CacheGOP Blog

The title was taken from despair.com under the title of government.  But isn’t it interesting that government creates a lot of the very problems they claim to be trying to solve, especially when it is not a power given them in the Constitution?

Let us start with the Department of Energy.  When it was formed we were importing 34.8% of our oil.  The DOE was supposed to help us get over our addiction but just the opposite has happened.  I believe we now import 60%.  How much money was forcibly taken from the citizens as taxes for this “fix”?  Where is dealing with this in the Constitution?

Another issue is education.  The Department of Education was created to make sure our kids had a better education and help us “catch up” to the Soviets.  Before this it was a local community and state issue.  What has happened since?  I think we can all agree that standards have dropped in most areas and that schools are turning more into places of government subsidized daycare rather than institutions of learning.  Were we even behind the Soviets?  They launched Sputnik but some reports indicate that we had a similar capability at the time and that they had stolen the technology from the USA.  This is another one of those things that is not in the Constitution.

Another example is the Federal Reserve.  The fed was supposed to protect us from bank failures, inflation, and economic uncertainty.  Since its creation many banks have failed, many depressions / recessions have happened, and we have had over 2000% inflation.  That means that your dollar today has less purchasing power than a nickel did before the fed was created.  Oh yeah, the fed has helped create these things by artificially lowering/raising interest rates and injecting our money supply with new money, thereby making the old stuff worth less.  Congress is supposed to coin money anyway, not give that role to somebody else.

The last one I will touch on is campaign finance.  A friend and I asked one of our senators how much money they had received from Fannie Mae.  He said it was illegal for the corporation to give them money.  But the employees would donate to a PAC and then give that money to the senator.  So let me get this straight, the corporation giving money to the politician is bad but the corporation giving the money to an employee and then to a PAC and then to the politician is OK?  That sounds very much like money laundering doesn’t it?  So the government creates a problem by giving out money that the Constitution forbids them to (bailouts) which causes corporations to want a share and then try to influence the politician.  This then creates a market for influence and hence we have this problem, created by the government and also inadequately solved by them.  What if we just stuck to the Constitution?  Wouldn’t there be much less of a market for lobbyists?