Yesterday Conservatives voted in droves to elect a Republican Majority to the US House of Representatives.  Today the new majority must begin representation. 

Yesterday was a victory, a small battle.  But the war to restore fiscal sanity will be long and painful. 

The First Act:  A shot across the bow of the Obama Policy 

If Republicans will continue to represent the American people in this war, their First Act must be a shot across the bow.  First, the Republican House should pass legislation to fund the payroll for all Federal employees for the coming fiscal year.  This money will be set aside, so paychecks will not bounce.  This legislation will not guarantee any Federal job or any Federal Agency’s existence.  By passing this legislation first the Republicans will demonstration their dedication to fiscal responsibility.  By passing this legislation now President Obama will be put on notice there will be a budget showdown.  Republicans’ first action will be an offer to save Federal employees from becoming political pawns.  If Mr. Obama or his Democrat Senate rejects this legislation, he and the Democrat party effectively announce that they will use Federal employees’ pay as political pawns.  

The Second Act:  Repeal Obamacare

America opposed Obamacare by 70%.  The Republican House should act swiftly to repeal Obamacare.  If the Senate fails to pass the repeal of Obamacare, Republicans must take names.  Those senators must be held accountable in the next election.  

The Third Act:  Repeal Obamanomics

The Republican House must repeal Obamanomics.  The House must pass a fiscally responsible budget.  They must work hard to go beyond balancing the budget and pay down our debt.  If Mr. Obama and the Democrat Senate reject a fiscally responsible budget, the Republican House must be prepared to shut down government.  Again Republicans must take names.  Those senators must be held accountable in the next election.

In 2009 Federal revenue was approximately $2.1 Trillion, but Federal spending was $3.5 Trillion.  To put this in perspective it would be like spending $35,000 a year on a salary of $21,000, and you already owe $130,000 in credit card debt.  Mr. Obama told us open another credit card, so we can spend our way out of our financial woes.  If we continue Obamanomics, America will file bankruptcy and the debt collectors are not our friends. 

The only way out of trouble is paying down our debt, not amassing more debt.  Government spending does not stimulate economies.  Though short-term memories allows this practice to regularly return, all historical evidence proves this policy is a failure.  US increased spending during the recession of the early 1930s, initiated economic stagnation in America.  Failed US government spending policies in the 1930s resulted in a Great Depression for our nation while the rest of the world merely experienced a recession.  The Japanese government increased spending in the 1990s to stop a recession.  That policy resulted in “The Lost Decade”.  Japan suffered a severe recession for 10 years that has taken another 10 years to recover from.  In 2006 the Democrat congress increased government spending.  As a result America is more indebted, unemployment is at 10%, and our economy teeters on a deepening recession. 

A New Strategy

Republicans must follow a strategy deserving of America. 

Discard Establishment Politics

As a precursor for the newly elected Republican House majority, the Republicans must elect House leadership from Conservative, non-establishment Republicans.  In 2006 America rejected the Republican establishment.  Now four years later with quadrupled deficits and $5 trillion more in debt, America rejected the Democrat establishment.  The American people spoke loud and clear yesterday, crystal-clear political establishment is not the answer.  Americans would be better served by a newly elected Republican as Speaker of the House of Representatives or by a member, such as Michele Bachmann, who is not a member of the political establishment. 

Fiscal Policy Revisited

The Republican controlled House must set a conservative, long-term fiscal policy to pay down the Federal debt and free American business from government control.  Federal funding should not be reviewed old-school to eliminate waste.  Republicans must take a play from the Democrats’ playbook.  As the Bush Tax Cuts were scheduled to expire, all government programs and agencies should be viewed in the same light.  All government agencies and programs should automatically expire.  If a government program is successful, the problem it sought to resolve will be gone.  Therefore that program is no longer needed.  If the government program is not successful, the problem it sought to resolve still exists.  Failed government programs will be allowed to expire. 

Today is the day after…

Elena Kagan is not honest.

