Our founders intended for the federal government to have limited and divided powers, while most governmental powers would be dispersed among the states and the people. Instead, government power is now concentrated at the federal level.

As predicted, the concentration of power at the federal level has led to waste, fraud, corruption, poor quality and high-cost services, inefficiency, debt, division, and political paralysis. Yet federal politicians, specifically politicians in the Democrat Party, are totally opposed to giving power back to the states and the people. Even though the statistics confirm that the federal government is incapable of providing services efficiently, cost-effectively, and without high levels of waste and fraud, Democrats obstruct efforts to move decision-making to the states and the people. The reason for this obstruction is obvious: Democrats benefit politically by controlling money and services and using this leverage to manipulate voters on a national scale.

Except for national defense, trade, immigration, and border control, there are very few issues that states, private businesses and organizations, or individual Americans could not handle better. The fact that Democrats will not even consider decentralizing power on any issue should tell you everything you need to know. Voters need to wake up and start asking “why.” And Republicans need to be ready with better answers.

Age-verification laws target operating systems because apparently teenagers having root access is now a safeguarding crisis. //

Big Brother is only going to get worse. With the US Congress advancing its own App Store Accountability Act, and more state lawmakers floating copycat bills, OS‑level age verification is poised to become a standard part of how Americans set up phones, tablets and PCs within the next few years. Happy, happy, joy, joy. //

These kinds of laws don't work. They've never worked. Prohibition failed in the United States. I kept reading Playboy, and these days, people use virtual private networks (VPN)s to get around the restrictions of the UK’s Online Safety Act. However, as the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) notes, VPNs are far from a perfect solution.

The real problem is this hodgepodge of laws; it's the growth of the surveillance state.

. The federal workforce is actually shrinking, and the number from late 2024 to January 2026 is now up to 12 percent of the workforce, most having left voluntarily. That, folks, is what we call a good start. //

The OPM's data shows that the government's civilian workforce shrank by 12% between September 2024 and January 2026, going from a headcount of 2,313,216 to 2,035,344.

Separate data, also released by the OPM, shows that the majority of employees who left during that time did so voluntarily rather than being forced out, Reuters reported. //

anon-vg5c Random US Citizen
an hour ago
12% is scrapping the mud off your boot.

Need to cut another 64-65% of the Federal Workforce - and start with the IRS, Dept of Labor, Dept of Education, and completely eliminate (if not already done) USAID.

OpenAI is in and Anthropic is out as a supplier of AI technology for the US defense department. This news caps a week of bluster by the highest officials in the US government towards some of the wealthiest titans of the big tech industry, and the overhanging specter of the existential risks posed by a new technology powerful enough that the Pentagon claims it is essential to national security. At issue is Anthropic’s insistence that the US Department of Defense (DoD) could not use its models to facilitate “mass surveillance” or “fully autonomous weapons,” provisions the defense secretary Pete Hegseth derided as “woke.” //

Despite the histrionics, this is probably the best outcome for Anthropic—and for the Pentagon. In our free-market economy, both are, and should be, free to sell and buy what they want with whom they want, subject to longstanding federal rules on contracting, acquisitions, and blacklisting. The only factor out of place here are the Pentagon’s vindictive threats.

Federal employment dropped to 2,686,000 in January 2026, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. That number has not appeared in federal labor data since Lyndon B. Johnson was in the White House.

The Bureau’s “All Employees, Federal” series confirms it. We have not seen staffing levels this low since May 1966. //

According to Office of Personnel Management data summarized in public reporting, more than 322,000 federal employees left the government workforce during the first year after Trump returned to office. //

Those exits came in different forms. Roughly 149,500 resigned. More than 105,000 retired. Around 10,500 were laid off. Even after new hires were added, overall staffing declined noticeably.

And it was not limited to a single agency tucked away from public view.

There were no pre-game speeches or waving banners; the vets surrounded the jail, demanding access to those ballots.

In response, one side started shooting, and the other answered in kind. The gunfight lasted a couple of hours until the door to the jail opened, giving the ballots a breath of fresh air.

When all eyes could see, the counting resumed.

Consequences, Not Chaos
Unsurprisingly, the slate of GIs won their respective elections — no race was even close — and the corrupt regime lost its grip of control.

There wasn't a loss of life, nor did Athens descend into anarchy; it simply corrected course.

