Dakota Beacon

In both inaugurals, there was no mistaking the message, or the mood that followed. Both initiated a profound, palpable, quite immediate change in the nation’s morale and sense of itself. The shift was dramatic. Of course, it wasn’t just the speeches that made the difference, but the men who made them, with the inaugurals their starting points.

The anniversary of two unforgettable inaugural addresses from two beloved presidents, Democrat and Republican: John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan. For Kennedy’s speech, this is the golden anniversary, 50 years; for Reagan, 30 years.

Wealthy people must be punished--presumably for accumulating all that nasty "wealth." At least this is the impression one gets from today's class warfare mongering progressives, who talk of the evils of the "income gap." Free To Choose Network director Max Borders suggests the following approach to kicking off a discussion with an income gap worrier.

Why do liberals, both Democrats and RINOs (Republicans in Name Only), invariably choose totalitarian solutions to treat real or imagined economic, social and political issues? Don’t they realize Americans resent authoritarian rule?

Liberals and their kind tax to punish, withhold funds to coerce and award money to entice. Look at the list.

Obama's tyrannical regime speaks for itself--the forced, unwanted legislation; the ideologically-motivated executive orders; the business-murdering, general welfare-destroying regulatory nightmares of the EPA, CMS, FCC (1, 2, 3), HHS, FDA, etc. But it would be wise to maintain a balanced perspective. On occasion, when even the most radical President ever does or says something good, if conservatives and right-side-of-the-road libertarians fail to acknowledge the goodness, then is the Right and righter than the Left?

Shakespeare biography is in what might be described as a persistent vegetative state. This is a rather natural result of trying to write a man's life without taking the preliminary step of making sure you've got the right guy. I own more than two dozen biographies of the Stratford man, most of them fairly recent, who has been mistaken for the real author for nearly four centuries.

After much soul-searching I decided I would do it: I would comment on the shooting that took place this month in Tucson.  The reason for my reticence in writing about this crime is because it IS a crime, a random, isolated incident, mishandled from the start, yes, but NOT a politically relevant item.  The only “political” element is that one of the shooter’s victims happens to be United States Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords.  The absurd attempt by the liberal press to associate this very troubled man’s act of violence with anyone in our American political arena should be seen for what it is- a red herring promoted by a desperate Left to distract the American public and our newly elected Congressional delegation from doing what we sent them to Washington to do, to repeal Obama Care, to curb the illegitimate activities of agencies such as the EPA, to bring the national debt under control and myriad other urgent projects.

Are Red River Valley winters especially harsh?, Three Affiliated Tribes Chairman Tex Hall, more money and help, Gov. Dalrymple, high school graduation rate, Federal spending in ND, The new 49ers general manager Trent Baalke, the nation’s largest potato farmer, The Sunday Opinion Pages, Seven out of 55, UND GFighting Sioux nickname, 30-acre greenhouse, staged at least 37 auto accidents, Daktoids

In the reason corner, we have the birther foolishness, Obama fascism, and the Fed conspiring with foreign powers. Anyone, not just Tea Partiers, putting significant energy into any of these three areas is wasting their time.

Now for the nonsense corner. To deny that Obama has driven America toward socialism, that Soros has financed vitriol-filled anti-American organizations and efforts, or that some Muslims are trying to push the tenets and customs of Islam into various American communities requires the blindness and naïveté discussed above.

The real genius of the American political system is the original understanding, born more of experience and compromise than of theory, that power should be limited, divided, and dispersed. Spreading power thinly is one way - imperfect, but practical - of protecting liberty.

In a truly federal system, states are united on a few specified points, but free to differ in all other respects. How ironic, but how typical, that the apostles of "diversity" want to make the states uniform. Real diversity, the kind the United States used to have, is the last thing they want. This is E pluribus unum with a vengeance.

It’s time to quit ignoring our Constitution as the three branches of government so frequently do. Let’s get back to basics in government. Last week was believed to be the first time that the complete Constitution had ever been read in Congress. Let’s make reading the Constitution in Congress an annual event, as it is for Washington’s Farewell Address.

Opening the 112th Congress by having a succession of representatives read the Constitution aloud on the floor of the House was a worthwhile exercise, despite heated criticism to the contrary. If nothing else, it showed how little respect many members of Congress have for the supreme law of our republic. Fewer than half the members even bothered to be present during the reading.

This is a metaphor for what you, Dupnik, and the rest of your leftist ilk are visiting upon our once-great nation.  Do you really want to prevent violence, sheriff?  Then drop the inflammatory-rhetoric artifice and stop the immoral actions.  Stop attacking Western culture and traditions.  Start believing in and seeking Truth, yielding to reason and abiding by the Constitution.  Stop the lies and deceit.  We yell fire because you and your fellow travelers really are pyromaniacs.  Pick up a hose and help, or America will be hosed down by 1984 – or 1776 – whether you, I, or anyone else likes it or not.