Elena Kagan is a progressive liberal. 

Elena Kagan will not defend the Constitution of the United States.

President Obama selected a nominee for the Supreme Court of the United States who is unqualified to serve on the highest court in our land.  Because Elena Kagan is not qualified to serve on the Supreme Court of the United States of America, the Senate has an obligation to prevent the appointment of Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court of the United States.  The Democrats in the Senate will not take their role to advise and consent Supreme Court Justices seriously.  Republican Senators have an obligation to filibuster Elena Kagan to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. 

Miss Kagan is not honest.  On numerous occasions during her career and during senate confirmation hearings, Miss Kagan has failed to speak the truth.  In a single day when asked if she would consider herself as open-minded or a “legal progressive” she stated, “I honestly don’t know what that label means”.  However, later that day during the same hearing Miss Kagan described herself by stating, “my political views are generally progressive”.  Miss Kagan told two separate contradictory stories during her confirmation hearing.  Miss Kagan is not telling the truth.  As most progressives Miss Kagan is trying to conceal her counter-American progressive views in order to obtain a position of power.  America cannot afford more deceptive progressives obtaining positions of power.  

Progressives cannot fulfill an oath of office to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.  They do not believe in the Constitution, nor do they seek to uphold the Constitution.  Progressives are hostile or opposed to the American ideal.  They subscribe to a philosophy that permits the dismissal of the Constitution.  Contrary to the authors of the Constitution, contrary to the intent of the adopters of the Constitution, contrary to the American politic and contrary to the actual words of the Constitution progressives believe the law of the Constitution can be changed without changing the Constitution.  In contravention of the Constitution, progressives change the legal affect of the Constitution without altering or amending the Constitution.  Progressives adopt a counter-American, counter-representative legal framework in violation of our most fundamental laws including the Constitution and unlawfully apply it to our Constitution claiming the Constitution is a “living document”.  As a “living document” progressives seek to alter the legal affect of the Constitution without altering the Constitution.  Progressives believe their “intellectual superiority” empowers them to change the meaning of the Constitution to update the law to remain current with their view of changing moral codes and mores.  They believe the text of the Constitution is no longer relevant.  The Constitution is not only our nation’s legal framework.  The Constitution establishes our union of states and the authority of our federal government to act on behalf of the people.  Article V of the Constitution explicitly provides the only methods by which that document shall be amended.  No where does the Constitution permit amendment by the Supreme Court, regardless if they claim “intellectual superiority”.  Federal agents cannot fulfill any oath nor act legally under the Constitution when they alter that fundamental agreement among the states without the consent of the states or the people.  Progressive Elana Kagan cannot fulfill a Constitutional oath, because her count-American philosophy prohibits protecting the Constitution. 

In addition to the above mentioned disqualifying flaws, Miss Kagan demonstrates disturbing opinions.  While at Harvard she banned the military from her campus.  As Solicitor General Miss Kagan argued that the government could ban books and political pamphlets.  During Senate hearings, Miss Kagan refused to say the government could not tell people what they could eat.  Miss Kagan’s dishonest, self-proclaimed progressive counter-American philosophy, and inability to protect the written Constitution, mandate prohibition of her appointment to the Supreme Court. 

US Intelligence recently caught 10 Russian spies actively spying undercover in the US.  Less than one week after capture there is talk of releasing those 10 spies in exchange for 4 westerners being held by Russia.  Suddenly “justice” is swift when you are a spy. 

Who is being duped?  Barack Obama?  The American People? 

And by who?  Russia?  Barack Obama? 

Such a quick escape…er release of 10 Russian spies logically goes beyond preventing a proper interrogation.  A quick release strongly protects Russia in direct contravention to the USA’s best interests.  Premature releasal of these Russian spies will compromise US national security.  Prior to releasing these spies it is critical to determine their release will not bring irreparable harm to America. 

