A Libertarian’s Christmas Wish list for 2005Written by Mike Sylvester
I moved back to Fort Wayne five years ago. I moved back to Fort Wayne to raise my family. I want to do my part to make America a better place for my children; I do not think anything is more important then that.
I feel that America has made some very bad decisions in last 84 years. In 1920 Franklin Roosevelt started “The New Deal” and government started growing. In 1920 total government spending was about 4% of Gross Domestic Product. Today, total government spending is about 40% of Gross Domestic Product! This means that about 40% of all spending in United States is now done by one government entity or another. This is a trend that must be stopped. Our government gets larger and more inefficient every year. Bigger is NOT better.
I want my children to grow up in a country where citizens are responsible for their own actions. I want my children to grow up in a country where United States Constitution is respected and adhered to. I want my children to live in a country that manufactures products; not one in which everything is made in China. I want my children to grow up in a country where government has a limited role and our citizenry is responsible for their own actions. I want my children to grow up in a world like one envisioned by our “Founding Fathers.”
Here is my Christmas Wish list for 2005: 1.I want to see Republican House, Senate, and President Bush reign in Federal spending like they have been promising for years; I do not want to see government keep adding one half a trillion dollars per year to existing Federal debt. The Federal debt currently stands at over $7,600,000,000! 2.I want to see Mitch Daniels and Republican majorities in Indiana House and Senate balance Indiana budget by reigning in spending. The local taxes I pay already skyrocketed far too much in 2004. My sales tax went up one percent AND my property tax went up over 61% this year. I paid almost $2000 more in local and state taxes in 2004 then I did in 2003. 3.I want to see current seat belt laws for adults completely revoked in Indiana and I want to see current proposals to expand seat belt laws get defeated. It is absurd that government should try to regulate whether law abiding citizens are wearing a seat belt or not.
Origins Of The WarWritten by The Indy Voice
It has been case that throughout history many people have attempted to revise history to suit needs of their time. In an unprecedented way, many people in power today are trying to revise contemporary history and they seem to be getting away with it (at least 61,000,000 people are buying it). The Indy Voice wanted to re-revise history to represent reality (wow, what a concept).
Many have said that George W. Bush's idea for war with Iraq came only after 9/11 and was only for national security reasons. The reality is that many within administration were pushing for a military strike against Iraq to remove Saddam Hussein from power going back to 1998. In fact, on January 26, 1998 members of "The Project for New American Century" (PNAC) sent a letter to then President Bill Clinton outlining their reasons for removing Hussein from Iraq. Their reasons DID NOT include an imminent threat. Actually language they used was "we MAY soon face a threat".
The present day positions of these PNAC members include National Security Council, Deputy Secretary of State, George W. Bush’s speechwriter, Under Secretary of Arms Control and International Security, Under Secretary of Global Affairs, counsellor to United States Secretary of Defense, Advisory Board of Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs and former chairman of Defense Policy Board, Assistant Secretary for International Security Affairs in Department of Defense, Chairman of Defense Science Board, Ambassador and member of Council on Foreign Relations, Deputy Secretary of Defense, and Secretary of Defense. They let President Clinton know that they believed that "it is difficult if not impossible to monitor Iraq’s chemical and biological weapons production" and "in not-too-distant future we will be unable to determine with any reasonable level of confidence whether Iraq does or does not possess such weapons." How then was this administration so certain that Iraq possessed WMD in 2002?
As for threat posed by Iraq on mainland they mentioned nothing. They believed that Iraq possessing WMD would have a "seriously destabilizing effect on entire Middle East." And "if Saddam DOES acquire capability to deliver weapons of mass destruction" he will threaten "the safety of American troops in region, [sic] our friends and allies like ISRAEL and moderate Arab states" (like Saudi Arabia?) And they stated another reason why they were concerned. They were worried that Hussein would put at risk "a significant portion of world’s supply of oil." Interesting?!