Corrupt authority retreated into the darkness because ordinary people refused to accept theft disguised as governance. //

Despite the desire to paint corruption in postwar America as a foreign disease, Athens was the horn that woke everybody else, illustrating how civic rot grows fast when oversight vanishes, and fear replaces accountability.

Sunshine, as always, is the best disinfectant, so trust returned just as fast when that sunlight exposed everything.

Remember, those men were veterans returning from organized chaos and brutality, and when they returned home, they didn't want to see echoes from the battlefields. All they wanted was a count that matched the vote, while their restraint was just as important as their resolve. //

Across American life, a rope lies across everyone's waist, stretching between trust and force: Keep it slack enough for the law to work and tight enough to stop abuse.

Athens (TN) found its balance when patience was exhausted, and determination emerged.

A better explanation is that DOGE is functioning as a stress test of the federal bureaucracy.

Stress tests are not designed to produce immediate, permanent fixes. They are designed to apply pressure and observe outcomes: where systems bend, where they break, where they resist, and where supposed constraints turn out to be optional once incentives change. It is a drive to gather data, not repair issues.

Under this model, efficiency gains are not the primary goal. They are signal, evidence of latent capacity revealed under load. Resistance, delay, panic, and narrative hostility are also signal. They show where authority actually resides and which processes exist because they are necessary, versus merely habitual.

The Social Security Administration results fit this model precisely. When pressure was applied, performance improved quickly and measurably. That does not prove the system is now permanently fixed. It shows something more revealing: The capacity was there all along. //

This interpretation aligns closely with how Elon Musk has repeatedly operated across very different domains.

Musk does not treat institutions as abstract ideals. Thinking like an engineer, he treats them as systems that must be tested under real conditions. His approach favors empirical stress over theoretical reassurance and exposure over simulation.

One of the clearest expressions of this philosophy is SpaceX’s use of the acronym RUD, “rapid unscheduled disassembly,” referred to by most people as a big old explosion. Rockets are pushed until they fail. Failure is not an embarrassment, but rather a valuable data collection moment. Each breakdown reveals load-bearing assumptions that no white paper can surface.

The goal is not to avoid failure at all costs. The goal is to fail fast enough, visibly enough, to learn where the system’s true limits are, and to learn it quickly.

Viewed through this lens, DOGE’s behavior becomes coherent. //

From a stress-test perspective, controversy is not proof of failure. It is proof that pressure reached something structural.

Despite efforts in recent years to gain clarity, the roughly 110-mile state line between Michigan and Indiana remains blurry as ever.

The last official survey of the dividing line between Michiganders and Hoosiers was conducted in 1827, and wooden markers placed by federal surveyors at that time have largely rotted into the pastoral landscape.

Some surveyors have estimated that the state line generally accepted by locals could be off by a few feet in some areas, creating potential areas of conflict. //

Despite putting out two requests for proposals, the state didn’t get any bites from private surveying companies willing and able to take on the large project.

“We didn’t receive any qualifying bids,” Andrew Brisbo, director of Bureau of Construction Codes for Michigan’s Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, told lawmakers during an October Senate committee hearing.

“We went back and discussed with the commission whether it might be a better approach to provide the funding to the county surveying programs on the border,” he continued. “They have the capacity to do the work, and they can just build it into those programs in order to get the work done.”

Somehow, every Arizona factory and wholesaler selling parts to us became our branch office when we asked them to ship directly to our customers. Address labels became stores, refrigerator magnets became salespeople and, magically, RockAuto was in Arizona.

No previous court case (including ours in the Arizona Tax Court) found a retailer "physically present" without employees or assets or someone making in-state contact with customers. ADoR's own publications say "drop-shipping" from Arizona suppliers does not create tax liability. But ADoR persists in demanding six years of taxes (which we didn't collect from customers) plus interest and penalties — far more money than we earned in 20 years selling auto parts to Arizonans!

For every action there is an equal and opposite government program. -- Bob Wells

in 2025, the next archivist may well be among the most important appointments President Donald Trump will make. Why? Because the federal government’s ability to function transparently, legally, and accountably now depends almost entirely on fixing a catastrophic, decades-long failure in electronic records management — a failure that no other agency but the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), which the archivist heads, has the authority to repair. //

Most Americans have no idea how bad the situation is. And that’s not their fault. If the government had been managing its electronic records as required by law, we would all have access to the information needed to understand how decisions are made, money is spent, crimes are investigated, and power is used.