Before these spies are released national security mandates a proper interrogation.  America must learn everything possible from these spies before we return them to our enemies.  Once these spies are released our enemies will be free to extract all the information these spies collected.  We do not know the extent of the knowledge they possess.  We do not know the harm their possession of such information can bring.  Before we release these spies we must know everything they know or be certain they can bring us no harm. 

Our national security is at stake.  If these spies learned our airport security, they could crash planes into buildings.  If these spies learned our power grid, they could knock out power across this nation.  If these spies learned our food distribution, they could poison our food supply killing millions.  If these spies studied our security procedures, they could target attacks where they detect vulnerabilities killing tens of millions.  How many Americans could those spies murder?  What do these spies know?

Before these spies are released national security mandates a thorough investigation.  Simply questioning these spies is negligent.  A thorough investigation is desperately needed.  We already know one additional spy exists and has evaded capture.  We must make certain the entire network of spies has been brought down.  We must investigate any of these spies’ contacts.  We must thoroughly review anywhere they have gone.  We must make sure they have not deposited a mountain of data that they are waiting to retrieve. 

We must make sure America is kept safe.  Perhaps one of these spies has dropped off a package, but only needs to tell their contact where to retrieve it.  Perhaps one of these spies uploaded classified military files to a secret web server and is waiting to return to mother Russia to type in the location.  We must make sure they are not waiting to tell the twelfth spy where the detonator for a nuclear bomb hiding in a US city is located.  We must make sure all 10 spies are not in the middle of any such plots or worse.  Prematurely releasing these spies will ensure nothing related to our security. 

Not only should we know what these spies know and the extent of their spy network, we must know what their knowledge is worth, especially to our enemies.  We must know what they were planning. 

I don’t want to question President Obama’s motives or intelligence, but perhaps we should question both. 

Mr. Obama, what is your motive to so quickly return spies to the people who sent them to spy against us?

Mr. Obama, is your decision to quickly return these spies an intelligent decision? 

Mr. Obama, you have very serious questions to answer. 

Trading 4 fully interrogated westerners in exchange for 10 Russian spies we have not had a week to question stinks.  We have yet to find the 11th spy, so we cannot possibly know all these spies know.

What will we get if we catch the 11th spy?  Is there a 12th spy?

Someone is getting duped.

Mr. Obama recently sent a letter regarding his plan to reform the US Fiscal System.  This is a response to his letter. 

Mr. Obama, here is my message to you:

Stop crisis-mongering!

You do not understand the US financial system much less the US economy.  

You are not competent or qualified to reform the US Fiscal System.

You do not even know what “the problem” is.

Government “bailouts”, “TARPs”, “stimulus packages”, and all the other creatively-renamed pork-barrel-spending expanded this recession. 

Our weak economy, high Carter-level unemployment, and looming inflation is a result of the policies you voted for and signed into law. 

Stop the Crisis-mongering. 

            In his letter Mr. Obama states in large bold text, “We cannot delay action any longer.”  Such an emergency, yet he acknowledges earlier in the same letter its “been over a year” and this “near collapse” cost America “more than 8 million jobs”.  Is there a reason Mr. Obama waited over one year after more than 8 million jobs were lost?  Now he claims “businesses are starting to hire” and “neighbors who had given up looking are returning to the job market with new hope.”  If things are improving, why the urgency?  Does a crisis still exist? 

Stop the Obama “Progress”. 

            Obama says, “We’ve made strides.”  Yes, he has.  Obama delivered “Hope and Change”.  Obama Policies have passed through a partisan Democrat-party-controlled congress.  Let’s look at Obama’s partisan strides.  He lost over 8 million jobs.  Unemployment still stands near 10% after Obama spent Trillions in “emergency” spending.  Obama spent $787 billion on his “stimulus”, another $250 billion on the mortgage bailouts, and $450 billion for “jobs” followed by “cash for clunkers”.  In less than 1 year he’s nearly quadrupled the deficit and added trillions to our national debt. 

Obama spent trillions and yet he lost millions of jobs. We cannot afford any more Obama Progress.  

