Our Blog

Keep up to date with what is going on.


“I Pledge Allegiance to… The President?”

September 23rd, 2012

Several of Hollywood’s biggest celebrities have come out in recent days with a new version of the Pledge of Allegiance.  Specifically, they’re holding their right hands over their hearts and pledging allegiance to President Obama.

Actress Jessica Alba is leading the way.  She told the Washington Examiner:

“Growing up, my classmates and I started every day with a ritual.  We’d stand up, put our right hand over our hearts, and say the Pledge of Allegiance,” explains Alba. “To me, that gesture was a promise. A promise to be involved and engaged in this country’s future.  A promise to work for liberty and justice — and for affordable education, health care, and equality — for all.”

For her part, Alba is simply acting as one of the faces of the Obama campaign’s new “For All” promotion.  Obama supporters are taking pictures of themselves pledging allegiance to Obama with important issues written on their right hands — like “equal pay”, “cleaner energy”, and “women’s rights”.

But should we really be pledging allegiance to any one person?

Doesn’t the entire thing conjure up an image of a leader who is so blinded by power that he starts operating in his own best interests — instead of ours?  Regardless of your political beliefs, America is supposed to be greater than any one person.  It’s supposed to be a nation of “We The People”.

The key word there is “people”.  Collectively.  Exercising our natural-born rights.

No matter who is in charge, we aren’t supposed to pledge allegiance to him… We’re supposed to pledge our allegiance to something much bigger.

Why is the Second Amendment So Important?

September 23rd, 2012

If you Google the term “repeal Second Amendment”, more than two million results pop up.  You’ll find articles blaming the Second Amendment for the July mass-shooting in a Colorado movie theater, for the Arizona shooting that wounded Congresswoman Gabby Giffords, the 2007 Virginia Tech shooting, and even for arming the Mexican drug cartels.

There’s no doubt that guns can do horrible things, but does that mean we should change the Bill of Rights?

The 27 words that make up the Second Amendment are clear:

“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

Back in 1791, there was no National Guard.  Instead, Americans had militias that could be called upon when things got rough.  In fact, Colonists had been relying on these militias ever since they first arrived at Jamestown in 1607.  Without them, America may not have been able to break free of England in the first place.

Back in those days, you weren’t just ALLOWED to have a gun.  You were EXPECTED to have gun.

But Thomas Jefferson took it one step further.

Remember, the Declaration of Independence makes it clear that the government works for the people — not vice versa.  In the Declaration of Independence, Jefferson talked about what would happen if the government failed to protect its citizens.  What if the government actually became the enemy of the people?

In that case, Jefferson said, the people were allowed to overthrow the government.

But doing so wouldn’t be possible without weapons.  Therefore, Jefferson reasoned, the federal government could never forbid its citizens from bearing arms.  If it did, the people had no way to prevent the government from running right over the top of them.

Don’t we face the same threat today?

If we repeal the Second Amendment, does it give the government an opportunity to stop working FOR us and start working AGAINST us?

What is Redistribution?

September 23rd, 2012

In a much talked-about video from 1998 that has just surfaced, President Obama says “I actually believe in redistribution.”

But what does that mean?

Redistribution is a fancy word for creating level incomes in a particular society.  Specifically, you take money from the rich and give it to the poor.  Redistribution is the main focus of Socialism, because Socialists believe that everyone should be equal — regardless of how much they work or how much money they make on their own.

To a point, America already redistributes some of its wealth.  After all, money for welfare and other government assistance programs comes from tax dollars.  So, some of the rich’s money is already given to the poor.

However, what would happen if America were to place more emphasis on redistribution?

History gives us two big examples of where redistribution has been tried — and failed:

–        Henry VIII seized money from the Catholic churches in England and gave it to his supporters.  However, it still wasn’t enough to keep the country afloat.  Henry VIII wound up having to lower the value of the country’s coins — which led to massive inflation.

–        During the French Revolution, police took money from the wealthy citizens.  What they left behind, looters stole for themselves.  In the end, Louis XIV was beheaded, and France was left with a dictator in charge named Napoleon.

It made a nice catch phrase for Robin Hood, but is taking money from the rich and giving it to the poor what our forefathers intended for America?

While we can’t speak for all of them, we know that Thomas Jefferson was against it.  In a letter to Joseph Milligan in 1816, Jefferson wrote:

“To take from one, because it is thought his own industry and that of his fathers has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers, have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, the guarantee to everyone the free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it.”

Is Mitt Romney Right?

September 23rd, 2012

If you’re a loyal visitor to Our Voice Counts, you know that we’ve already debated whether or not America is becoming a society of moochers.

Turns out, GOP Presidential nominee Mitt Romney shares some of our thoughts.

Although it’s probably not the way he would have preferred the information come out, a video of a Romney fundraiser has been the talk of much discussion over the past few days.  On it, Romney talks about the people whom he can never convince to vote for him over President Obama.  According to Romney:

“There are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it. That that’s an entitlement. And the government should give it to them.”