Instead, we now have more than two decades of abject information chaos — a level of dysfunction that threatens the very foundations of democratic governance. NARA’s dysfunction has damaged transparency, as seen with Jan. 6, Russiagate, and Arctic Frost, to name a few. On oversight, it has contributed to the Pentagon’s inability to account for trillions of missing taxpayer dollars. With cybersecurity, it has resulted in the loss of more than 25 million classified electronic records, as demonstrated by the Office of Personnel Management’s data breach. Lastly, it has made it difficult to hold anyone accountable for federal health agencies’ misconduct. //

In 1997, NARA endorsed the Defense Department’s DoD 5015.2-certified electronic records repositories as the official solution for managing federal electronic records. The problem? Those systems were designed by professional records managers who — through no fault of their own — had little to no understanding of electronic information management. The result was predictable: applications that were theoretically compliant on paper but fatally flawed in practice.

Federal agencies spent millions purchasing these certified systems. Yet not a single agency ever successfully deployed one in a production environment. The reasons are detailed in a stunning investigative report by the Epoch Times, which chronicles how these failures have cost taxpayers billions, compromised national security, and endangered the lives of innocent Americans. But the bigger story is this: because the DoD 5015.2 systems never worked, federal agencies never managed electronic records in accordance with the Federal Records Act at all. //

If agencies and vendors fail to demonstrate a solution’s compliance with these requirements, NARA can reject it as a suitable solution for managing agency information. Thus, NARA effectively became the government’s default IT regulator — a role for which it was neither trained nor equipped.

As a result, the archivist of the United States, a position once considered ceremonial, suddenly became responsible for overseeing the digital infrastructure of the entire federal government. //

In February, President Trump fired the previous archivist, historian Colleen Shogan. Given her lack of technical experience, her support for her predecessor’s participation in the FBI’s raid on Mar-a-Lago, and her questionable political independence, I fully supported that decision.

But it has left a vacuum at a time when NARA desperately needs leadership with vision, technical expertise, and the ability to rebuild trust across partisan divides. The president has not yet nominated a replacement. //

The person who steps into this role will carry responsibility for ensuring the U.S. government can function in the digital age. If the next archivist fails, the consequences will cascade through every policy domain — from national security to public health to economic oversight. //

The failure of federal electronic records management has already cost billions of dollars, jeopardized transparency, and eroded public trust. It has allowed agencies to operate in the shadows, shielded from accountability by systems too broken to track what they do. //

The archivist of the United States is now the guardian of every recorded action of our government — and therefore the guardian of the public’s right to know.

My antennae started twitching about Trump and Isaacman on Monday, when space reporter Eric Berger (probably the best in the business) published this story for Ars Technica: Capitol Hill is abuzz with talk of the “Athena” plan for NASA.

Long story short, Athena was Isaacman's plan for cutting costs at NASA and restoring the agency's "mission-first" culture — and getting us back to the Moon, at a price we can afford and before China does. Needless to say, Athena involved upsetting an awful lot of well-anchored apple carts and taking way some gold-plated iron rice bowls.

For starters, Isaacman wants to ditch the stupidly expensive, technological dinosaur knowns as the Space Launch System (SLS), meant to carry Americans back to the Moon. Not only is SLS built from yesterday's disposable rocket parts, but "at $4 billion a launch, you don’t have a Moon program," interim NASA Administrator Sean Duffy (and full-time Transportation Secretary) said back in September. //

Washington read that as "Isaacman is too close to Elon Musk and too far from Lockheed," and that's when the long knives came out for the 42-year-old billionaire and record-setting private astronaut.

AND ANOTHER THING: "Old Space" refers to old-school contractors who have been in the business forever, mostly doing the same things in the same ways — and also to NASA. "New Space" encompasses the free-thinking startups, large and small — and hopefully to NASA under new leadership. //

Cliff_Hanger
a day ago
Thanks for the "ANOTHER THING."
I thought "Old Space" was a cheap knock-off cologne but couldn't figure out what it had to do with NASA.

anon-a-miss Cliff_Hanger
a day ago
It smells almost like "Old Spice", but not quite...