Stop the Obama-Fixes. 

            Mr. Obama spent trillions of dollars to fix things.  Certainly things are fixed.  Obama says, “the flaws in our financial system that led to this crisis remain unresolved.”  Of course they do because he voted to bailout many responsible for this fiscal irresponsibility.  In the past when a business failed the free-market American fiscal system allowed them to go out of business.  Mr. Obama prevented free markets from doing their job.  Naturally people who lend a failing business money are not paid profits because there are losses.  Just as bosses who made decisions that led to a business’s failure do not earn bonuses, because there is no money.  They lost it.  Enter Hope and Change, the Obama-Fix via his “stimulus”.  The Obama Stimulus legislated large uber-bonuses be paid to the executives who bankrupted these companies.  Certainly things are fixed.  After giving hundreds of billions of our tax dollars to these corporations and legislating “stimulus” bonuses paid to the failed executives, Mr. Obama acknowledges that these “Wall Street titans still recklessly speculate with borrowed money.”  Of course they do!  They’ve not got Obama money!  Obama gave them our money because they lost all of their corporations’ money. 

            Mr. Obama helped orchestrate and perpetuate the real crisis in our financial system.  Now there is a new Obama-Fix the Democrats in congress are trying to pass.  Senator Dodd just admitted this Obama-Fix won’t fix anything, it will not even attempt to address the numerous meltdowns with Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae.  Obama Government prevented our financial system from operating freely.  As Democrats tainted the free markets by flooding our financial markets with bad loans through the government regulated Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, Obama promises more of the same.  His solution, further government intervention, will worsen the problem just like his previous trillion dollar fixes. 

We cannot afford any more Obama-Fixes. 

Stop the Obama Accountability and Transparency. 

            Mr. Obama’s hope and change promised a new era of accountability and transparency.  Mr. Obama tells us “consumer financial protections are currently spread across seven different government agencies.”  He acknowledges 7 government agencies were supposed to protect us.  Seven Obama agencies were transparently accountable to Hope and Change.  They miserably failed us!  The Obama solution?  Create an 8^th government agency! 

Fool me once, shame on you. 

Fool me twice, shame on me. 

Fool me 7 times, government bureaucracy at its finest. 

Fool me 8 times, I give you the boldness of Barack Obama and the audacity of hope. 

We cannot afford any more Obama Accountability and Transparency. 

Mr. Obama, stop! 

President Reagan summed things up best when he explained: We don’t mistrust one another because we’re armed.  We’re armed because we mistrust one another.

That very concept explains the difference in thinking between a juvenile junior high schooler and a wise man.  There is a fundamental difference in philosophy between these two concepts.

The Obama Doctrine is premised on the idea that countries mistrust one another because they are armed.  Disregarding human nature and historical fact, we can follow this immature, unintelligent dogma.  Obama Doctrine seeks American nuclear disarmament so other nations will trust us.  Obamians believe US disarmament will cause all other nations to trust us.  With trust these nations will also disarm.  Unfortunately, here is where thought behind Obama Doctrine ended but average 6^th graders and up continued thinking.  Since there are multiple nations, trust for the US may not transfer to Pakistan.  Since Pakistan has not disarmed, India will remain armed out of mistrust toward Pakistan and Iran will continue to arm itself out of mistrust toward both.  The mistrust grows and an arms race rages.  A 7^th grader may be so bold to think a country may claim to disarm but believe there is no reason to trust they will disarm.  Learned people understand trust is not derived from a lack of arms.

Countries are not born with arms.  Actions instill trust and mistrust.  Actions speak louder than words.   Trust must be earned.  Do you buy a colt 45 because your neighbor owns a 9 millimeter gun?  Of course not.  Does the US mistrust the UK because they have a standing army?  Quite the contrary.  The US and the UK are staunch allies despite the fact they are both armed.  We do not mistrust one another because we are armed.  If I trust someone, I will not care if they are armed.  There are many reasons to trust or mistrust.  There are many different reasons people are armed.  Tyrants and dictators build armies to conquer and enslave.  Americans stand on centuries of honorable history.  From the foundation of our nation Americans have never used military might for conquest.  Time and time again American armies defeated tyrants, liberating the enslaved.  Not once has America expanded her borders through military campaign.  Generation upon generation shed blood and gave life to maintain Americans’ freedom or liberate an unknown face in a foreign land. 

