Hate Crimes, Dems and Lies, Oh My!!

The headline on OneNewsNow.com’s site reads:

“Hate crimes vote postponed, Dems caught in ‘lie'”

I am not surprised.

Andrea Lafferty, executive director of the Traditional Values Coalition, … says during yesterday’s markup hearing, Democrats neglected to mention that in America — a country of 300 million people — there have been only 1,521 cases of hate against homosexual, bisexual, and transgender people.

That is 0.000507%, a small number indeed.  Never mind that crime against any individual is already illegal.

Contrast that with another number.  0.433%.  What’s that percentage?  Why, it is the percentage of the U.S. Population that is aborted each year — or 1,300,000 people.

Where is the outrage over this crime against the most helpless, the unborn?

We Hold These Truths to be Self-evident…

The Declaration of Independence of the Thirteen Colonies
In CONGRESS, July 4, 1776

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. –That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, —That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. —Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain [George III] is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

For depriving us, in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:

For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by the Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

The Declaration of Independence establishes what our Founding Fathers believed was just cause to separate from the British Crown.  I am going to quote the first part of the Declaration again, and then draw parallels to today.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. –That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, —That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. —Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain [George III] is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

The first part needs no changes to see how these truths are still relevant today.  Be on the lookout however as I change the rest.

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.  –That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Do you think that our current Government has become “destructive of these ends”?  Do you notice that it talks about “Safety and Happiness”?  How safe and happy are you when the tax code is so complicated you cannot know for certain that you are complying with the law?  How safe and happy are you if illegal aliens and terrorists are extended essentially the same rights as a citizen?  How safe and happy are you, if you are the victim of identity theft, your social security number has been used by dozens of illegal immigrants, and you’ve done everything you are legally able to do, and yet the fraud continues?

“Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience has shown, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.”

How long are we willing to suffer a Government that spends more than it receives in revenue?  How long are we willing to obligate ourselves and future generations to ever increasing debt before we consider abolishing, or at the least overhauling our government?

“But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”

I believe that time has come… and now come the changes to the Declaration of Independence.

“–Such has been the patient sufferance of these” United States; “and such is now the necessity which constrains” us “to alter” our current “Systems of Government.  The history of the present” leadership of the executive, legislative and judicial branches of government, “is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these,” United “States.”

What do you think?  I think a TEA Party on April 15th is a good start.

Unemployment is as Flawed as Social Security

Unemployment insurance is based on having those who are employed pay benefits for those who become unemployed. That’s crazy. That’s not insurance! And it doesn’t help much. Take a person in Illinois making $84,000.00 per year. This fake insurance would pay them $534 per week for 26 weeks. That’s the annualized equivalent of $27,768, or roughly 1/3 of what they were making when they were employed.

Now, let’s suppose that this individual had been employed at this level or higher for 20 years. Their employer would have contributed $7,626 in taxes over that timeframe. And you would have contributed to taxes too… but that is harder to find and figure out what part of your tax is going there. So, if you paid anything more than $6258 in any type of unemployment tax, you will be getting much less than you paid for, and the help isn’t really enough to get you through a tough time, based on your 20 plus year standard of living.

What would be better you ask? How about real insurance? Seriously. If you drive a car, and have lots of accidents you’re going to pay much more in insurance premiums. But if you are a safe driver, you should have lower premiums. Apply that same concept to unemployment insurance. Your premium should go down the longer you are employed. And you can choose how much you pay for what level of coverage.

The market would determine risk, and set premiums. The market would monitor for and prosecute fraudulent claims. And the cost to government and employers would go away. Having that cost to employers go away makes it easier for companies to employ workers, and that helps to eliminate or at least reduce the risk of the insurance.

So, unemployment “insurance” is actually counter productive in my view because it makes employers hesitate to hire workers, because if they then let them go, they will be faced with higher unemployment taxes.

Surely we can figure out a better way to help those who wish to work transition from one job to another, without taxes! Private true unemployment insurance for the benefit of the employee, and under their complete control would make that a reality.

Privatize Social Security

Cato InstitutePrivatize Social Security NOW!  It would have been a phenomenal thing to have done back in 1997.  It is a good idea NOW!  And just like the best time to plant a tree is years ago, the next best time to plant a tree is… you guessed it… NOW.  Social Security PrivatizationThis is a long read from the Cato Institute, but well worth it even if you only have time to read the executive summary.

