American Ideas and Solutions

Ideas and Projected Solutions Central to American Life

Archive for July 2011

Social Justice vs Equal Justice

with one comment

Social justice is based on the idea that a group of people are entitled to certain treatment or resources due to circumstances other than what the general population experiences.  It usually involves taking resources, provided by someone else, and providing them to the group of people.  It also involves allowing for different treatment or rights when a group of people do not have access to liberties, rights or resources due to a disadvantaged position in society.  It requires government to dictate conditions in order to regulate private affairs and gain ‘equality’ for the disadvantaged group of people.  This is one main tool of politicians who call themselves Progressives.  Why are they called Progressives?  One brick at a time they progressively dismantle the original foundation of our nation, based on freedom and equality for all, to gain government control over each of the issues brought to ‘social justice’.  The government must regulate these issues in order to maintain ‘equality’ through ‘social justice’. In order to maintain social justice, the government must regulate the behavior of the people to comply with each issue addressed.  Each time a law is passed in the name of Social Justice, there is a chip taken away from the liberties and rights of someone. I submit that this practice must be stopped in order to preserve the original foundation of our great country! Read Wikipedia’s definition of Social Justice:

Equal justice is based on the idea that all are entitled to certain treatment or resources through set standards of entitlement as defined by law.  It relies on compliance of all citizens to one uniform standard. It assumes applying civility and compassion through the private sector in the way of private non-profits, churches or other private groups in order to provide resources to the disadvantaged and social grace from the private sector when a group of people are in a minority. Read Wikipedia’s Definition of Equal Justice:

Social justice is the very thing the founding fathers fought against when they formed our nation.  This is the reason they wrote the first ten amendments to The Constitution.  The intent of the “Bill of Rights” was to provide all citizens with protection from government dictate or intrusion in certain parts of our lives.  Each time an exception is made in the name of social justice, the equal rights of the people are compromised.  Each time a law is passed in the name of Social Justice, there is a chip taken away from the liberties and rights of someone. I submit that this practice must be stopped in order to preserve the original foundation of our great country!

Here are some examples:

Using equal justice, the Civil Rights Act gave all people, regardless of race, religion, gender or sexual preference equal rights to participate in the workforce having equal rights to access public resources. This allowed for the freedom of all citizens to access any public resources available without requiring government or institutions to instill mandates to comply with the law.   The law was self explanatory and required no physical resources to administer it with the exception that the individual citizen would have to use his own resources to gain access to public resources such as getting to a certain school or job.

Using social justice, integration legislation required employers to hire a ratio of races, and required schools to enroll a ratio of races disregarding cost or need of the institutions.  This put the burden of cost on the institutions instead of the individual in order to comply with the law.  It required taxpayer money to be spent, such as in the case of school busing.

In the name of Social Justice, it was decided in Congress that all Americans should have an opportunity to buy a home.  Here is where we got into the Freddy Mac, Fanny Mae debacle.  The government instructed banks that they must offer high risk loans to people who would normally be rejected because they could not repay the loans. Taxpayers money would eventually support the effort.

Social Justice is the basis of laws being proposed to limit the food available to the public in the interest of being healthier.  In New York a law was presented to forbid restaurants adding salt to the food in the interest of heart health.  The idea is that people who were refraining from salt would not have the ability to refrain from or could not eat at the restaurant; therefore all should forego the salt in the name of social justice.

In California there is a law being considered (possibly already dicided) to disallow the toys in McDonalds Happy Meals.  The basis is that McDonalds advertising put the parents at such a disadvantage in controlling their children’s eating habits that it would be required to forbid the toys in order to have healthier children.  This would take freedom of choice away from all the parents who are responsible enough to control their children’s eating habits.

The list goes on and on.  Each time a law is passed in the name of Social Justice, there is a chip taken away from the liberties and rights of someone.  I submit that this practice must be stopped in order to preserve the original foundation of our great country!


Written by American Ideas And Solutions

July 29, 2011 at 4:04 pm

A Practical Look at Term Limits for Congress

leave a comment »

A restructuring of Congress and the Senate with term limits would be a monumental task.

In order to accomplish the task, Would  we, as a people, have to find enough politicians willing to participate in voting term limits through our current system of lawmaking in Washington to amend the Constitution of the United States as stated below:


The Constitution of the United States

Article 1 Section. 2.

The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States, and the Electors in each State shall have the Qualifications requisite for Electors of the most numerous Branch of the State Legislature.

No Person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the Age of twenty five Years, and been seven Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen.

Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons. The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct. The Number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty Thousand, but each State shall have at Least one Representative; and until such enumeration shall be made, the State of New Hampshire shall be entitled to chuse three, Massachusetts eight, Rhode-Island and Providence Plantations one, Connecticut five, New-York six, New Jersey four, Pennsylvania eight, Delaware one, Maryland six, Virginia ten, North Carolina five, South Carolina five, and Georgia three.

When vacancies happen in the Representation from any State, the Executive Authority thereof shall issue Writs of Election to fill such Vacancies.

The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.

Article 1 Section. 3.

The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, chosen by the Legislature thereof for six Years; and each Senator shall have one Vote.

Immediately after they shall be assembled in Consequence of the first Election, they shall be divided as equally as may be into three Classes. The Seats of the Senators of the first Class shall be vacated at the Expiration of the second Year, of the second Class at the Expiration of the fourth Year, and of the third Class at the Expiration of the sixth Year, so that one third may be chosen every second Year; and if Vacancies happen by Resignation, or otherwise, during the Recess of the Legislature of any State, the Executive thereof may make temporary Appointments until the next Meeting of the Legislature, which shall then fill such Vacancies.

No Person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty Years, and been nine Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State for which he shall be chosen.

The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be equally divided.

The Senate shall chuse their other Officers, and also a President pro tempore, in the Absence of the Vice President, or when he shall exercise the Office of President of the United States.

The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.

Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.

Can we as Independents, Tea Partiers, Republicans and Democrats elect enough new politicians in the various fifty states willing and/or able to get the task done; or would there be enough people willing to act as non-partisans to elect enough politicians into a new Tea Party or Independent

Would the individual States ratify the new amendment as required by law?

Can we act as a majority to replace partisan favorites and career politicians who would most certainly resist? If not, will the new politicians have enough influence to sufficiently making a difference?

In the case of partisan favorites, there would be states and districts who would not want their favorite politician to be replaced.  They ‘have them in their pocket’ and would re-elect them in spite of the movement to elect politicians favoring term limits.

We must also define what we mean by time limits. In order for any politician to accomplish a campaign for a worthy cause, he would have
to present his cause and find enough support to vote it into law.  If he could not, he would have to wait for the playing field to change enough to find that support.  Four years would not be long enough to do that.  Would six years, eight years or even ten years be needed to get a job done? Changing political ideals depends on who is currently President and what the current majority opinion is in the House and Senate.

The idea of term limits is appealing but, if the American people really want this to exist in the House and Senate, there are many things to consider in order to create an atmosphere that will accomplish the desired result.

Please leave your comments. This is the purpose of this Blog. We must formulate new ideas and make them workable or abandon them to prevent their being only a distraction to what we all want to achieve; a federal system at the top level that truly represents the people and not special interest and big money.

Written by American Ideas And Solutions

July 29, 2011 at 1:54 pm

7 Things You Can Do To Change America, by yourself, without joining any groups

leave a comment »

1. Educate yourself on what is happening with issues of personal concern.  You do not have to be an authority on all issues.  Choose what your own interests are. You will speak with more conviction and desire about things you care about personally.  Do research on the internet or at the library so that you speak accurately.  Check the definition of words you are using if you are in doubt about what exactly they mean.  In most controversial debates people will use any opportunity to discredit your opinion.

2. If you can speak your opinion better than you can write it, speak up when opportunity presents itself.  Avoid becoming excited or angry when speaking.  You can make a point more solidly if you speak with a calm attitude and confidence.  Knowing that you are concerned about the outcome of the conversation, you should back away if you begin to loose control of your emotions.  You may have already made your point and becoming emotional will only damage your influence as a credible source.

3. If you can write your opinion better than you can speak it, start writing.  After writing your opinions, you can find a variety of ways to get the word out.  Be carful of posting your papers or digital copies in inappropriate places.  You will not get the message out and may only draw unwanted negative results.  Once you have written your opinions, you may find it much easier to speak about them.

4. Speak out on the Internet. Talk about the issues you are concerned with in the social discussion groups you frequent such as chat rooms, Facebook and My Space.  This has become a very powerful way to voice an opinion.  Use videos and links in your comments to illustrate the basis of your discussion. Use them to promote and support your opinion or to illustrate where you agree or disagree with someone or something.

If you want to create a blog to post and retain your thoughts and ideas for others to view, this is a very good way to refer to them using links instead of passing the whole article on via email or discussion post.  I suggest WordPress at . It is free for public use and very easy to use. I use WordPress to generate this Blog.

5. Vote on Election Day! Make yourself familiar with people running for office.  Vote for city, county, state and federal candidates who you find to represent your views.  Vote in state elections as well as federal elections.  There is a movement for States Rights that may very well become more powerful than the federal level of government in deciding things that affect your life personally.

6. Call, fax, and/or email your government representatives about issues you disagree with.  They may have the opinion that they do not need to ask you your opinion after being elected, but when a large number of the voters contact them about an issue, they may have second thoughts about voting against the people who put them in office after having direct and current contact.
Contact your senator:
Contact your Representative:

7. Read Animal Farm and 1984 by George Orwell.  These books were written by a man, George Orwell, who experienced fist hand the Spanish Revolution against the fascist royalty in Spain in the 1930’s and then, after barely escaping these authorities with his life, was under the dictate of the Stalin Regime.  After writing the books, they became an incomparable tool to illustrate how governments can manipulate a population of people to a point of being subject to an overbearing government. They are short easy to read books and have been on High School read lists at least since the 1950’s.  Animal Farm describes how the progressive politicians change the lives of their “comrades” to an unrecognizable state.  The book 1984 is where we get the phrase “Big Brother is watching.”  It describes a country where the government has monitoring and spy mechanisms in place to monitor all activities of its citizens and the resulting effect on the lives of that population.  If you read them years ago, read them again in the light of current conditions in America.  The parallel to today’s events will stand out even more than you might think and you can sharpen your perception of what is going on around you.

Animal Farm George Orwell ISBN 978-0-451-52634-2

For Audio book on tape call 1-800-628-1304  ISBN 1-55690-018-X

1984   by George Orwell   isbn 0-452-28423-6

Read George Orwells writings online  at:

Written by American Ideas And Solutions

July 28, 2011 at 2:30 pm

The Evolution of Social Security

with one comment

This easy to check out, if you don’t believe it. Be sure and show it to your family and friends. They need a little history lesson on what’s what and it doesn’t matter whether you are Democrat or Republican.

This evolution of events is a classic example of how progressive politics works.

Facts are Facts. Social Security Cards up until the 1980s expressly stated the number and card were not to be used for identification purposes. Since nearly everyone in the United States now has a number, it became convenient to use it anyway and the message, NOT FOR IDENTIFICATION, was removed.

Franklin Roosevelt, a Democrat, introduced the Social Security (FICA) Program. He promised:

1.) That participation in the Program would be completely voluntary.

It is no longer voluntary.

2.) That the participants would only have to pay 1% of the first $1,400 of their annual Incomes into the Program.

Now it is7.65% on the first $90,000

3.) That the money the participants elected to put into the Program would be deductible from their income for tax purposes each year.

It is no longer tax deductible.

4.) That the money the participants put into the independent ‘Trust Fund’ rather than into the general operating fund, and therefore, would only be used to fund the Social Security Retirement Program, and no other Government program.

Under Johnson the money was moved to the General Fund and Spent.

5.) That the annuity payments to the retirees would never be taxed as income.

Under Clinton & Gore up to 85% of your Social Security can be Taxed.

Since many of us have
paid into FICA for years and are now receiving a Social Security check every month — and then finding that we are getting taxed on 85% of the money we paid to the Federal government to ‘put away’ — you may be interested in the following:

Q: Which Political Party took Social Security from the independent ‘Trust Fund’ and put it into the general fund so that Congress could spend it?

A: It was Lyndon Johnson and the democratically controlled House and Senate.

———— ———
——— ——— ——— ——— ——— —

Q: Which Political Party eliminated the income tax deduction for Social Security (FICA) withholding?

A: The Democratic Party.

———— ——— ——— ———
——— ——— ——— —–

Q: Which Political Party started taxing Social Security annuities?

A: The Democratic Party, with Al Gore casting the ‘tie-breaking’ deciding vote as President of the Senate, while he was Vice President of the US

———_.- ———
——— —–.— ——— ——— ——— –

Q: Which Political Party decided to start giving annuity payments to immigrants?


A: That’s right!

Jimmy Carter and the Democratic Party.

Immigrants moved into this country, and at age 65, began to receive Social Security payments! The Democratic Party gave these payments to them, even though they never paid a dime into it!

———— —
———— ——— —– ———— ——— ———

Then, after violating the original contract (FICA1 )the Democrats turn around and tell you that the Republicans want to take your Social Security away! And the worst part about it is uninformed citizens believe it! If enough people receive this information, maybe a seed of awareness will be planted and maybe changes will evolve.

Written by American Ideas And Solutions

July 28, 2011 at 1:32 pm