As of 2011, 46% of Americans paid no income taxes.  So, there are plenty of people who want to be PAID by the system — but aren’t willing to PAY INTO the system.  Romney mentions these people by saying:

“I’ll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives…”

Even though the video was leaked without his knowledge, Romney has stood by his comments.

So, is he right?

Has America turned into a “me-first” society?  Are Americans simply looking for a handout?  Has it really been that long since John F. Kennedy said, “Ask not what your country can do for you — ask what you can do for your country,”?

Regardless of what you think about Mitt Romney’s political beliefs, is he right?  Is a huge portion of Americans dependent on the government?  What would our forefathers think about that?  More importantly, what do YOU think about that?

A President with No Political Party

September 8th, 2012

In today’s day and age, it’s unfathomable that someone could be elected President of the United States without any kind of political party affiliation — but that’s exactly what happened when George Washington took over!

Oh, sure, back in Washington’s days, there was plenty of political debate.  However, it was restricted to beer halls and assembly houses — and it was on a much smaller scale.  People had their own independent opinions about how the country should be run, but they weren’t part of any kind of political party.  Even when Washington was re-elected in 1793, he still didn’t have a political party attached to his name.

And that’s just how he wanted it!

In fact, Washington HATED the idea of political parties.  He was afraid that they would grow too powerful and, as a result, damage the country as a whole.  Washington thought that a young America couldn’t withstand political opponents trying to exact revenge on one another (and, to him, that’s all political parties were about — getting revenge on your enemies).  He thought political parties would be a distraction to the government — or, worse, that they would lead to people losing their freedoms.

Right before Washington left office, he made sure to let Americans know exactly what he thought of political parties — in hopes that they wouldn’t take over after he was gone.  In his farewell speech, Washington said, “…the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of the party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.”

Wonder what Washington would think of today’s political climate?!

4 Things You Don’t Know About the Gettysburg Address

August 29th, 2012

Regardless of political views, people consider the Gettysburg Address to be the most memorable and influential speech in history.  After all, Abraham Lincoln had a massive challenge — to unite Americans after the Civil War tore them apart, and to do it while overlooking the graves of thousands of soldiers who had made the ultimate sacrifice.

The speech’s mark on history is even more impressive when you consider that:

  •  It was short

At just 272 words, the Gettysburg Address was over in less than three minutes

Can you remember what was said in the 2012 State of the Union Address?  It lasted 77 minutes, and I bet you don’t remember a single one of its talking points!

  •  Lincoln wrote it all himself

Can you imagine today’s leaders sitting down at their desk and writing their own speech — then delivering it flawlessly without a teleprompter?!

  •  No one clapped

Unlike the hooting and hollering that we see during political speeches today, the response at the end of the Gettysburg Address was stone-cold silence — which stirred up all kinds of debate.  Some people thought it was proof that the audience didn’t like it.  Others thought the silence showed that people were in awe of what Lincoln had just said.

  •  Lincoln had smallpox at the time

The day before the Gettysburg Address, Lincoln told his assistants he didn’t feel so good, and they said he looked weak and dizzy.  Within a few days, Lincoln had a high fever, major aches and pains, and skin that was covered in red blisters.  Now THAT’S devotion to the task at hand!

Regarding Obama’s eligibility

August 29th, 2012


Regarding Obama’s eligibility:

Briefing by Lord Monckton – 3rd Viscount of Brenchley, England – hereditary peer of the Royal Monarchy, policy advisor to British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher;  “Obama birth certificate a forgery”, “GOP treasonous for inaction.”  His full PDF briefing can be found at this link: http://www.moncktononline.com/images/peers-briefing.pdf

Patrick Leddy



Exclusive: Christopher Monckton of Brenchley calls GOP treasonous for eligibility inaction


When Did We Lose the Cherry Tree?

August 27th, 2012

It’s a story that’s been told for centuries…

Little George Washington (then just six years-old) was playing with a hatchet, when he cut down his father’s favorite cherry tree. When his father asked him who killed the tree, Washington replied, “I cannot tell a lie, father, you know I cannot tell a lie!”

As we all know, little George grew up to be our first President, and this story set a high standard for America’s leaders to strive for.
But look at what we’ve got today:

– Republicans in Congress crying foul over U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder’s alleged refusal to turn over documents in response to a subpoena over Operation Fast and Furious.

– Secretary of Treasury Timothy Geitner, who didn’t pay Social Security or Medicare taxes from 2001-2004. He paid $34,000 in back taxes before being confirmed to lead the IRS’ hunt for tax-evaders.

– Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who said she was never briefed on the CIA’s use of waterboarding back in 2002. However, the former CIA counterterrorism chief claims to have proof (in a classified government cable) about when and where she was told about what was going on.

It’s not just Democrats who are in hot water, and it’s not a recent development, either. After lying about the Watergate scandal, Richard Nixon is still the only U.S. President to ever resign.

More recently, former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay was sentenced to three years in prison for money laundering, after he used a political action committee to send donations to Texas House candidates.

Examples like these make you wonder… when exactly was it that we lost sight of the cherry tree?


Hot Topics

Keeping The Idea of America Alive!
HomeAbout UsContactPhotosSitemap
back to top