I would like to highlight two of the benefits.

  • It removes the Federal Government’s access to Social Security funds as a means of disguising budget deficits.
  • It compartmentalizes the individual participant’s contributions into accounts that are privately held for the future benefit of the same individual retiree.

These two changes would be enough to make me opt for the private plan.  Yet the benefits continue.

  • Conservative investment returns have the potential to be significantly greater than the investment return the Social Security Administration obtains from loaning funds to the Federal Government.
  • The employee could choose to pay taxes on the employer’s contribution to this private retirement plan which would be rolled into a ROTH IRA.
  • The employee could choose not to pay taxes on the employer’s contribution, and those funds would be rolled into a Traditional IRA, and taxed upon withdrawal.
  • The income taxes paid on these funds would be used to pay the benefits of those who choose not to opt out of the government Social Security plan.
  • The increased capital investment will provide corporations with additional equity infusions instead of needing to access the debt markets to fund operations.
  • There will be cost savings due to reduced fraudulent claims, because private firms with a profit motive will likely do a better job of addressing those issues, much like insurance companies do today.

The final result of all these measures would likely be an increase in the incentive for employment, and a decrease in the cost of employment for companies.  This would reverse the current downward pressure on the economy that presents systemic risk due to the cascading impact that the combination of higher unemployment (read more government expense and less government revenue) and the resulting lower consumption.  This spiral needs to be reversed.  Debt caused the problem, and reversing this Social Security debt by Privatizing it is the way to go.

ACORN and the 2010 Census???

Tell me this will not last… that Congress will hear from enough of us, and take the correct action.

ACORN to Partner With Government for 2010 Census
Wednesday, March 18, 2009 9:07 AM

By: Dave Eberhart

The Association of Community Organizations for Reform (ACORN) is now a “national partner” with the U.S. Census Bureau, soon to help the White House find 1.4 million workers to canvass for the country’s 2010 census.

If the acronym rings a bell, it’s because the organization has a history of voter fraud charges in the last election cycle, according to a report by FOXNews.com.

ACORN will be joining with more than 250 national partners, including TARGET and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), to assist in the hiring of census workers around the country.

ACORN spokesman Scott Levenson told FOXNews.com, “ACORN as an organization has not been charged with any crime,” adding that concerns that the organization will unfairly influence the census are unfounded.

The U.S. Census Bureau has also gone on the defensive.

“The Census (Bureau) is a nonpartisan, non-political agency and we’re very dedicated to an accurate account,” bureau spokesman Stephen Buckner told FOXNews.com. “We have a lot of quality controls in place to keep any kind of systemic error or fraudulent behavior to affect the counts.”

Buckner said 140,000 census taker jobs must be filled to complete the first phase of the effort. Each applicant, he emphasized, must take a basic skills exam and is also subject to an FBI background check.

But there are many who remain concerned about the organization’s role.

“ACORN has been accused of voter fraud, embezzlement, and more… and yet this is a group that the federal government wants helping with the census?” asks Bobby Eberle of GOPUSA.

“It’s a concern, especially when you look at all the different charges of voter fraud. And it’s not just the lawmakers’ concern. It should be the concern of every citizen in the country,” Rep. Lynn A. Westmoreland, R-Ga., vice ranking member of the subcommittee for the U.S. Census, told FOXNews.com. “We want an enumeration. We don’t want to have any false numbers.”

ACORN came under assault in 2007 when Washington State filed felony charges against several paid ACORN employees and supervisors for more than 1,700 fraudulent voter registrations. In March 2008, an ACORN worker in Pennsylvania was sentenced for making 29 fraudulent voter registration forms.

Meanwhile, Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, a member of the House census subcommittee, said, “I feel fairly confident that the penalties for an individual manipulating the count are pretty severe,” noting that the penalties would certainly deter any fraud in the counting by workers. The penalty for any fraudulent activity can be up to five years in jail.

The census count is critical to both politicians and states because it not only determines congressional allocation, but it also provides the raw data by which government spending is allocated on everything from roads to schools.

© 2009 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

Thank You Mike Huckabee!

I just read Mike Huckabee’s blog entry, quoted verbatim below.  My comments follow.  Thank you Mike!

