Elections are only 11 months away, so let’s get to work changing our future. God Bless America!

I submit this in the name of the Most Holy Trinity, in faith, with the responsibility given to me by Almighty God to honor His work and not let it die from neglect.

Bob Russell
Claremore, Oklahoma
November 25, 2011

As we walked in the door, we were greeted by a lady sitting at a table. She introduced herself as Leigh Watson, and told us she was a local author who was there for a book signing. She gave us an overview of what her book was about, and my mind began to whirl!

She had me from the moment she opened her mouth. I could see by the cover of the book that it was about our military. She confirmed this fact within the first few words she spoke, telling us that it was about her journey of seeing her son off  when he went to Iraq in the war. She said “9 Miracles- One Mother’s Amazing Journey Home After Seeing Her Son Off To War” was not about her sons journey, but her journey, and the miracles that happened to her.

I told her we would take a book, and she addressed it to our family. After a few more minutes of pleasantries, we thanked her, and went on our way to do our shopping.

Author Leigh Watson

Just a few moments later, I told my husband to watch the kids for a minute, I would be right back. I just had to talk to Leigh again! I had so many questions! I could not even concentrate on my own shopping, because I was so intrigued by her story. I honestly do not remember all that we talked about, but I remember distinctly that she told me the book itself was a miracle, because she never wrote anything down- not even a shopping list!  We visited for several more minutes, and once again, I went on my way, rejoining my family.

We finished our shopping, and went to check out. As we were waiting in the check out line, my children began talking to her. She gave each of my children a bookmark, which of course thrilled them to the gills!

We made our purchase, said our good-byes to Leigh, and headed out the door.

Right next to Family Christian Bookstore is Home Depot. We had to run in to pick up a few items there as well, so as I was driving across the parking lot, I asked my husband if he wanted to just run in and get the few items we needed, and I would stay in the car with the kids. He was agreeable to that arrangement, to my delight!

As he ran in to do our shopping, I opened my book and began to read.

The synopsis, as written on the back of the book, is as follows:

When Leigh’s husband is unable to accompany her to see their Air Force son, Luke, off to Iraq, Leigh mentally prepares herself to make the trip alone, knowing she will have to be strong for Luke’s sake.

Along the way, she encounters extraordinary people and incredible circumstances that could only be defined as heaven-sent. Rejoice, how as one exits- another appears, carrying her on the wings of mercy all the way home.

I finished the first chapter just as my husband was getting back into the car. Leigh had already brought tears to my eyes- in the very first chapter!

The rest of the day was quite busy, so I did not have the opportunity to sit down to read anymore for the day.

This morning, I woke up at 7:30 am and picked up my book. By 8:10 am, I had completed the book. I needed this book at this time in my life more than Leigh could have known!  More importantly, God knew I needed this book! If the store had not been closed last weekend, we would have completed our shopping then, and would not have been back this weekend. In fact, as I told Leigh, this was only the second time we had come to this store, preferring instead to shop online. God had other plans for me this time. He knew that this book was something that I needed. He knew that I needed to meet Leigh. And He knew this is a book I probably would not have chosen to buy, had I not met the author personally.

While I know that God Is God- He is real, He is with me every second of every minute of every day- sometimes I tend to forget that He is concerned with even the tiniest details of my life. Just as He was with Leigh at one of the saddest points in her life, He reminded me that every day He is with me, just as He was with her that day! He has used “9 Miracles” to speak to my heart. He has reminded me that all the things I have been preoccupied with recently should be handed over to Him.

Rather than sitting around wringing my hands, worrying about my children, the choices they are making, the choices they will make in the future, I need to focus on raising my children in a Godly home and let God do the rest. Yes, without a doubt we are going to have our rough times. Yes, we are going to have our tribulations. But as the new Newsboys song says,

“You stay the same through the ages
Your love never changes
There may be pain in the night
But joy comes in the morning
And when the oceans rage
I don’t have to be afraid
Because I know that You love me
Your love never fails”

His love never fails. The trials I am facing right now are painful, but indeed, joy will come in the morning, because His love never fails! “9 Miracles” is proof of that fact! Without a doubt in my mind, Leigh’s story is proof that God cares for us more than we can ever know. Her journey was, indeed, an amazing one!