History’s lessons and human nature quickly disregards Obama Doctrine on foreign policy atop the devastated American economy toppled from the Obama domestic policies resulting in high unemployment, snowballing housing market bubbles, unprecedented government spending as tax revenues drop and as inflation looms.  As domestic Obama Doctrine’s defiance of history, logic and fact resulted in ruinous economic destruction, so too shall Obama Doctrine on foreign policy topple America’s national defense. 

Obama Doctrine is incompetence demonstrated.  Nuclear disarmament is not a foreign policy.  Applied appropriately arms reduction can be one piece of a successful foreign policy.  President Reagan outlined a basic 5 point plan for peace that included military balance, economic stability, regional stability, arms reduction and dialogue.  The Obama Doctrine lacks all key elements and instead subscribes to unilateral American disarmament.  Peace brought on by American disarmament will come only through American surrender to armed enemies.  The former Soviet Union sought peace through American surrender.  Communist peace would have come through blood, oppression and enslavement. 

Americans seek peace through strength.  For generations this policy has successfully defended and restored liberty across the globe countless times.  The absence of weapons will not deliver peace, certainly not at the cost humanity can afford.  America cannot afford Obama Doctrine.  Liberty cannot afford Obama Doctrine.  Humanity should not be forced to pay the costs of Obama Doctrine. 

In 1773 British parliament passed the infamous Tea Act that led to the Boston Tea Party. We all know that law levied a tax on tea for the American colonies, but you may not realize the law lowered the tax rate and made British tea less expensive. Part of the legislation granted a monopoly to the financially troubled East India Company. Britain was trying to bailout the near bankrupt East India Company, which was sitting on stockpiles of tea it could not sell. This monopoly would eliminate all private tea merchants and outlaw all other sources of tea.

American colonialists were rightfully angered for two reasons. First, colonial merchants’ livelihood was being taken away by the government and given to a failing corporation. If the government could do this with tea, it could do this with anything. Second, colonialists recognized the British government’s ploy to trick colonists into accepting and acknowledging parliament’s right to levy taxes on the colonies. Britain thought the colonies would pay the tax as long as the tea was cheap. We all know Americans would not take taxes without representation.

When the East India Company sent tea to America under the new law, ships were turned away in Philadelphia and New York. In Charleston tea made it off the ships, but was locked up in a warehouse only to be sold years later by Americans to fund the revolution. On the night of December 16, 1773, Boston threw their illustrious tea party. So here we stand over two-hundred thirty-five years later in the United States of America.

Why are we here?

Our Founding Fathers wanted a limited centralized federal government. Our founders did limit centralized government. They recognized an important truth that those of us gathered for our tea party recognize today: government can only control the economy by controlling people. When British parliament attempted to bailout the failing East India Company, our founders recognized the attempted theft of economic freedom. They opposed it vehemently.

Government has no business in business. Liberty to practice freedom in the marketplace is an inalienable right outlined in the Declaration of Independence and protected in our Constitution. When our government confiscates large amounts of private wealth and enters the marketplace, it has far exceeded the power bestowed by the people. It has gone far beyond the framework of the Constitution. And those acting in the government’s name have violated their oath and pledge to all Americans.

Indebtedness welcomes our progeny into America. They are beholden to government for a tremendous financial obligation. Every dollar government spent from our children’s piggy banks is one less dollar our children can spend, one less dollar of economic freedom. Government has already deprived our children thousands of dollars of freedom. The government has no permission to spend our unborn children’s money.