Jingoists push the notion that America must grow exports faster than imports. These preachers preach that importing more than we export is somehow bad. But mathematics doesn't lie. Look again at those last two paragraphs. There's a 38% higher correlation between imports and GDP than there is between exports and GDP. The math says this: Go ahead and focus on growing your exports, but when you do, your economy will grow less than if you had let the market run free to produce increased demand which spurs imports. A rising gross domestic product goes along with rising imports--plain and simple. Trade deficit worriers may reject that reality, but reality it is.

In summary, when imports increase, the economy and the job market expand. When imports decrease, the economy goes into recession and employment falls. There is no similarly strong correlation in the case of exports.

Absent real reform, the property tax program is simply destined to cost more and more each Session.  The Legislature must evaluate new ways of to make local governments more accountable and appreciative of what the Legislature does for them by shifting local government burdens onto the state's books.

Local government must make a good faith effort to reduce their own property tax property taxes as part of the state's efforts to do the same.

The United States cannot force these states to change, but Washington should make religious persecution part of its human-rights dialogue with other nations. Equally important, Americans should support and pray for the oppressed around the world.

Religious liberty is the proverbial canary in the mine. If a state won’t respect this most basic freedom of conscience, it isn’t likely to respect people’s lives and dignity in any context.

His straightforward reasoning went like this. If voters were willing to elect public “servants” who would take care of them in exchange for a bit of their freedom, that was their choice. His choice was to recoup at least some of what the government had taken from him in taxes by claiming his share of benefits as soon as possible. After all, he argued, he had worked long and hard while the government took more and more of his income. Why shouldn’t he get something in return?

He claimed he felt no guilt from transgressing the old American ethic of getting ahead through hard work. He indicated he understood a new ethic, an overriding unspoken ethic, affirming the right to live off one’s fellow man. This was his subtle observation of the public mind-set.

The hysteria fanned by the hyperbolic catastrophism of the ‘carbon klatch’ and a sensationalist press have created a ‘Ready Fire Aim’ mentality, pushing the nation and the world toward drastic action, before cost-effective capture methods and energy alternatives are established and operational – based on a blind faith

A chronic state of crisis, readers suggested that the IHS should be abolished, sustain a positive business climate, proceed with caution, public administrator and guardianship services, Remarkable Run Ends for Team North Dakota, the “heart” landed lightly on his feet, You would think they might notice, new diesel tractor engines, an expensive boondoggle, for disobeying road closures, more frequent competency tests for older drivers, Fighting Sioux nickname, State Dairy Queen

That the Democrats took a thumping last November is obvious. In the House of Representatives, over 60 seats changed from Democrat to Republican. Less-remarked upon, however, was the equally dramatic switch to pro-life legislators, which, not coincidentally, accompanied that Democrat-to-Republican shift.

In short, the Democratic Party, which was already heading down this path, now has preciously few pro-lifers in the House or Senate. We’re approaching the point where you can count them on two hands, potentially one hand. Alas, I say this with regret. I honestly do. I’m a pro-life Republican, but I know that the parties, and what they stand for, change over time. I’m far more concerned with the lives of unborn babies than political lives of Republicans.

Three years ago, I witnessed a cocktail-sipping San Francisco area Sierra Club attorney sit and hold court with enthralled listeners.  The attorney described the pleasure that she derives from inflicting economic pain on manufacturers and sending "messages" to consumers of capitalists' products.  I wondered aloud if her computer, refrigerator, TV, phones, and air conditioners were powered by electricity.  Court spectators chuckled.  But the jab flew over the head that sported the up-tilted chin, spittle-flinging lips, and angry eyes peering down a nose with nostrils flaring each time the brain recalled a legal victory over planet-hating wretches.

It seems that our neutered, post-Christian culture just can’t do enough to vindicate Muslims’ accusation of Western decadence.  And the latest affront to common sense and Truth is an attack upon the family: The State Department will remove the terms “father” and “mother” from passport applications and replace them with “gender neutral terminology.”

Insofar as government is going to be involved in influencing the family, it has a duty to not undermine familial health.  The family is the central building block of civilization, and nations rise and fall with its fortunes.  And as with obesity and other physical problems, familial anomalies will inevitably exist (e.g., single-parent households).  But this doesn’t mean they should be normalized.

I’m delighted to see the left wring its collective hands over an entity with no single leader, no headquarters, no “bullseye” at which they may aim.  I’m pleased to watch them waste time and resources trying to identify a single monolithic Tea Party movement, try to portray certain Sarah Palin types as the de facto leader, and throw the same old Alinsky playbook at the straw man they’ve created.  All the while they’re motivating us even more, the average citizen-turned-activist who continues to fly under their radar.  We’re out here in numbers, we’re resolute in our cause, and we’ll make our presence known during every legislative session and election cycle.

How did the “Minot Mafia” react to the Dakota Beacon article?  It moved, through the Minot city attorney, seeking a GAG ORDER prohibiting this writer from discussing, writing about, or making public comments about the claims, defenses and evidence in the case.

American liberals have enthusiastically celebrated the passage of a law requiring the Armed Forces to recruit homosexuals. The celebration in some cases (for example, Rachel Madow, liberal host at MSNBC) is so excessive that one has to wonder if homosexuality will replace abortion as the cardinal defining principle of contemporary American liberalism. Even the Republican liberals joined on this issue.