Beyond the Cusp

September 14, 2013

Has America Lost its Credibility and Super Power Status?

With the recent standoff over presumed use of chemical weapons on civilians which supposedly murdered over fourteen-hundred innocents many have claimed that the United States appeared weak, indecisive, and excessively tentative eventually backing away from enforcing President Obama’s declared red lines. This has sparked claims that America has lost her super power status and is no longer to be respected as any red lines or other ultimatums made in her name are likely just hot air and empty threats. But is it true that the United States has become a secondary level player or worse in the world or is it something less severe? Perhaps America is still the super power the world has depended upon to come to the rescue of Europe through two world wars and acted as the world’s nation of first and last resort. It is where nations turn after natural disasters and such will continue despite the presumed trauma suffered by the Syria debacle. So, what is the reality concerning the United States; has she fallen from grace or simply had a bad encounter from which she should return with her familiar roar.


Fortunately for the future of mankind, America is the same super power and retains her ability to come to the rescue of the world, save nations and people from natural disasters, and come to the answer no matter when, where or who is in need no questions asked and then go home when the difficult circumstances have been resolved without saying a word or demanding compensation, never expecting to receive gratitude as she has become accustomed to being taken for granted. This episode is simply the rest of the world exercising their favorite pastime, ridiculing the United States at the slightest stumble reveling in her embarrassment while ridiculing Americans apparent weakness and stupidity knowing full well that should they meet disaster and cry out for the Americans to save them, she will come without regard for the scorn and not expecting any apology or explanation and treat those in need with careful care and compassion which is only possible when you are self-assured that you are above threats and able to answer any real challenge. Sure there are the jealous wannabes ridiculing the powerful one which has had a moment of poor leadership, but that is all this is, a moment of poor leadership and America knows that she gets to choose a new leader whenever necessary every four years. Though it has yet been necessary to actually push a leader from the Presidency, though one did depart under fire, there is also the path to make changes within the four year cycle should such prove necessary.


No, my friends, the United States of America is still the last best hope of mankind, the example for others to emulate, the proud but humble, hardworking, ever giving, charitable, savior of the distressed, super power she was for as long as we can remember. America has not fallen, not even really stumbled; she has had a crisis of one person, her President who came up wanting in a difficult situation of his own making. There will be those in the world who will mock America in this moment of imperfection, but her friends will continue to know she is their best hope and best of all possible friends while her detractors will revel in her momentary lack of will through inadequate personal leadership of her President but still fear to press her too far or make threats because they think her fallen for they know the reality is she is still the strongest and most righteous of powers. No, America is still that shining city on the hill and retains her pride and shine and the Red, White and Blue, the Stars and Stripes still wave and her National Anthem, all three verses, still describe her heart and will which none should test lest they wish to feel her wrath. America is still slow to anger and quick to forgive beyond the understanding of her enemies and the gratitude of her friends. America is the hope and shall retain every ounce of pride as it is all deserved. A President has stumbled, there will be a new one coming along, so be careful of your scorn for America does have a long memory, ask those who have thought to test it before, the Barbary Pirates, the English, the Germans, all tested her twice and found her up to respond to the task each time. America still stands tall, proud, and decent, like always has been and will continue for the foreseeable future. Enough said.


Beyond the Cusp


May 1, 2013

Can America Survive in a World Without G0d?

There has been a slowly rising crescendo for half a century from a growing group of conservatives who are religious and hold their faith in the L0rd as dearly as they hold to the rights as delineated in the founding documents, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and increasingly the Declaration of Independence. It is in the Declaration of Independence that these religious conservatives find their strongest arguments that they are uniquely positioned to more fully understand the ideas and ideals behind the founders and what they viewed as the origins of the nation they wished to found. They also take to heart many of the arguments made between the different founders which many were fortunately preserved in the letters of correspondence. The likely most famous coming from John Adams who wrote, “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” But even this quote falls short of the delineation of the manners for power distribution which was the backbone of the Declaration of Independence. Despite the watering down of the reference in order to pacify a select group of founders who feared placing too strong a reference to things religious as they feared relating too close an interdependence between the Almighty and the governance of the country they were to found. Still, the distribution of power is given a direct flow from the Creator to the individual people and from them to government. The government was relinquished to accepting only those powers permitted by the people and the people retained all other powers and rights not relegated to government. And taking things one step further, the power which was relinquished to the purview of government was to be most powerful at the most local level and from their powers would be relented upwards until the Federal Government would receive the least power and only those powers which were furthest from the citizens as those powers were to be retained at the governance closest to the people and most readily monitored and corralled by the citizens. The Constitution went even further in limiting the powers of the Federal Government in that it spent more words forbidding powers to the Federal Government than granting it powers.