The federal government must return power to the people. It has grown far beyond the control of the governed. The union of states constituted the federal government. We cannot permit the federal government to coerce states’ actions through conditional federal payments from locally collected taxes. We must stop the federal bureaucrats from telling the states how to spend their money, our money. We cannot permit centralized power in a federal government lacking authority.

Americans deserve better. For decades our political parties have traded policies of “tax and spend” for “borrow and spend” between one another. Each policy serves the same purpose: expand the power of centralized federal government at the cost of individual freedom. Rarely do they relinquish the powers usurped.

Now in economically troubled times both the current administration like the last fumbles from one crisis to the next. Our woes began with a sub-prime mortgage crisis that grew into a liquidity crisis and a banking crisis then an auto crisis. With each new crisis came a larger power grab in the form of tax-payer funded bailout, which has perpetuated the underlying problems. With each new failing corporation the federal government tries to avert failure by giving out our money, the money we were not willing to surrender by choice to failing endeavors.

America needs good leaders now more than ever. We can no longer accept mediocre leadership that has resulted in the theft of our money. Government has failed us for far too long, at all levels, federal, state and local, running up colossal debt. Now as many large corporations fail wiping out our retirement savings, our government leaders move to protect and preserve them at our expense. To those government leaders I say this, “Let the failures fail.” We must wash away those failures and remove those responsible from their leadership positions. There are good leaders throughout America. We must recognize them and elevate them. We must elect good leaders to the boards of our companies and governments.

One person will not be America’s savior. Everyone must play a role. We must be weary when one person promises to solve all the nation’s problems. We hoped for change and received more of the same. Our problems are systemic of a distant centralized government that believes it can better manage our lives than we are capable. What is best for an elitist distant politician is not best for all Americans.

Our Founding Fathers created America with a limited centralized federal government. Federal government will be limited. Government shall not decide what companies will be subsidized out of failure with tax dollars. Our progeny will be afforded representation before they are taxed any more. America deserves good leaders. Government shall not decide who will run private businesses. Whether in business or government, we will replace ineffective leaders set on a path of failure. As the Boston Tea Party ignited cries against “taxation without representation”, today our tea party puts bureaucrats on notice. We will not tolerate government depriving citizens of their livelihood to save a failing corporation. We will not tolerate taxation without representation.

The question is not so simple. From one perspective the era is indeed over. One may deem the closure as the end of his political life or the passing from our world. Nevertheless, from that standpoint the Reagan Era has ended.

The complexity lies in the broader concept of the Reagan Era. The passing of an individual does not always dictate the end of an era. People with the impact and influence on a society, on the global level to garner an “Era” for their movement, will create change long after they are gone through the movement that remains.

There are two presidents who often rank tops with Ronald Reagan. They both serve as examples via comparison to determine whether an era has ended.

First, President Abraham Lincoln, who’s life abruptly ended. Lincoln’s movement to reunite this nation void of the inhumane enslavement of others continued years after he left our world. Post-Civil War Reconstruction continued for years. Republicans continued his cause. Former slaves made great strides serving as US Senators. However, Lincoln’s successor did not share his views. Upon Lincoln’s assassination the new President Johnson and Democrat Party opposed Lincoln’s pro-freedom Post-Civil War Reconstruction. We forget the tumultuous setbacks after Lincoln’s death. His political opponents never garnered the strength to reinstitute slavery. Unfortunately, those who supported slavery eventually instituted a segregated society often by capturing state governments through force. Lincoln’s cause struggled for a leader capable of filing his shoes. Most consider President Lincoln’s era abruptly ended on April 14, 1865, with his assassination. Though Lincoln’s dreams were not fully realized on his watch, his movement did long endure.

