To the Editor:
Now that President Obama’s “Summer of recovery” is over, we hear that the recession ended in June of 2009. Well, bless me, I guess that makes everything just fine.
But, what about the nearly ten percent unemployed? The additional ten percent underemployed or discouraged workforce drop-outs? The record levels of Americans in poverty? The miniscule economic growth rate? The media described President Bush‘s five percent unemployment rate as a disaster. The media describes President Obama’s numbers as the “new normal”.
Unfortunately, if President Obama’s policies are continued, these numbers, and the personal disasters they represent, may be the “new normal”. Few businesses will invest and hire people when they cannot estimate their expenses because of the many unknown costs of President Obama’s agenda, e.g., Obamacare, cap and trade, card check, executive compensation limits, personnel policies, taxation, etc. What business executives will take risks when the government can declare a business “too risky and too important” and just take over the business, dismiss the executives, and wipe out investors as it did with car company investors?
As long as President Obama and the other liberals (or “progressives” as some prefer) smear business executives and investors, create a treacherous economic environment, and…
The left has oft times suggested that we need transparency in political advertising. That people deserve to know who is paying for a political ad. While this sounds like a good idea on its surface the legislative remedies the pro-government elites tend to propose turn out to be the equivalent of using a sledge hammer to hit a thumbtack. And their obsessive desire to protect and defend the government from the enemy that is the Constitution (I really think they should just change their oath of office to reflect that truth) will forever produce restrictions on speech that are unacceptable to anyone who understands the first amendment in even its most un-convoluted context. 
Don’t expect ShaHodeSheaPorter to wrestle with this conundrum; while running for office in 2008 they insisted that the Bush Tax cuts were "for the rich," or "the wealthiest Americans." The class warfare rhetoric made the case that Republicans didn’t provide tax relief for anyone else, and the democrats promised to remedy this the moment they were elected. The result was to embark on a multi-trillion dollar spending binge that cannot possibly be paid for without taxes on everyone and everything–though they still insist otherwise.
A few months back I discovered that Paul Hodes had received a one time $10,000.00 donation from American Crystal Sugar (A major US Sugar conglomerate), at about the same time as the 288 billion dollar 2007/2008 Farm bill was being pushed through congress, and vetoes overrode. US Sugar is a protected industry with a good amount of political influence. American Crystal Sugar wanted to get into the ethanol industry but could not justify the up front costs. Hodes and the farm billed solved that problem with your money. 
Yahoo! News has a morning headline titled "How Democrats Lost ‘Don’t Ask’ Repeal." 
I was watching the online web cast of Hillsdale College’s commemoration of the Kirby Center (on Constitution Day) in Washington DC, and Dr. Charles Kessler of Claremont McKenna College. Dr. Kessler is a constitutional scholar and early on in his speech he makes the following observation about the current clash between the government and the people, and the rise of the Tea Party