It would be an impossible argument to try and claim that as time has passed that the Americans as a peoples have strayed from their strict religious beliefs and are now at best evenly divided between religiously observant and largely secular. If one were to query a plurality of Americans as to where their rights originate, they would likely say they were granted by the government and likely the Federal Government. This is exactly the opposite of the ideas that were the underpinning of the intentions and inspirations of the Founding Fathers. This belief has become so widespread that the Federal Government does not even pretend to follow the restriction on their powers as delineated in the Constitution. This has been a growing problem which found its origins in the humanist movement which really gained steam at the turn of the twentieth century. The prominence of the humanist, secular humanist in particular, was given a huge impetus with the writings of two men of science, the first being Charles Darwin and the second Sigmund Freud. Between these two gentlemen much of what had been wonder and the purview of the Creator were now reassigned to the purviews of science and given Earthly explanations. This drove the movement that culminated in <a href=>Amendment 17</a> to the Constitution which stripped the States of their representation at the Federal Level thus removing the power to limit the powers stolen from the States by the Federal Government which over time allowed the Federal Government to gather far superior power over that of the States and other local governances. This inverted the power curve from G0d – People – Local Governments – State Governments – Federal Government to the new divisions of power which now appears to closely resemble Federal Government – State Governments – Local Governments – People. When the followers of secular humanism rearranged the structures of power in the governance of the United States they not only inverted the entire power curve, they removed the Creator from the picture completely and placed the Federal Government as the originator of all powers, rights, and grantor of all privilege. The same year that Amendment 17 was ratified there was another, namely Amendment 16. This permitted the Federal Government to collect an income tax from the people which further placed the peoples under the thumb of the Federal Government as the governance now had a direct access to one’s wealth.


Once the Federal Government inverted the entire power structure which had been implemented under the system designed by the Founding Fathers it began to take over those areas which had been relegated to religion and seen as the place where religion and thus G0d was responsible. Such areas included assisting those who were in need, those unable to care for themselves, feeding the hungry, assisting those who were unemployed, the homeless, providing for the education of the people, providing health care, childcare of orphans, and all distribution of charity. One by one the government took control of these areas with the concept that the government would provide such care without subjecting those who were in need with sermons and other pressures which religious institutions were presumably guilty of forcing upon those they helped. The fact that a church run soup kitchen might impinge upon those receiving their food that they say a prayer and listen to hymns while they ate was cast as being an unnecessary victimization on those who were needy. Why should anybody have to put up with such an imposition of their sensibilities just to receive a meal. Government was going to save these needy people from such an imposition. Government took over the care for children in orphanages with the reasoning that the government would be more suitable and particular when choosing adoptive parents and this would free those seeking to adopt from the possibility for meeting unnecessary religious requirements. The result was that the main determination for adopting a child became more aligned with wealth or who one knows than more humanistic qualities. Unemployment, charity, you name it and the government crept in and usurped responsibility replacing religion in every sector of our society. By the end of this year the government will be well on their way to replacing religion in its last bastion, hospital and health care. The death knell for religious provided health care is known as Obama Care which will slowly morph health care in ways that will wrest it from the hands of religious institutions eventually making government the sole provider for health care just as they have taken over every other area in society which once was provided by religious institutions. This was not done by accident as government was seeking to replace religion and replace G0d as the originator and guarantor of rights and freedoms. Let us pray that when we find that we the people can no longer suffer the overreach and domination of government over the individual that we can find the strength of character and the power of faith and trusting in our Creator take back from government those rights and privileges it has stolen from us the people and return the balance of power such that the people are under the protection of G0d and not the vassals under government.