Why settle for Old Space cologne when you can use Musk! //

KS
a day ago
SLS was specified by the Senate to use existing equipment. "Senate Launch System"
The whole point is to spend money on companies that make nice paybacks to politicians.

The reason SpaceX can lauch so cheaply is because they do blow stuff up to find out what works and what doesn't.
If NASA did that, congresscritters would complain "They're wasting taxpayer money! I prefer other ways of wasting taxpayer money!"

I have seen this for 45 years, not just space but FAA. The ATC computer system was seriously obsolete in 1980, but Congress didn't want to allocate money to update it. One big deal to handle the ATC strike was "flow control" - monitoring how busy airspace would be so planes could be held on the ground when there would be delays. The PROTOTYPE was more capable than the deployed system, because Congress insisted the FAA use the obsolete IBM mainframes they bought in the 1960's instead of more modern computers.
(Which is why I think Air Traffic Control should be privatized and paid for by user fees, not funded by Congress. They would be able to make better decisions).

Snowblind KS
a day ago
Which Is crazy as IBM mainframes are transaction monsters. Always have been. But 20 years is a LONG time, 6 or 7 genrations.

I mean sure, the mean time between failures is 25 years.... but that does not mean you should keep them that long! Maintenance goes way up after 2nd Gen has passed, or 6 years. Cost less to replace them.

KS Snowblind
a day ago
These were 360/30's and 40's customized for real-time operation and called 9020's after the Univacs they replaced. By the 1980's, the connectors were suffering metal fatigue.
Both hardware and software had advanced quite a bit and newer more reliable distributed systems were possible.
KS Snowblind
a day ago
Better would be a distributed system. Even replacing the 360's with 370's would have been better, but PDP-10's were quite capable (the flow control prototype I mentioned was written for a PDP-10) and better at real-time work. Although minicomputers such as PDP-11's would do a lot of the I/O.
The problem was, the old mainframes were customized and software would not necessarily run on a newer 360/370 system.
What was done was to somehow get IBM or IBM clones to run the software.
Of course, if this was a government project, we'd still be working on it, and consultants would have made a lot of money.
BTW, back then, I was a subcontractor to DOT from a small company as their cash cow; that company never did make it (technology wasn't ready for a "specification language") but it did have a connection with the space program. HOS - Higher Order Software, started by Margaret Hamilton and Saydean Zeldin (sp?). Look up Margaret Hamilton - did a LOT for the Apollo program. //

polyjunkie
a day ago edited
Elon Musk will greet NASA from his condo on the moon by the time NASA builds a rocket to get there. And his grandchildren will greet NASA on Mars by the time it gets there.

Here’s the way fix NASA: Close it. Make in an Accounts Payable Desk with a list of projects it will pay for:

1) $5B for the first 30 day sojourn on the moon.
2)$2B for an additional 6 months.
3) 25B for the first round trip to Mars with a 30 day stay.
4) $100B for the first 2 year stay on Mars and return for 50 people.

Etc.

The reviewer begs the reader’s indulgence for combining a book review with an appreciation of the author. Yes, Leonard Read is my guide and inspiration, and I was thrilled to learn of the republication of Government: An Ideal Concept (FEE, 1997, $12.95 paperback). This book is to me much like the fruits of scripture.

In 1982, I wrote to Read asking if he still believed what he had written in 1954. His reply: Just the other day I re-read Government: An Ideal Concept. Today I wouldn’t change a word of it. All of my books have been consistent with this book you like.

I have read all of Leonard Read’s books; they are consistent. Read is constant in character and consistent in thought. Given his premises, his freedom philosophy, as he called it (to disassociate himself from the anarchists who had appropriated his earlier use of libertarian), is consistent and corroborated by history. Read has grasped and described a natural law.

In Government: An Ideal Concept, he limits himself to basics and a few clear examples. Other issues and secondary points he leaves for other books, other writers. The argument of this work is logical, consistent, and neither circular nor abstruse.

Read is never a polemicist but warns against provoking antagonism with unnecessary personal attacks and criticisms of error, when what is needed is self-improvement and demonstration of truth. Although he says Government: An Ideal Concept is an essay in clarifying his own thinking, he writes with the authority and serenity of someone already possessed of a truth.