From The Washington Times, March 18, 2009

Enough already of the hand-wringing and night sweats about the demise of the conservative movement!

Conservatives aren’t challenged because of the basic principles that define us, but by the failure of the principles being translated into policy and practice.

Gandhi once said, “If Christians would really live according to the teachings of Christ, as found in the Bible, all of India would be Christian today.”

I would be so brazen to say that if conservatives would really live according to the principles of classic conservatism, all of America would be conservative today.

The crisis is not one over the precepts, but the practice. It’s not that we’ve failed in our doctrine, but our “doing.”

Conservatives believe that the best government is the most local government possible and that the 10th Amendment means something and should be followed. Yet, the supposedly conservative Republican Party has been a drum major for the expanded role of the federal government.

Our founders feared a highly centralized and endowed federal government, instead preferring a system of strong and virtually independent states so that no one person, party, or power broker would exercise a great deal of control.

The inherent danger of allowing too much power in the hands of the few was the heart of the major dispute between Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton. Jefferson won, believing that the dispersing of power among the states would by design keep the federal government from becoming too consuming and powerful in its approach to governing. The genius of the 10th Amendment, as is true of all of the Bill of Rights, was that it deliberately limited what the government could do – not what the individual could do.

The 10th Amendment defines the limits of the federal government in 28 words: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

Over the past few years, Republicans have been either acquiescing in or encouraging the acquisition of more power and control by the federal government – in policy shifts in education, health care, and even how a driver’s license looks.

During my 10 years as a governor, a constant battle raged with my own federal government over such programs as “Real I. D.,” which was a federally conceived idea to force states to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to re-format the look of a state-issued drivers license so it would become the equivalent of a federal ID card.

Of course, no member of Congress wanted to come out and advocate an actual federal ID card, so forcing the states to make the driver’s license the substitute seemed brilliant to Washington.

What they didn’t really think about or seem to care the least about, despite the numerous attempts by governors, Democrat and Republican to explain, was that a state driver’s license is just what it claims to be – a license to drive a motor vehicle. It is not proof of citizenship, good behavior or church attendance, and the people who work the counter at the state Department of Motor Vehicles are not trained law enforcement officers, immigration officials, CIA agents or detectives. They are typically entry-level state employees who do their best, but are hardly the choice front line of defense to catch a potential terrorist by discovering their true identity.

Ditto that for reforming the Medicaid program.

Former Virginia Gov. Mark Warner – now Sen. Warner – and I spent many frustrating days on Capitol Hill trying to convince House and Senate members that the Medicaid program was out of control, financially unsustainable, and needed flexibility at the state level. Thanks primarily to Congressmen Joe L. Barton of Texas and Nathan Deal of Georgia, we finally were able to convince Congress that some of the decisions for the program could be made better if made closer to the people being served.

Perhaps no other example is more glaring than having painfully watched so-called Washington conservatives abandon the most fundamental principle of conservatism – fiscal restraint. A Republican administration pushed for and got the authority to spend $700 billion that we had to borrow from our grandchildren’s future so we could do what government has no business doing – picking out winners and losers in the private sector marketplace.

It was especially disgusting to me to watch some of the very leaders who had smugly dismissed my candidacy for president because I had the audacity to speak out against the excesses of Wall Street and Washington as early as February 2007 now stand up and flop-sweat as they explained why they were about to support the government taking off the striped shirts of the referee and put on the jersey of a team to play the game for one team against another all in the name of “saving the markets.”

By abandoning our bedrock conservative principles, and those of our founding fathers, they risked ruining our country to save the markets.

What gives me hope is my belief that the party of Reagan will reunite behind the consistent conservative policies that have made our country great – policies that empower individuals, families, and entrepreneurs, not government, to shape our own destinies. If we do that, we will not fail.

We don’t need so much to redefine conservatism. Just practice the real thing.

Might I make one slight change to that last exclamation?  God’s people by “nature” and beliefs should be radically conservative.  What do I mean by that?  Jesus was a radical change from the conservative Jewish thinking.  He challenged conventional wisdom, by demonstrating that he knew human nature better than they did–he should, he created it.

So I suggest that conservatives need to address one of the perceived things that the Democrat party does well.  They give lip service to caring for the little guy, but the reality is that it is self-serving.  By looking like they care for the “little guy” they get the votes necessary to remain in power.  They pay for this on the backs of future generations.