A second example is that of our Founding Father’s Era. George Washington remains the ultimate American: General, President, and Founding Father. We don’t deem this George Washington’s Era. Why? The era spans many decades and individuals. Though aren’t Washington’s years really most important? Of the Founding Fathers we also remember Adams, Jefferson, Madison, Hamilton, Franklin, Henry, Paine, and others from the time of revolution through the first few presidents. We remember the revolution and countless precedents Washington set serving two terms. Yet we often forget those years between when Washington went home after the war. The first attempt at American government failed miserably with the Articles of Confederation. Washington’s return of 8 years instilled stability and integrity in a government to last over 200 years. For one and a half centuries no one dared challenge his two term precedent. Washington’s influence and that of our Founding Fathers survives today.

The reason we struggle with the Reagan Era is twofold.
First, no successor has successfully filled Reagan’s role.
Second, we have identified the Era as Reagan’s.

To the question whether the Reagan Era has ended is both complicated and simplified by these problems.

First, since no one successfully filled Reagan’s shoes, it is difficult to believe the era continues. As with Lincoln and Washington you cannot fill their shoes so easily. You cannot duplicate an individual. Washington did not define the movement; he was simply its best leader. However, there were other leaders, other Founding Fathers. After Washington’s departure others continued the cause: Adams, Jefferson, etc. Lincoln’s story is much different. He successfully ended slavery and kept our states united. Lincoln was murdered for his movement. President Johnson opposed Lincoln’s vision of equality. In fact he wrote to Missouri Governor Fletcher, “This is a country for white men, and by God, as long as I am President, it shall be a government for white men.” The pro-slavery Democrats were eventually able to hostilely regain control in southern states and institute an economic and new societal form of slavery, which still resides subversively in Democrat party policies. Though no one filled Reagan’s shoes, his passing was not as abrupt as Lincoln’s. He faded from the national spotlight like Washington.

Second, identifying an era for one individual can obscure the underlying movement. George Washington didn’t offer an idea or vision that was his alone. It was a shared vision established by a group of brilliant individuals. The challenge is whether another can pick up the cause after the main leader steps aside. Plus the underlying cause must always be the focus. Adams proved able to continue the cause after Washington. Lincoln’s successor, President Johnson, did not share Lincoln’s vision. Reagan’s Revolution was the conservative movement. He was not the sole individual behind it, but he was the messenger. As “The Great Communicator” Reagan spread the message with an appearance of ease. Reagan’s passing was certainly a relative, momentary blow to the cause. But what is the cause?

The Reagan Revolution was a resurgence of the ideals of our Founding Fathers: modern conservatism.

This leaves us with an answer.
The era of Ronald Reagan is over. It will never be lost. It will never be forgotten. Ronald Reagan rose to the level of a Founding Father. He fully embraced their ideals and continued in action as the Founding Fathers. We came to know this era as the Reagan Revolution. But are they one in the same? Unequivocally, no.

Reagan’s conservatism and his message grew far beyond his own mortality. We embraced it as the Reagan Revolution. The title was intended as honorary for this brave leader. It was never intended a limiter. In Reagan’s farewell address he acknowledged that he and his supporters set out to improve our country and ended up changing the world. He encouraged us to continue the cause. He is right.

George Washington’s rebellion never ended. It evolved into something more powerful than the Founding Fathers could ever have foreseen. An era called the American Revolution evolved into the greatest force this world has seen. Transition is difficult. As the colonies moved to establish government at the end of the war, they floundered. The first attempt at American government was a failure. Lincoln again took up the cause and paid with his life. His passing was a major setback, but America moved forward. Ronald Reagan continued the fight our Founding Fathers began.

The era of Ronald Reagan fades more with each passing day. But we must never forget the Reagan Revolution ended in victory. More importantly we must not forget that the Reagan Revolution was a small piece in a much larger effort. The struggle of our Founding Fathers is now encompassed in the conservative movement.

We recognize and refuse to let go of the greatness of Ronald Reagan, and rightfully so, because he communicated the ideals of America better than any others in over a century.

We have graduated from the Reagan Revolution.

Now is time “to begin the world over again.”

Each generation goes further than the generation preceding it because it stands on the shoulders of that generation. You will have opportunities beyond anything we’ve ever known.