One thing that sticks out in my mind from my conversation with Leigh was the fact that she said she was not a writer. She told me, and she writes in the book, that the entire book was written in two sittings. This just amazed me! God was definitely in the writing of His “9 Miracles”!

If you are someone who likes to tear apart the sentence structure of a book, disect the technical side of things, and critique the literary experience, this is not the book for you. While it may never be a “literary masterpiece” to the scholars of the world, the Master of the Universe doesn’t need all that.  Leigh Watson is most definitely the instrument in the hands of The Master who loves His children. If, however, you are just an ordinary person who believes in miracles, this is a book you must read! And if you are someone who does not believe in miracles, I challenge you to read it anyway! Maybe… just maybe, God will speak to you as well! And if you dare to allow Him, He will work miracles in your life. You simply have to believe, and place your trust in Him.

I literally read the book from beginning to end in less than 45 minutes. It was as if I was sitting there with Leigh, over a cup of coffee, with her telling me the story in person. I teared up more times than I can remember, and actually cried a couple of times, out of just pure amazement at my God’s love and mercy!  I know that He loves His children- there is no doubt in my mind of this! However, to read the specifics of how He lovingly took care of Leigh shows me that yes, He may have created heaven and earth, and everything that is, but He still loves every single one of His children as if we were the only one in the world!

My older three children had asked if they could read the book. After I finished the book this morning, I called them into my bedroom and they all piled into the bed. I told them that rather than each of them reading the book, I would read it to all of them, so even the younger two children could hear the story of God’s miracles. We finished half of the book this morning, and will most definitely finish it tomorrow.

If you would like to read a book that is very easy to read and very inspiring, you will want to read this book! In Leigh’s words, “Everyone needs 9 miracles!”

Order the book “9 Miracles- One Mother’s Amazing Journey Home After Seeing Her Son Off To War”

The world has not heard much from “Condi”, as she became known to all of us, throughout her years serving in the George W. Bush Administration in recent years, but she has recently written a memoir, entitled, “No Higher Honor: A Memoir of My Years In Washington”.  The book is quite revealing, and gives us insight on many situations she faced in her leadership position.

Though she writes about some things we’ve already heard, obviously, she writes from a completely different perspective. One such instance is that of Vice President Dick Cheney, who writes in his memoir of conflicts between he and Condoleezza Rice. She tells a completely different side of the story.

Then there’s the issue of the now-deceased Libyan dictator Moammar Gaddaffi’s obsession with the lovely lady, who he called “his African princess”. He had it so bad he even wrote her a song, entitled, “Black Flower in the White House”, which he presented as a gift to her.

When discussing the war in Iraq, she makes it clear that the administration “could have done better”, however, she still feels that direct action was absolutely necessary.

In an interview with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos, when asked about the war in Iraq, she says:

“This was a security threat of Saddam Hussein, who had started wars before, used weapons of mass destruction, was shooting at aircraft in the no-fly zone, was still threatening his neighbors, had tried to assassinate George H.W. Bush, was a cancer in the Middle East and a great source of that volatility in the Middle East, needed to be dealt with. And I, as much as anybody, understand and really regret the cost, particularly in lives.  But I also know that nothing of value is ever won without sacrifice.”

In a world where  the current administration believes every decision of theirs has been correct, Condoleezza Rice’s honest reflection is a refreshing reminder of the days of old, when mistakes are made,you acknowledge them and move on. It’s hard to believe that was just a few short years ago. It seems like a lifetime, trapped in a nightmare we cannot wake up from!