Beyond the Cusp


August 12, 2012

Romney Makes Ryan His Veep Choice

Republican Presidential nominee Mitt Romney announced Paul Ryan as his running mate yesterday. If Mitt Romney has any luck whatsoever, then the Republican self-anointed leadership will come out unanimously aghast in opposition of his choosing Representative Paul Ryan. One reason this may actually prove to be the case is due to Representative Ryan’s budget formulations which he proposed successfully twice in the House of Representatives. The high Lord Muckie-Mucks of the Republican Party are really just a bunch of Democrat lite who support government as the solution to most problems. These are the people who gave us other wonderful choices such as George W. Bush who added to the size and scope of government nearly as much as any Democrat before him including both Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Lyndon Baines Johnson. For those who take offense and are claiming I am way off base here, may I remind you of just two small projects laid upon us that massively grew the size, scope, and cost of government permanently going into the future. The two programs are “No Child Left Behind” and the “Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act”. So, one point in favor of Paul Ryan is his belief in actual cuts in spending instead of simply cutting the increase and proclaiming deficit defeated. But was this the best choice, an inspired choice, a great misstep, or what?

Representative Paul Ryan is obviously a fiscal conservative which will go far in underlining the Romney message that budget cuts even if it is of those programs often perceived as third rail instant political death to suggest cuts are necessary if the United States is to avoid catastrophic financial Armageddon. Ryan is very likely to be a good fit with the Romney financial platform with a stress on tax cuts tied directly to budgetary reductions phased in over time with the aim of reaching budget surpluses within the decade. This is a reasoned manner to return the United States to fiscal sanity as we have been taken so close to the edge that being able to prevent the country going beyond the cusp demands serious restraints in spending. The big questions are not about the fiscal policies of Romney and Ryan as those are well known. Ryan will likely support Romney in any jobs programs as this is seen as a Romney strong point. Simply restraining government and promising to allow private growth and a steady and unchanging atmosphere will go a long ways to producing job growth. The repeal of all of Obama Care without any ideas of replace would also spur more job creation and here Ryan is likely to be a good influence as he supports repeal over replace of Obama Care.

The big questions about both Romney and Ryan come in the area of foreign policy. Ryan is known as a supporter of a strong military and, along with Romney, as a supporter of Israel as our strongest ally in the Middle East. What we will need to find out is whether Romney and Ryan are against the military adventurism which many have used to refer to our efforts at nation building. Should their foreign policy be one of support for those who have a similar world view and withholding interactions with those who oppose our principles of governance, human rights, and other principles they are likely to find this as a winning policy. If Romney and Ryan should support intervention to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, then as long as they are not in favor of prolonged presence with nation building and instead put in place an interim government and remove our troops as soon as the Iranians hold elections for their new government, this is likely supportable by the American public over a repeat of Afghanistan or Iraq. It is also more likely that the United States would gain a friend by engaging in as short an intervention as logistically possible and trusting the people of Iran to choose wisely. At least the people in Iran already have experienced Islamic Sharia rule so are unlikely to follow the path taken by Egypt, Libya, and others after the Arab Spring chilled and turned to an Arab Winter.

Where the economy and jobs have been chosen as the most likely deciding areas for this coming Presidential election, there are those who hold that foreign policy is the highest importance when choosing a President. We already have been told that Romney will be different than President Obama when it comes to financial policies and the addition of Ryan can only make this difference greater, but it remains to be seen how different a Romney foreign policy will be to that of President Obama. Ryan is known to be almost a polar opposite of President Obama, especially where the Middle East, and Israel in particular, but we will have to wait for Romney to disclose his entire foreign policy interests and plans. Ryan will likely be seen as a positive move as Ryan’s is a fiscal conservative, pro-military strength, a social conservative, and a personable individual and a good communicator. He has an ability to take difficult concepts and ideas, especially concerning budgets and fiscal planning, and making such understandable for the average person. This ability along with Ryan’s warm personality will add to and fill what some have seen as a void in a Romney campaign. Ryan may prove the deciding factor if the election should be a close contest. Oh, and if you have not figured it out yet, I really like Ryan as Romney’s choice for Veep.

Beyond the Cusp

Blog at

%d bloggers like this: