When Winston Churchill said: “You can always count on Americans to do the right thing—after they’ve tried everything else” he didn’t anticipate the partisan battle over a troubled health care system. There might not be an amicable solution as long as a polarized America isn’t interested in reaching a consensus.

We seem to be at a point in history where we can’t be happy. We can no longer do anything without some one being offended or having their feelings hurt. Nearly every like-minded demographic, large or small, feels it is entitled, and is being treated unfairly. Can we all be victims of discrimination and injustice?

Several weeks ago, after the Academy Awards, one of the top award winners said she wasn’t happy because she thought some nominees got too much credit and recognition while others got too little credit.

How can we be happy when so many participants reject the concept that life produces winners and losers? Life will never be fair or equal no matter how hard we try.

Maybe this situation is the result of believing everyone should get participation trophies and the emphasis shouldn’t be on winning and losing.

It is this selfish philosophy that is destroying the soul of America. It conceals a fundamental deviation from American values and common sense because it ends up not benefiting the people who support it.

Those who choose wisely and responsibly have a far greater likelihood of success, while those who choose foolishly and irresponsibly have a far greater likelihood of failure.


Robert George recently said this about America’s debate on the immigration and refugee problem. “We shouldn’t be trying to fight terrorism by closing our doors to the victims of ethnic violence.” It sends the wrong message to the part of the world that sees America as a safe haven.

At the same time, George says the U.S. should use its military, diplomatic and economic clout to help create safe places for refugees in the Middle East, closer to their homes and families. There would be less culture shock for everyone.

George is a conservative legal scholar and political theorist. He is director of Princeton’s James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions. He has served recent presidents of both parties on issues such as bioethics and civil rights.

The trick to solving the refugee issue is thorough vetting, which is very difficult. If just 10% of the incoming refugees harbor evil intentions towards America, it wouldn’t be fair to penalize the other 90% who…given the chance…could become great Americans and substantial contributors to the culture of the American ideal.

The key is awarding citizenship to worthy immigrants and then holding them accountable after they arrive. America should retain the option to deport any immigrant that fails, or refuses to assimilate after a reasonable length of time.

In his essay, George warned that there is a hugely disproportionate number of university professors on the left. He worries that too many college graduates are being brainwashed and over-exposed to liberal and progressive viewpoints.

Those who teach equality of outcome as a right, while completely ignoring inequality of effort is devoid of common sense. It is a false philosophy to say one man’s success comes about unavoidably as the result of another man’s victimization.

Charles Swindoll once said, “Life is 10% what happens to you and 90% how you respond to it.” Most often in life, our destination is determined by the course we take.

You do not reduce social injustice and income inequality by debasing the successful when it seeks to deny the successful the consequences of their choices and spare the unsuccessful the consequences of their choices.

When young minds are only exposed to liberal and progressive bias we have social problems because they believe their disruptive behavior is more important than anyone else’s liberty.

George worries that this slanted education will come back to haunt the country in the future. Students are not getting balanced views while attending college classes, he said.


Does anyone ever wonder why Americans today are still paying for our country’s perceived sins and mistakes that happened 200, or even 100 years ago? Why should 10th-generation ancestors still be entitled to special benefits from people who have no connection to the ancient events?

Shouldn’t there be a time limit or an expiration date on these obligations? Can’t we acknowledge these historical events without being held hostage forever?

We might bear guilt, shame or sadness about past wrondoings and transgressions that happened 180 years ago but is it fair to still be held accountable today when there is no longer a direct connection? Even worse, the people demanding special benefits today may not have any connection to the aggrieved parties from 180 years ago.

Think of it this way. When families take out a 25-30-year mortgage to buy their home they pay their monthly payments faithfully. At the end of the mortgage term they have fulfilled their obligation to the bank or lending company. They own the home outright, free and clear.

When the loan is paid off, they stop sending the checks. The debt is paid. Future generations have no liability. They are thankful for the mortgage company’s participation, but they are free to move on without any further onus. The original lender may have even sold the mortgage, or the lender may have changed ownership.