Conservatives need to do a better job of explaining how they want to take care of those who are less fortunate, or who are in the position of “the little guy”.  Conservatives believe that you cannot legislate compassion.  That the best compassion is the local soup kitchen, or food pantry, or Meals-on-wheels, supported by individuals who give out of a sense of compassion, not compulsion.  When these people give, they also provide oversight.  They want to make sure their giving is achieving results.  Doing this on a local level eliminates several layers of bureaucracy, and results in more compassion occurring.

Further, the goal of conservatives is to eliminate the need for this compassion, not doom participants to continued dependence on a government program.  Don’t you think these individuals would feel better about themselves as productive members of society?  Don’t you see how they as more productive members of society could themselves become a part of solutions, instead of a constant drain on the resources of a nation?  In the end, that’s radically conservative.

And, as Mike Huckabee suggests in his op-ed piece, we need to walk the walk, not just talk the talk.  We need to walk the talk, we need to practice what we preach.

Maligned Truth

The truth has been maligned.  No doubt about it.

I saw this quote on the Motley Fool Discussion page.  The author “could not remember” who was responsible for the quote.

“You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift.  You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong.  You cannot help the wage earner by pulling down the wage payer.You cannot further the brotherhood of man by encouraging class hatred.

You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich.  You cannot keep out of trouble by spending more than you earn.  You cannot build character and courage by taking away man’s initiative and independence.  You cannot help men permanently by doing for them what they should do for themselves.”

Was it Shawn Hannety…or was it Rush Limbaugh?

No!  It was Abraham Lincoln!

Here’s another quote I first heard on American Family Radio.

“You cannot legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the wealthy out of freedom.  What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.  The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.  When half the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is about the end of any nation.  You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.”

Dr. Adrian Rogers, 1931 ­– 2005.

These words are wise counsel, if only we would heed them as a nation.

Please stop taking money away only to give back pennies on the dollar.  That's like cutting off my left arm, and then offering it back to me as if that's generous of you.

Please stop taking money away only to give back pennies on the dollar. That's like cutting off my left arm, and then offering it back to me as if that's generous of you.

I am concerned that those who are leading this country have no clue the degree of damage they are causing on the long term viability of the United States of America.  Tax cuts are the solution to this problem, along with sensible regulatory reform.  Wait, I know what you may be thinking.  We have been told that the lack of or relaxing of regulations are what got us into this economic condition in the first place.  While it may be true that changed regulation helped, it isn’t the full story.  The purpose of regulation ought to be to create a level playing field with all of the rules of the game laid out so all participants can be confident in the underlying products.  The reality is that regulations, like the tax code, have taken on a life of their own.

Here’s one regulatory issue from the days when “daytraders” were making a killing on Wall Street.  Back then you could trade as frequently as you wanted without restriction, as long as you were willing to pay your broker to trade.  You had to have a certain account size for your broker to extend you a “margin” loan, where you could borrow money against stocks held in your account, and purchase more stock.  And, brokerages managed all of this to make sure that they were protected.  Then when those same “daytraders” were caught in the “dot com” bubble burst, and lost money, the government decided that these individuals needed to be protected from themselves, and changed the regulations.  Now, there are additional rules regarding “Pattern Day Trading”, which prevent you from buying and selling stock the same day, for more than four consecutive days, before you need an account with over $25,000.00.  Then to make it seem as if they were really doing you a favor, they allowed 4:1 margin, so with your $25,000.00 account you could really purchase $100,000.00 of securities within any given day.

Does anyone see a problem with this?  It is actually the same problem as the government saying it is just fine if you “state your income” for a mortgage loan, or have a mortgage where you only pay interest.  You could very easily extend yourself beyond what you are financially able to tolerate.  You could make quite a tidy sum, if things work out.  You could flip the house, and make money in a raging bull housing market, and you could do the same in a red hot stock market.  But both are cyclical, and you could unwittingly purchase at the peak, and then watch the markets tank, right along with your overextended financial situation, causing the problem you face to be exponentially greater than it needed to be.

Reduce taxes.  Reduce government spending.  Pay down the national debt.  These are simple things, that take more political courage than any of our elected representatives seem to have.