The word “czar” has been used to describe an emperor or supreme ruler. Nowadays, our presidents appoint or consider appointing drug czars, car czars, anti-piracy czars, etc.

Well, another “czar” could be on the way. Senators Olympia Snowe and Jay Rockefeller will introduce a bill that creates a Federal “Cybersecurity Czar”. This latest czar would oversee not only all government networks, but also private networks deemed critical to national security.

First of all, why do we even refer to government officials as “Czars”? Visions of Tsarist Russia immediately come to mind. Also, we can learn a lesson from our own history. Originally, both chambers of Congress appointed committees to consider the proper title to give the President. The Senate opted for “His Highness, the President of the United States of America and Protector of their liberties”. However, the House considered such a title far too monarchical and fought to simplify it to just “President of the United States”. The Senate eventually agreed. And as we all recall, George Washington could have become the “King of America” but humbly refused. If only our current politicians would adopt such a humble spirit and dutiful adherence to the Constitution.

Our government has grown too big, too arrogant, and too powerful. It’s time to get back to the basics.

As more details of the “Cybersecurity Czar” emerge, many are also wondering how much this latest federal bureaucracy will cost? How will it affect civil liberties? Is it constitutional? How long will the bill be? Will legislators even read the bill before they vote on it? Can any bill be justified in the name of national security?

Stay tuned…

Read the article here.

St. Louis Tea Partier Interviewed on Glenn Beck

Media attention has continued to grow!  Let’s continue the strong push to have our message heard!

Reminiscent of the WWI & WW2 “Victory Gardens”, as well as the Great Depression “Relief Gardens”, Americans are planting their own gardens in increasing numbers during these tough, economic times.

W. Atlee Burpee & Co., the nation’s largest seed and gardening supply store, has registered a 25-30% increase in vegetable seed and plant sales since last year. CEO George Ball said, “I’ve been in the business for 30 years, and I’ve never seen anything like it- even remotely like it.” The National Garden Association expects a 19% increase in the number of homegrown fruit, vegetable, and herb gardens this year. And according to the association, a $70 garden investment can yield $600 worth of annual produce.

Americans are utilizing their ingenuity to cut costs and make the necessary sacrifices during this severe recession. Every penny counts.

Wouldn’t it be nice to see Washington D.C. act the same way?

Read the article here.

As details of the GOP counter-proposal trickle out, here are some initial thoughts.

Positives: Cuts personal and corporate taxes, rescinds much of the stimulus bill, freezes current domestic spending, and overhauls Medicare

Negatives: No cuts in military spending, and projects over $500 billion budget deficits for years to come

America, take your pick. $500 billion budget deficits or $1-$2 trillion budget deficits for the next decade.

While lower personal and corporate taxes are critical elements to an economic recovery, the Republicans still don’t get it. The real problem is overspending. Whether it’s a $2 trillion budget deficit or a $500 billion budget deficit, the excess spending is obscene.

The Republicans’ real dilemma is military spending. By some accounts, the US spends around $1 trillion a year to maintain its global empire of 700+ bases in 100+ countries around the world. Several economists estimate that the ongoing Afghanistan and Iraq wars have cost America over $1 trillion alone in the last eight years.

Something has to give. If Republicans want to restore fiscal responsibility, they will have to propose far more than just moderate cuts in domestic spending. They will also have to tackle the gargantuan costs of a global empire. If they choose to maintain the size and scope of the empire, then, in order to propose anything close to a balanced budget, they will have to propose much, much deeper domestic cuts. So far, they don’t have the stomach to do so.

At some point, both Republican and Democratic leaders will have to explore other, more cost effective ways to defend America. Currently, Democrats want to substantially boost domestic spending, while maintaining extraordinarily high levels of military spending. Republicans want to moderately cut domestic spending, while maintaining extraordinarily high levels of military spending. Neither approach will produce balanced budgets or make a dent in our national debt.

Read the article here.

In a recent interview, renowned investor, Marc Faber, discussed various aspects of the global economic crisis. His perspective is extremely relevant to the national tea party movement. Here are just a few of the highlights:

Q: What do you think are the long-term effects of the stimulus and bailout proposals on all the Western countries, including the U.S.?

A: …in terms of fiscal spending, bailouts usually don’t work…when the government sits in and tries to offset sagging private demand with government demand, it usually does not work. Many people think the global recovery will begin in late 2009. I seriously doubt that. I think it will be at least two years from now, worst case maybe 10. And when we do start recovery, interest rates will rise and inflationary pressures will be enormous…if you try to postpone a recession the way the US Government has tried to do, then one day you will have a much bigger problem.

(more…)

We in the Tea Party 2009 movement are extremely unhappy about the explosive deficit spending taking place in our nation’s capitol at the behest of the Obama Administration and its Democrat cohorts in Congress. We ought to be. Deficit spending encourages the government to spend far above and beyond what it would spend if it had to swallow hard and raise taxes on us right now to pay for its budget. Much of the deficit is paid for by printing money, which causes inflation and destroys the value of the money that hard-working Americans have earned. Because this causes prices to rise, it hurts poor and struggling families the most- they already have barely enough to make ends meet.

The portion of the deficit that is not monetized (paid for by printing money), is paid for by taking out loans. The government takes out loans by issuing Treasury bonds, many of which are bought up by the Chinese and Saudis. This crowds out the market for credit, which is ironic since most advocates of Obama’s massive deficit spending spree argue that there is not enough freely flowing credit in the economy. Eventually the government has to pay off its debt (with interest), which means that by running deficits now, the government is only promising to tax us even more later. Just the cost of servicing the interest on the United States Government’s massive debt is a major drag on the economy.
(more…)