Not at the Constitutional Convention of 1787 nor when Read wrote Government: An Ideal Concept, says Read, was there any well-defined . . . principled, spelled-out ideal theory of government or liberty. The founders attempted to limit government, but lacking was a well-defined theory or positive rationale as to why limitation.[1]

Read was familiar with political and philosophical ideas from earliest writings to the present. Yet he was convinced that extant theories of liberty and government were inadequate and that this lack would have to be supplied before American society could secure the Blessings of Liberty cited in the preamble of the U.S. Constitution.

Read’s plan is to try to justify government, an effective but surprising strategy for one who sees that government, the immune system of society, designed to protect from internal and external dangers, has itself grown unhealthy, and, by proliferation, become an agent of social dysfunction. He seeks to understand the healthy state of government in society as the ideal—a key word in this book’s title. Properly limited government, he asserts, because it is necessary, must be a positive good rather than a necessary evil.

Fundamental to Read’s theory of limited government is his analysis of social versus individual problems, and the role of force and coercion in society. By definition, government is organized force. It monopolizes the legal use of force in those geographical, social, and economic areas under its jurisdiction. Read posits, Man’s purpose on earth is to come as near as possible in his lifetime to the attainment of those creative aptitudes peculiarly his own. He then explains why all of creative human emergence can only be a personal, voluntary undertaking. This leaves those actions of man which impair the source of creative energy and stifle its exchange, and also the actions which are parasitic on the flowing energy as the only social problem. To remove these inhibitory actions, it is necessary to restrain aggressive force and/or penalize those persons who indulge in it. Read explains why force can only restrain, never create. Therefore, the only proper use of force is to restrain aggressive use of force and fraud.
...

Beef costs have stayed relatively stable over the last 50 years. One pound of ground beef in 1980 was equivalent to the earnings of less than 15 minutes of labor, and that ratio is roughly the same in 2025.

At the same time, input costs have soared. //

“A hamburger full of high-quality protein and nutrients for $6 is an incredible deal, especially when you consider the cost of foods with far less to offer,” said Justin Tupper, president of the U.S. Cattlemen’s Association.

Others contrast beef prices to the cost of nutritionally empty, mass-produced products.

“A Snickers bar weighs 1.86 ounces,” said Chris Earl of Reverse Rocking R Ranch in New Mexico. “At $2.69 a bar, that equals $23 dollars a pound for a Snickers.” //

Many producers believe Trump is responding to demands from powerful meatpacking companies to increase supply and slash the premium prices they are being forced to pay for American beef products.

The advocacy group R-CALF USA has long criticized the unchecked power of the four meatpacking companies that process 85 percent of the American beef supply.

“Packers and retailers have become so concentrated they now control the market,” R-CALF posted in an X statement. “A generation ago, ranchers earned over 60% of the consumer beef dollar. Today, they get under 40%. Trying to lower prices by inviting even more imports only speeds up the dismantling of America’s beef industry. We don’t need more foreign beef. We need fair markets and country of origin labels.”

At the very least, ranchers argue, they should have the right to compete against imported beef with clear and transparent labeling.

“I don’t really care if Argentina imports beef, as long as it’s clearly labeled,” said Arizona rancher Casey Murph. “American ranchers are more than ready to compete with the rest of the world’s beef with their lax standards.”

Mandatory country of origin labeling (MCOOL) would require meatpackers to label beef products with the country they came from, giving American producers a market edge. Ranchers have called for this legislation for years to no avail.

Burke warned that flooding the market with cheap foreign beef could turn ranchers against a president who has historically enjoyed enormous popularity in cowboy country.

Tariffs are taxes on American consumers and businesses. They make inputs more expensive, reduce choice, and slow investment. They don’t bring jobs back—they make the tools to create those jobs more costly.

During the campaign, Vice President JD Vance claimed that “a million cheap, knockoff toasters aren’t worth the price of a single American manufacturing job.” The line got applause. But it betrayed a dangerous economic illusion.

Vance sees the toaster. He doesn’t see the millions of families who bought that toaster for $20 instead of $80 and used the savings for groceries, medicine, or a child’s school supplies. He doesn’t see the small business owner who bought cheaper equipment and hired another worker. He doesn’t see the everyday miracles of freed-up capital, redirected investment, and second-order job creation.

Henry Hazlitt called this the fallacy of the “seen and unseen.” It’s the oldest trick in politics: show the factory job you might save, hide the thousands of better futures you quietly destroy.

If we want a freer, fairer global economy, we don’t get there by torching trust and slapping taxes on ourselves. We get there by enabling investors and entrepreneurs to build competitive industries, by investing in lifelong education and innovation, and by strengthening institutions that last longer than one man’s grievance.

That’s what America used to stand for: rules, not whims; institutions, not improvisation.

Steve Miran argues that because the US has run trade deficits for decades, the economic models must be broken. But that’s like saying gravity stopped working because planes fly. The persistent US deficit isn’t a flaw in the system. It’s a reflection of how much of the system depends on us. Models need to be read with the institutional context in mind.

The stakes are bigger than a trade balance. What’s being traded away—at a terrible cost—is the American model of principled leadership, rooted in liberty, trust, and rules. We lose that, we lose the quiet miracle behind a billion pencils.

The result would be a "checkpoint society" where identity checks become an unavoidable part of daily life, Big Brother Watch says.

The group says such a system would fundamentally alter the relationship between citizen and state, creating a surveillance infrastructure vulnerable to abuse, discrimination, and hacking. A Big Brother Watch poll, carried out by YouGov, shows that 63 percent of Brits don't trust the government to protect their data – hardly surprising given Whitehall's track record of bungled IT projects, data leaks, and multi-billion-pound write-offs.

The group has also sounded the alarm over the UK's existing digital identification system, One Login, which underpins the credential issuing process in the so-called "BritCard" proposal, which it says is known to suffer from substantial cybersecurity and data protection weaknesses.

Big Brother Watch also warns of mission creep, arguing that once a system is live, "voluntary" quickly becomes mandatory. Those who fail or refuse to enrol risk being locked out of jobs, housing, or healthcare, while errors could leave people wrongly excluded from essential services.

"The notion that digital ID will provide a magic-bullet solution for unauthorised immigration is ludicrous," said Rebecca Vincent, interim director of Big Brother Watch. "It will not stop small boat crossings, and it will not deter those intent on using non-legal means of entering the country from doing so. But digital ID will create a huge burden for the largely law-abiding 60 million people who already live here and insert the state into many aspects of our everyday lives."

Unlike its rival, Intel, AMD saw the need for battery efficient chips. It bet better than Intel. It will now be competitively disadvantaged by the United States government becoming Intel’s largest single shareholder.

Apple, too, is a major player in microchip architecture. Using ARM chip architecture, which is very power efficient, Apple engineers and manufactures all its chips for its devices. The Mac uses M-chips. The iPad Pro uses M-chips. Apple’s other devices use A-series chips. Many of Apple’s processing features run faster with less power than Intel’s chips.

But, again, the United States now is the largest shareholder of Intel, which puts every other microchip company at a disadvantage. Why? Because Intel now has subsidy by taxpayers. Instead of having to let the creative destruction of the market place pick apart Intel, which has chronically made bad decisions, the leadership that made those bad decisions has been rewarded.

Uncle Sam insists it will exercise no voting with its stock. But the fine print of the deal shows Uncle Sam is getting common stock with voting rights. Saying it will not vote and not actually voting are two different things. If the situation continues and a Democrat takes back the White House, you will see ESG and DEI explode as Intel seeks to humor its largest shareholder.

This is another step down a dangerous path. Defenders will say the government bailed out Fannie and Freddie. The government bailed out General Motors. The government even bailed out Chrysler. //

The government keeps making companies too big to fail and hiding behind “national security” as the excuse. In fact, that has become the consensus talking point among defenders who will say things like, “I’m uncomfortable with this, but national security…”. It is an excuse and justification, but not reality.

Intel can now ignore most of its other shareholders. Its competitors now face a company subsidized unfairly by taxpayers. Its business decisions get to shift with the whims of political administrations.

This is a terrible decision. Donald Trump has beaten Mamdani to seizing the means of production.

The Preamble

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Government: 'Trust us, it'll be different this time'

The reason for asking the civil government to proclaim the goodness of traditional family life is not because men and women in marital covenant wish to become a special interest group. Rather, the official acknowledgement of the traditional family’s goodness is proper because one of the government’s most basic duties is to promote virtue. Challenging the county commission to honor this role offered them the opportunity to proclaim truth amidst a backdrop of other governments, businesses, and institutions promoting vice.